The Continuum

Feast of the Purification February 2

2012-02-01T13:51:00.000-05:00

Malachi 3:1-5 Luke 2:22-40

We learn from the Book of Leviticus, the twelfth chapter, that after the days appointed for the mother’s purification, the child is to be brought together with a sacrifice of a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and also a young pigeon or a turtle dove for a sin offering. We see in the last verse of that chapter:

“And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtle [doves], or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering...Lev. 12: 8)”

Remembering that, let us look again at the words from today’s Gospel reading:

“And when the days of her purification according to the Law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present Him to the Lord; (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the Law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons. (Luke 2: 22-24).”

We need to understand the theology of what is happening in these verses. To begin with, St Luke is very clearly telling us that the family into which God became manifested, in our own human nature, was not a family of wealth, but of poverty; for they were not able to bring a lamb. The royal line of David, the line of the Jewish kings, had been reduced to poverty by the process of history, of wars and of subjugation to the Roman empire, And so it is that Joseph, in the line of those ancient kings, was a poor carpenter. Into his house of nobility, but of poverty, was our Lord born; this same Lord of glory, who had only a month before been laid in a manger because there was no place else for Him.

Remember the words of St. Paul:

“For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might be rich (II Cor. 8:9).”

The implications of this are very deep, and very profound. It is a picture of the mystery of the Incarnation itself, that the One Who did not grasp onto His own equality with God, but became a man, Who humbled Himself in obedience as a servant, unto the death of the cross, is the One to Whom every knee shall rightly bow, and Who shall be called Lord on every tongue, at the mention of His human name, the name of Jesus. Here He was, noble and the heir to the throne of David, yet poor. Here He was, true man yet very God. Here He was, the Lord Who had suddenly come to His temple, yet a new born babe, without power, and without wealth.

To see Him as He truly was required the eyes of faith, a certain faith which is knowledge, and that comes only by the revelation of God. Eyes that see, ears that hear and a heart that understands are the gift of the Holy Ghost. So it is that the true wisdom which comes from above is given to an old man, who wears the mantle of a prophet, seeing the Lord by the revelation given to Him from the Lord’s Holy Spirit. This is expressed in the words which live on in the Church every evening at prayer:

“Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word; For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.”

The wisdom of God contradicts everything that a fallen and sinful world holds dear. It contradicts the wisdom of the wise, the might of the powerful, the haughtiness of kings, the wealth of riches. “He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble and meek; He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away.”

An old man takes in his arms an infant from a poor man’s house, and declares that He is the salvation of God for all the world. An elderly widow, also given the true wisdom from above, the gift of the Holy Spirit, speaks of Him to all who looked for redemption in Jerusalem. The prophet Amos wrote that, in the understanding of sinful man, “the prophet is a fool, the spiritual man is mad.” How could this poor son of a poor carpenter, bring salvation to the world? Let alone, to Israel? And what light could He give to the Gentiles, light that would overturn the pagan religions, the ignorance of idolaters in every land, including the powerful empire of Rome with its many gods? How could this child born into a carpenter’s house, restore the glory of Israel, as if the throne of David could replace the rule of the cruel gentile tyrant, Herod, and banish the powerful legions of Rome? What did these two foolish and mad old folks have in mind, speaking such non-sense?

Let me allude to a fantasy story: Perhaps some of you have seen the movie The Return of the King, or, better yet, have read J.R.R. Tolkien’s, The Lord of the Rings. If so, you recall that the world is saved from the power of the evil Sauron by two very little, and completely powerless people. Two hobbits of the shire, Frodo and Sam, accomplish what the warriors of Middle Earth, even under the leadership of King Aragorn, could not do themselves. In the climax of the story, the armies of Middle Earth can only fight their battle to serve as a distraction, while the two little hobbits, both under four feet tall, and without any strength of arms, manage to take the One Ring to its destruction, thus toppling the power of Sauron, and freeing the world from his grasp. Tolkien wrote his story with a Christian mind, as a very devout Catholic; and he made it obvious that the victory was wrought by Providence through the hobbits.

God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are powerful, and the foolish things of the world to confound the things which are wise; so wrote St. Paul. The true victory that banishes oppression from the world, and overturns all of the power of evil, was accomplished by a naked and wounded, beaten and humiliated man, breathing His last breath nailed to cross, as a spectacle of all that appears to be weak and powerless. In His humility and obedience to the Father, His submission to the will of God in giving His life, he is the One true hero Who breaks all of the power of Satan, and liberates the whole world from sin and death.

But, the world saw Him in His weakness and foolishness. It saw Him in His poverty and want of all things, having His garments parted among the gambling soldiers, being given nothing to quench His thirst, but only vinegar as if by a cruel joke. By all the wisdom known to sinful men, this was no conquering hero, no victorious king. The words of Simeon and Anna must have seemed a hundred times more mad and foolish than when they had spoken of Him in the time of His infancy. Anyone old enough to have remembered them, who may have recalled hearing them about thirty three years earlier, surely thought that they must have been no true prophets.

Of course all of this brings me to my second theological point from today’s Gospel reading. Here we see Jesus being presented in the temple, and an offering being made for Him as if He were a sinner. His mother, the Blessed Virgin, is obeying the Law of Purification, as if this child had been born in uncleanness, that is, as if tainted with original sin, as if in the prayer of David, in which he says “in sin hath my mother conceived me (from Psalm 51).” You and I can pray those words, for we were born in original sin, subject to powers over which we could not prevail; for we could never have made ourselves pure. But, Jesus needed no such offering, and His mother needed no purification. Yet, Mary and Joseph obey the Law; and this foreshadows for us the fact that Jesus would fulfill the Law.

The scriptures say that “He was tempted in every point as we are, yet without sin (Heb. 4:15).” And, that “God made Him to be sin for us, Who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (II Cor. 5: 21).” Isaiah had written, “And He made His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in His death, because he had done no violence; neither was any deceit in His mouth...He bare the sin of [the] many, and made intercession for the transgressors (from Isaiah 53).” The offerings that day, in the temple, foreshadow the life of Christ as one of perfect obedience to the Father’s will, in this case specifically by adhering to the Law of God given through Moses. It foreshadows the words he spoke to John the Baptist at His own baptism in the Jordan River: “Suffer it to be so, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.” For in His baptism He let Himself be identified with sinful humanity, and began then to take upon Himself the sins of the world, remaining Himself pure from all sin; as John said that day, “Behold the lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.” He bore them all the way to the cross; for “surely He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows.”

Yes, He needed no offering, and His mother needed no purification since Her Son was borne in complete purity. But the offerings that day, in the temple, teach us that He was taking our sins on Himself. As the only pure Man ever to live, His death would the only death that is completely undeserved. He did not merit death. Death came into the world through sin, and it is our penalty because of sin. When the sinless One died, death was undone. The power of Satan was destroyed, and with it the values and principles of a sinful world were turned upside down. On the day of his death, certified by His resurrection on the third day, all that was powerful was shown to be weak, all that was rich was shown to be poverty, all that was mighty was shown to be weak. “He hath put down the mighty from their seat; and hath exalted the humble and meek.” The two old prophets, who seemed foolish and mad, had spoken wisdom and reason when they spoke of this child as the One Who would bring redemption in Jerusalem.

And now, unto God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, be ascribed, as is most justly due, all wisdom, might, power and glory, now forever. Amen.

Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany

2012-01-28T14:45:00.002-05:00

Romans 13:1-7 * Matthew 8:1-13

When my children were still children I learned a valuable lesson. One evening when dinner was prepared, I sent our daughter to call her three little brothers in from playing outside. Through the window I heard her simply tell them, “come in now; dinner time.” She came in flustered and annoyed to tell me, “they aren’t coming in.” So, I sent her again, and said, “this time tell them, ‘Dad says to come in.’” This time she came back leading the way, her little brothers appearing one at a time. The oldest of the boys was complaining that he wanted a few more minutes out there, but he was in nonetheless. The difference was “Dad says.”

When St. Paul bids us to be subject to the higher powers, or governing authorities, in today’s Epistle reading, it is implied that the highest power is God Himself. Even among the worst of the worst, even in the highly corrupt and violent Roman Empire and the city of Rome itself, where the church to which he wrote this was located, it was in obedience to God that the Apostle urged respect for authority. That included his charge to them that they lead peaceful and law-abiding lives.

It is obvious that no human authority, however, is absolute. Shortly after this came a period of time when even so much as being a Christian at all became a capital crime; and that lasted until the year 313 AD, during which long period of history Christians were the victims of an ancient holocaust that claimed several hundred thousand lives (a staggering number in those days). The sentence for being a Christian was death. St. Paul himself would, a few years after writing these words, himself be executed by beheading. The very powers he wrote about would sentence him to death. Why? Because he knew where to draw the line.

In practical matters of peace and safety, in living with due order, the Apostle taught respect for authority; but not absolute surrender to tyranny. The key to unlock the apparent paradox is very much in the words, “Dad says.” In this case, Christians would pay taxes, honor the emperor within reason, keep the civil statutes, and so on. They would try to live peaceably. But, where the authorities contradicted God, they would have to disobey those earthly rulers in order to obey God.

This pattern was well established already, long before St. Paul wrote these words. Look at this from the Book of Acts, when Peter and the Apostles stood before the High Priest and the Sanhedrin:

“Before the council… the high priest asked them, Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men (Acts 5:28,29).”

So, we respect and honor authority, but always with a view that no human being has the authority to rule over anyone’s conscience, that is, to take the place of God. The Highest Power is God. However, unless convinced that it is an issue of “God rather than men,” each one of us is strictly commanded in today’s Epistle reading to be subject to lawful authority. Now, if you believe it is a matter of “God rather than men,” then your conscience should be so firm that you would be willing to be stood up against a wall and shot. Selfish or petty concerns, mere rebellion without a cause, or with a personal agenda, does not count. If the issue is “God rather than men,” I expect you to be willing to die for your convictions. If it so important to disobey the speed limit, not to keep off the grass, or to cause disorder and chaos in society or even in the Church, then readiness to lay down your life for it, whatever it might be, should naturally follow.

St. Peter was telling the High Priest, in effect, “Yes, but Dad says…” He was saying that it was the Lord Himself, Jesus Christ Who had risen from the dead and had stood before them alive after His death and passion for the sins of the whole world, Who had personally commanded them to preach His Gospel. Therefore, even the High Priest and the Sanhedrin, though their offices had been established by God Himself in the days of Moses, had no authority to tell them to disobey the Lord. The Apostles were bound to obey the Higher Power, Christ the Lord. And, yes they were willing to die for that obedience as an unshakable matter of conscience.

Notice that Peter and the other Apostles did not speak down to the High Priest and the Council. They were never disrespectful. They even accepted a beating, and rejoiced that they were worthy to suffer for the Name of Jesus Christ. They were not rebels, they were not like angry adolescents wanting to make a scene; rather, just like the Centurion, they were men under authority. Like the old TV advertisement for Hebrew National Hotdogs, they were Kosher; they answered to a Higher Authority.

I resist the idea that we should draw a direct a parallel between the Old Testament rule of the Sanhedrin and the High Priest to the authority God has placed in His Church. But, we may draw an indirect and implied meaning. Listen to these words:

“Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you (Hebrews 13:17).”

The “rule” is the same as care or cure. There are other such passages in the New Testament. There is a good reason why St. Paul wanted Timothy and Titus normally to ordain men who had already proven their ability as fathers in their own households. It takes the same kind of man who is a good father to be a good pastor. Though Paul himself (alone among the Apostles) lived a celibate life, and had raised no family, he nonetheless knew that, normally, it is best for a good father to have the responsibility for the cure of souls.

The priesthood is an eldership automatically (if you know the Greek New Testament you won’t even question that). It is no office for a man who wants either power or prestige. It is an office for a man who accepts responsibility for others, for their eternal good. It is an office with the responsibility of caring for the good of the Church, and also for souls under one’s pastoral care.

You need to understand something from my perspective. You are not my customers. The customer is always right, and must be placated. But, children in the care of parents, patients in the care of doctors, and parishioners under the care of priests, are not customers. And, they are not always right either. This parish is not my employer, and you are not my bosses: The priest works for God under the authority of the bishop.

My responsibility is to care for your souls. Primarily, just as I was the one calling my sons in for dinner, it is my office to feed you. What do I feed you? Not my own ideas. My own ideas would have no real authority. It would be like my daughter saying, “come in now,” instead of speaking to her brothers on behalf of their father. I am charged with the awesome responsibility of feeding you God’s word. First and foremost that is the Gospel itself, and the appeal to everyone, “be ye reconciled to God.” I am charged always to remind you that Christ died for your sins and rose again, to come to the table with “hearty repentance and true faith.” It is not my own idea. It is what our Father says.

The correct understanding of authority unlocks the mysteries in the Gospel reading we have today. The Law of Moses required that the leper was to keep his distance, and cry out “Unclean, unclean” as a warning, so others would keep away. In a very real sense, one we would not understand today in our time and place, the leper’s disease made him unclean and was, according to the statutes of the Law, a sin in itself. For, just by having leprosy a person was Lo Tahor, unclean. He was unable to enter the temple. He was, by having this disease, in a sense, required to keep his distance even from God.

Jesus, as a man under the Law, always kept it perfectly. Yet, as God, He is also the Lawgiver. In the Sermon on the Mount He spoke plainly as the Lawgiver. As a man He obeyed the Law, and as God it was His Law, his property if I may put it that way.

In dealing with the leper, He would have been expected to keep away so as not be made unclean Himself. Certainly, He would be expected not to touch such a man. Yet, he stretches forth His hand and touches him: “I will; be thou clean.” The words “I will” are words with ultimate authority, the will of God, the will of the Lawgiver Himself. Instead of the unclean man defiling the young rabbi, the Lawgiver Himself cleanses the leper. Instead of the touch making Jesus unclean, His touch makes the leper clean.

As the leper saw it, this cleansing touch restored him to the fellowship of his people, and allowed him back into the presence of God in the holy temple. His is the Highest Power, Christ making all things new. Just as He cleansed the leper, so He cleanses and restores the souls of all who come to Him with “hearty repentance and true faith.” It is in His power to cleanse and restore. And, as we see in this reading, that is the will of the Highest Power of all; it is the will of God to cleanse and to heal.

As a man, Christ perfectly fulfilled the Law and the Father’s will. The good will of God is why Jesus so readily took up His cross to take away all of our sins, just as He bore this leper’s sorrows and carried his grief, healing him thoroughly. He triumphed over death and rose the third day. With all the authority and power of the Lawgiver, with all power in heaven and earth as the risen and immortal Man in whose hand the will of God prospers* He commanded His disciples to go into all nations with the Gospel, and make more disciples, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things He had commanded them.

In line with the Centurion’s observation, Christ had lived His earthly life as a man under authority, even under the Law. He has all things in heaven and earth under His authority now; He gives commandment to his Church to follow Him and to proclaim the kingdom of God in His Name. It is He Who tells us to do these things.

* Isaiah 53:10

The Conversion of St. Paul January 25th

2012-01-25T14:24:00.002-05:00

EASTER OUT OF SEASON

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, the curse that was evident in the manner of Jesus’ death was revealed to be atonement paid by the Righteous one for the many sinners, thus taking away the curse from those who deserved it, and the prophecies of scripture were revealed to have been speaking of two comings of Messiah, not one. How much of this was clear immediately and how much had to develop over time as he thought about it, is not clear. But, right away, in his conversion, is the revelation that would become Paul’s bold teaching about faith in Jesus Christ and the grace that he gives, himself our only Salvation.

See the rest here.

Third Sunday after the Epiphany

2012-01-21T21:24:00.002-05:00

I have assigned preaching to Fr. Charles Lindsay this week, so here is a sermon I wrote for this Sunday (based on the American propers).

Gustave Dore' Bible Illustrations

John 2:1-11

Today we will look at three important things meant to be drawn out, exegeted, from this portion of the Gospel of John. These are:

1) Christ’s presence at a wedding
2) His phrase “my hour”
3) The title that he gives to His mother, namely, “Woman.”

Click here for the rest of the sermon.

Her Mother's Glory

2012-01-20T00:19:00.000-05:00

Robert Hart on the Hardest of Abortion Cases

I promised myself that I would not be the stereotypical father of the bride, like Spencer Tracy, who hates to give away his little girl. But as I walked her down the aisle, and approached the moment she would become a full-grown, married lady, I felt everything I had determined not to feel. Very far from my mind was the story of her strange origins. It is always far from my mind, unless something reminds me of it, like the recent news from Poland.

Read the rest here.

Do the work of an Evangelist

2012-01-19T14:29:00.001-05:00

Not of an underwriter.

(Re-posted from 2007. I was younger and less refined, a tad more feisty. But, I still believe this.)

"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine...do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry."

II Timothy 4:2,5

The insurance business has that dreaded class of gate keepers who study every new application sent by an agent, examining it thoroughly to find whatever reason they may to reject it. The agent has worked hard to sell a policy, only to have it fall into such hands, those who are trained to be suspicious, to protect the company's assets and reserves, and to this end to show no pity on a would be customer. The truth is, the insurance companies do need these menacing figures in order to control losses. They are necessary in insurance, but not in the priesthood.

A while back I listened to a priest, a man with little experience but generous with unsolicited advice, describing how he had protected his church from the wrong kind of people. A couple, both Episcopalians, were moving to his area, and wanted to find what they called a "Bible believing church." The alarm bells went off in his head, since he took the expression "Bible believing" to indicate that they were Protestant in their thinking, Low Church in their tastes, and just not the right sort for his "Anglo-Catholic" parish. He was practically boasting about how he had scared them off by arguing over who was and who was not orthodox, and by his firm refutation of women's "ordination." Yes, he manged to keep the wrong sort of people away, and they did not even come by on Sunday morning to visit and see the church for themselves. He had scared them off just fine over the phone.

The man should have been an underwriter.

The famed Barrister of fiction, Horace Rumpole, once said about a colleague, "It's no great trick getting people into prison. How good is he at keeping them out?" The opposite applies to the sacred ministry in the Church. It is no great trick keeping people out of the Church. Just decide, O' Priest, that you shall be a gatekeeper instead of a fisher of men. It's much easier, and you get to play the role of the Bad Vicar.None of that nasty business of being patient and kind, none of that drag on your time. And, you get to cater to the desires of the most fussy and effeminate contributors who think it is more important to observe all of the choreography of Ritual Notes than to tend to the salvation of souls. Golly! You can even console yourself as your congregation remains stagnant, or drops off to nothing, that you had done well by keeping it pure. You can concentrate on the gossip and who's who of the bitter Continuing divisions, and treat everything to do with learning as a matter purely theoretical.

But, guess what my friends; we don't need underwriters among the clergy. So, if you are the type who examines visitors to see whether or not their "application" is solid, please go do something else. The world always needs good waiters and janitors, and insurance companies could use very fussy people as, you guessed it, underwriters. Get an honest job.

This is a time of opportunity for us. At this point in history, the Anglican world is exploding. When it falls back down it will be resorted and reconfigured. Many of the people in official Cantuarian Anglican churches are fleeing for their lives; and they are looking to African Primates, or going to Rome or Orthodoxy, because for too long the Continuing Churches have been choking the supply of the Gospel, and of the power to save souls through the pure preaching of God's word; they have been squeezing the hose shut instead of allowing the water to flow through it. The Spirit has been quenched for too long among a people who, having the truest and best of orthodox doctrine, nonetheless have made evangelism the lowest priority, if a priority at all.

When I say, "evangelism" I do not mean, first and foremost, church growth. Church growth is a consequence of evangelism; but the purpose of evangelism is the salvation of souls. When all is said and done, we will not answer on the Last Day for how well we performed the Ritual Notes (not even for the Shrove Tuesday Pancake Procession); but we will answer for whether or not we had been moved by charity to become vessels meet for the Master's purpose, pliable to the Holy Spirit for the work of evangelists. How much have we cared about the eternal destiny of lost souls in a fallen world? How much have we sought to welcome them, in fact to "compel them to come in?"

Now, if this couple had asked me if my church were A "Bible believing church," I would have said, as every true Catholic, including Catholic Anglicans, should say: "Yes, we most certainly are." I would have urged them to come, to taste and see that the Lord is good. We can deal with ignorance. In fact, dear priests, expect ignorance since you are supposed to be the teachers, and you cannot teach people what they already know. Welcome people whose minds are confused, and learn to speak in and interpret tongues enough to communicate in terms they receive. If such faithful Christians think in terms too foreign for your understanding, how do you hope to win the nations for Christ?

"O Zion, haste, thy mission high fulfilling,

to tell to all the world that God is Light;

that he who made all nations is not willing

one soul should perish, lost in shades of night.

Refrain:
Publish glad tidings: tidings of peace
tidings of Jesus, redemption and release.

"Proclaim to every people, tongue, and nation

that God, in whom they live and move, is Love;

tell how he stooped to save his lost creation,

and died on earth that man might live above. Refrain

"Give of thy sons to bear the message glorious;

give of thy wealth to speed them on their way;

pour out thy soul for them in prayer victorious

till God shall bring his kingdom's joyful day. Refrain

"He comes again! O Zion, ere thou meet him,

make known to every heart his saving grace;

let none whom he hath ransomed fail to greet him,

through thy neglect, unfit to see his face. Refrain"

O' Zion Haste, hymn 261 in the 1940 Hymnal

Words: Mary Ann Faulkner Thomson, 1870

Second Sunday after the Epiphany

2012-01-14T13:37:00.001-05:00

Romans 12:6-16a * Mark 1:1-11

The season of Epiphany gives us pictures of Christ that are meant to help us understand the revelation of who He is. Look at an icon of this event, and you get a glimpse of the meaning of this Gospel passage. The Son stands in the water, the Spirit appears in form as of a dove and lights upon Him, and the Father’s voice comes from above. This clear revelation of God is why we should think of today as a companion Sunday to Trinity Sunday. It is why the Orthodox Church sees this scene from the Gospels as the most significant Theophany, for which they name this season.

About thirty years ago I heard a man preach that when the Father spoke the words, “Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” that this was somehow necessary in order to meet the psychological need of Jesus, a word of approbation from the Father that, as the preacher’s words still ring in my memory, “His Son needed.” I do not know where people get these ideas, but they do not find them in the pages of scripture. The idea that we can understand Jesus Christ in psychological terms that are based upon the normal condition of fallen sinful people, who need healing or affirmation because of the brokenness of their lives, is a short route to heresy. We must not try to get into the mind of Jesus Christ as if He were subject to the problems that sinful people have. His understanding of His mission is not a subject for that kind of analysis.

Another idea that was popular for many years is that Jesus was suddenly aware of who He was, and of His unique relationship to the Father, because of the voice from heaven and this whole spiritual experience. This interpretation comes from the idea that He was drawn to hear the preaching of John the Baptist, and underwent some sort of personal epiphany akin to religious conversion, the kind that takes place when revivalists preach. According to this interpretation, he emerged from the water a new man, suddenly filled with divine purpose. Again, this would require that we imagine a Jesus who came to John in order to be forgiven his own sins, because John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. But, the thought of Jesus having sins of which to repent is heresy. He is without sin.

We need to think according to the actual revelation that is recorded here in the scriptures, and free our minds from wrong ideas. For, the simple fact is, nothing that Jesus did in His public ministry had anything to do with meeting a supposed need of His own. Everything was for our sakes, like the hymn says- “for us baptized, for us He bore his holy fast and hungered sore.” That wonderful hymn begins each line of most verses with those two words, “for us.”

“For us He prayed, For us He taught, For us His daily works he wrought…For us to wicked men betrayed…For us he rose from death again.” What happened here at the River Jordan did not happen because the Son needed the Father’s affirmation, and it is was not some personal epiphany that changed His life. He knew already exactly who He was, and of His unique relationship to the Father, having expressed it to Joseph and Mary in the temple many years earlier when he was a child twelve years old. He asked them why they had looked for Him when they ought to have known that he would be in His Father’s house.

Jesus went to the River Jordan in order to begin His public ministry, to appear to the people of Israel, and to be proclaimed by John the Baptist as the Son of God. The baptism itself serves as a prelude to the crucifixion that He, for us, later would endure unto death. For here, standing with sinners in the waters of the Jordan, He is willingly taking on the sins of the whole world for the first time, letting Himself be identified with sinners and with their sins, remaining Himself guiltless, completely holy, and the only person among all of the human race about Whom the Father would say that He, God, is well pleased. God loves the fallen sinful children of men; but He is not well pleased with any of them in their Fallen state. Only His Son, free from sin, was pleasing to God; and here we see him entering the waters of the Jordan to begin his identification with our sins, a voluntary identification that would culminate on the cross. In John’s Gospel it is after this epiphany, this epiphany to John the Baptist and the people gathered, that the Baptist proclaims “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.”

I remember another strange idea that was expressed in my hearing, only this time it was from a layman. According to this fellow, there was some point when Jesus complained in response to the demands of a crowd that he was only one man, and they were asking too much from him. I do not know what movie this man saw, or what silly story he once heard from a well-meaning relative while growing up, or what dream he dreamt. I pointed out to him that nothing of the sort ever happened; that the Gospels record no such thing. Jesus fed thousands of people with five loaves and two fishes, rose people from the dead, walked on water, healed everyone who came to Him, and never once complained about anything, except for how little faith people have. He did not work within the confines of His human nature, but from within His eternal Godhead as the Son eternally begotten of the Father. He did not diminish His Divine nature, but rather he raised human nature. He did not reveal what is possible for a good man, but what is possible with God. The human nature that he took into His Divine Person as God the Son was a complete human nature; but the Person of Jesus the man was that of God the Son.

The voice from Heaven, and the appearance like that of a dove, all centered upon Jesus in the River Jordan, did not come for His sake. It did not meet some need that He had. It was for the sake of those who stood upon the bank of the river, those who saw and heard. It was for the sake of all of us who have learned about this epiphany, this revelation of the Trinity, that full and perfect name of God that later would be spoken by Christ after he rose from the dead; the name of “The Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.” Here is a revelation of God, and of the mysterious relationship that has existed from all eternity, about which we have no right to speculate, hidden and veiled except for glimpses of revelation meant to aid us in our salvation. At no point was the Son alone, for the Father was always with Him, and the Holy Spirit remained upon Him.

The other people came to the Baptist confessing their sins. But, about this man the Father made a confession, that He was well pleased. The others came out of need. Jesus was there to meet our needs, especially the deepest need of all, to be reconciled to God; to know Him, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. Others came to lay down their sins; Jesus was there to take up the sins they laid down, and to carry them to Calvary where they would be nailed to the cross with Him. The others came to lay down their burdens; Jesus was there to take up their burdens. “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 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 (Isaiah 53: 4-6).”

The Holy Spirit appears as a dove. Now, this is a different kind of manifestation than the physical presence of Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh. The Holy Spirit is appearing in a vision granted to everyone there; His appearing is in a symbolic way, that is to say, it is a Divine writing of iconography in the very heavens. The appearance of a dove is a symbol, and the message is that God’s wrath is over and done. This is the Christmas message of the angel who appeared and spoke to the shepherds of “peace on earth, goodwill towards men.” Not among men, but towards men. We are reminded of the story of Noah, who sent out the dove, which returned with an olive branch in its mouth to reveal that the waters of God’s wrath had abated from off the earth. Noah later offered a sacrifice after he left the ark, and God promised not to destroy man, and hung up His bow, His rainbow, as a pledge. The meaning is this: By appearing as a dove that descended upon Jesus, the Holy Spirit signified to us that Christ is the peace offering that reconciles us to God. This too, just like the very baptism itself, points to our redemption by Christ’s full and complete offering of Himself on the cross.

And, to the ear came the audible voice of the Father, telling us of His pleasure in the Son. This is more than simply His approval of Christ’s holy life. It is the eternal love within the Trinity, wherein God delights in being God, where each of the Persons delights in the perfection and worthiness of the other two Persons. ..we know this is true, but our speaking of it cannot do justice to the reality as we shall begin to know it when the risen Christ returns in glory. For now, we see the significance in the Father’s words, telling us not only of His Son’s worthiness and holiness, but telling us this in contrast to the pleasure He cannot take in the fallen state of every other human being who was there. Here too we understand why this voice was heard at the Lord’s baptism. As Jesus Christ identified Himself with sinful mankind, the other Persons of the Godhead told us Who He is, and why He is Himself without sin, but standing in for us to save us. The Father speaks of His Son Who always pleases Him, telling us not only that He remains holy and without spot or stain of sin, but even more; that He is the Son Who throughout eternity and before all worlds gives delight to the Father in that Divine love that is beyond our comprehension.

We see the Trinity in this report of the Lord’s baptism that day. The vision of the Holy Spirit was for our sake; the voice of the Father was for our sake. Here we see and hear the Trinity with eyes and ears, and we see also that only in Jesus Christ and His offering of Himself do we have salvation from sin and death. And, we can say, from all this, that the revelation of the Trinity tells us, in the words of Saint John the Apostle, “God is love.”

The revelation of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, the Trinity, is a necessary part of our salvation. It is not about abstract and difficult theology, but about how God, who is Love, saves us from sin and death and promises to raise us up in His Son. He has made Himself known in our world- not perfectly understood, but known. What was revealed that day at the River Jordan was a revelation to every human being except Jesus, who alone already knew.

Laymen's Guide to the Thirty-Nine Articles

2012-01-11T00:36:00.012-05:00

Article XVII. Of Predestination and Election

Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby, before the foundations of the world were laid, He hath constantly decreed by His counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom He hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation as vessels made to honour. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God's purpose by His Spirit working in due season; they through grace obey the calling; they be justified freely; they be made sons of God by adoption; they be made like the image of His only-begotten Son Jesus Christ; they walk religiously in good works; and at length by God's mercy they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination and our Election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh and their earthly members and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: so for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the devil doth thrust them either into desperation or into wretchlessness of most unclean living no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise as they be generally set forth in Holy Scripture; and in our doings that will of God is to be followed which we have expressly declared unto us in the word of God.

De Praedestinatione

Praedestinatio ad vitam est aeternum Dei propositum, quo, ante iacta mundi fundamenta, suo consilio, nobis quidem occulto, constanter decrevit eos, quos in Christo elegit ex hominum genere, a maledicto et exitio liberare, atque ut vasa in honorem efficta per Christum ad aeternam salutem adducere. Unde qui tam praeclaro Dei beneficio sunt donati, illi, Spiritu eius opportuno tempore operante, secundum propositum eius vocantur; iustificatur gratis; adoptantur in filios Dei; unigeniti eius Iesu Christi imagini efficiuntur conformes; in bonis operibus sancti ambulant; et demum ex Dei misericordia pertingunt ad sempiternam felicitatem.

Quemadmodum Praedestinationis et Electionis nostrae in Christo pia consideratio dulcis, suavis, et ineffabilis consolationis plena est vere piis et his qui sentiunt in se vim Spiritus Christi, facta carnis et membra quae adhuc sunt super terram mortificantem, animumque ad coelestia et superna rapientem, tum quia fidem nostram de aeterna salute consequenda per Christum plurimum stabilit atque confirmat, tum quia amorem nostrum in Deum vehementer accendit: ita hominibus, curiosis carnalibus et Spiritu Christi destitutis, ob oculos perpetuo versari Praedestinationis Dei sententiam perniciosissimum est praecipitium, unde illos diabolus protrudit vel in desperationem vel in aeque pernitiosam impurissimae vitae securitatem.

Deinde promissiones divinas sic amplecti oportet, ut nobis in sacris literis generaliter propositae sunt; et Dei voluntas in nostris actionibus ea sequenda est quam in verbo Dei habemus deserte revelatam.

Fr. Laurence Wells

When we come to Article XVII, we are bound to remember that the Articles of Religion, like the "forty stripes save one" of 2 Cor. 11:24, are widely unpopular among those who profess and call themselves Anglicans. At this point the distinction between an Apologia for the Articles and a mere exposition tends to break down. Predestination and Election are words which are likely to raise chills of horror and howls of wrath in our circles, eliciting the ugliest word in the Anglican lexicon. Calvinism! I recall a brother priest who kindly took me aside in a pastoral manner to tell me, in the manner of a physician about to share the diagnosis of a loathsome and terminal disease, that he suspected that "you have leanings in an unfortunate direction." And then there was the Bible study where a layman exclaimed with dismay, "Why that's Calvinism!" I explained to him that John Calvin was not the author of Ephesians 1 or of Romans 8 and that St Paul was not trained in Geneva. Burn the Bible if you wish, but do not stone me for telling you what is in it.

To deal immediately with one widespread myth, we must emphasize that it was not John Calvin who concocted the doctrines of predestination and election. His view on these matters was not only shared by Martin Luther (a generation ahead of him), but was aggressively taught by St Augustine of Hippo and the entire tradition which flowed from him, a school which included St. Anselm of Canterbury, St Thomas Aquinas, and another Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Bradwardine (1290--1349). This, of course, was not without controversy in any period.

Article XVII was written in 1553, in the earlier Forty-two Articles. The only significant change effected in 1571, when the Articles took their final form, was the important addition of the phrase "in Christ," within the larger phrase "those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind." In the mid-sixteenth century were was no great controversy on this matter. After all,

England

had a strong Augustinian tradition before the names of Luther and Calvin were heard there, and Article XVII could have been written even if the Reformation had never taken place.

But before the 16th century was out, controversy had broken out throughout Europe, a controversy never resolved in the non-Roman Churches and a controversy which the Roman Church itself did not escape, with the warfare between Thomists and Molinists, and the brief career of Jansenism.

To summarize some intricate history with a very broad brush, by the end of the following century (that is, by 1699), were at least five forms of the doctrine of predestination in circulation, which remain current today. Critics and opponents of this doctrine will probably not trouble themselves to determine which form they dislike most. But here is the list, with brief descriptions. We will arrange these from one extreme to the other.

First, we must mention the view which must be termed "hyper-Calvinism." This does not mean "real Calvinism fervently held and zealously taught." A hyper-Calvinist is one who maintains that since his eternal destiny is already determined in an absolute way, it makes no difference what he believes or how he lives. Since the eternal destiny of all mankind is likewise determined, then preaching the Gospel to the heathen is a waste of time. There are many who impute such a belief to the Augustinian tradition, and it seems to be a cheap and easy way to refute the Calvinist tradition. Sad to say, there have been, within the Baptistic churches, some who fit the definition of hyper-Calvinists.

When William Carey was about to embark on his missionary enterprise, he was told, "Sit down, young man; when God wishes to save the heathen, He will do so in His own time and way." But this is a caricature of what Article XVII teaches.

Next, there is the slightly more benign view labeled "Supralapsarianism." While a Supralapsarian believes that God has authorized the preaching of the Gospel to all mankind, he has a hard time explaining why it makes any difference. In his view, God, before the creation of the world and as an act of pure sovereignty, determined to send some of the human race to heaven and likewise to send the rest of us to hell. This decree was without regard to sin or to the fall, hence the name Supralapsarian. In this view, the Fall of mankind was subsequently permitted in order to achieve the one goal of election and reprobation. This is the view commonly called "double predestination." While it has had some highly competent exponents (the doughty Karl Barth spoke highly of it), it has never been taught in any of the Reformed Confessions nor has it been the official position of any Calvinist Church. Even so, most critics of Calvinism imagine this to be the most authentic form of predestination and election.

The third position, called "Infralapsarianism” asserts that God, having permitted the Fall as a consequence of Adam's free will, found a remedy for this sad state of affairs by choosing some for eternal life and abandoning the rest to their just deserts. God's decree of Election, therefore, is rooted not merely in brute sovereignty but in His love, forbearance, and determination to rescue a portion of His ruined creation. God decreed the election of certain people not because of anything in them, nor because of any merits they possess, but purely as an exercise of mercy and loving-kindness to undeserving sinners. The doctrine of Election, therefore, turns out to be a doctrine of grace, the sub-floor to the Gospel itself, This is the view which appears to be the one set forth in Article XVII. With such a gracious and evangelical concept of Divine election, election can indeed be a matter of "sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons."

A fourth position, closely related to the third, is called Amyraldianism, "hypothetical universalism," or modified Calvinism. It largely agrees with the Infralapsarian view, but refuses to draw out the perplexing logical corollary that Christ died specifically for the elect. If Christ died for all in the same way, then at least hypothetically, all mankind may be saved.

The fifth position, certainly the most popular and widespread, is that called Arminianism. The Arminian seeks to do justice to the Biblical texts that God is willing for all men to be saved and that Christ, the Lamb of God, has taken away the sins of the world. Equally committed to a philosophical concept of "free will," the Arminian position, rather similar to the semi-Pelagians of the Dark Ages, contrived the ingenious notion that if God elected certain men to be saved, He did so on the basis of a "fides praevisa." In other words, God foresaw who would believe in Christ, and those He graciously elected.

In Anglican theology of the 16th and 17th centuries, we can find representatives of the Infralapsarian, Amyraldian, and Arminian schools. The hyper-Calvinists and Supralapsarians are mentioned here only for the sake of contrast, necessary because so many caricatures and misrepresentations are in circulation. Critics of the doctrines of Predestination and Election hardly ever show any knowledge of the differences between Supralapsarianism and Infralapsarianism. But surely there is a wide chasm between a position which asserts that God's mercy and His wrath are equally ultimate and one which claims that He loved us in His Son before the foundation of the world.

While it is frequently said that Article XVII does not teach "double predestination," a closer reading of the second paragraph does in fact show a contrast between "godly persons, and such as feel within themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ," on the one hand and "curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ," on the other. But whereas in the Supralapsarian scheme the decrees of election to salvation and reprobation to eternal death are parallel, in the Infralapsarian, Amyraldian or Arminian view election to salvation to eternal life is rooted in God's own unmerited grace, while reprobation is in fact merited by sin. Not parallel, but nonetheless double.

When we narrow the field to the Infralapsarian, Amyraldian, and Arminian positions, it must be noticed that all three hold and teach that "Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God." Article XVII does not exclude any of these positions. The key difference, we must declare, is not so much in how "free will" comes into play as it is in the matter of whether God's elect people is a definite number of people, a "numerum clausum" as the Calvinists adamantly maintain, or whether it is an open set, which humans can voluntarily join, as the Arminians would assert. The apparent weakness of the Arminian position is that it seems to reduce "the Lamb's book of life" to a sign-up sheet for volunteers, The apparent weakness of the Infralapsarian and Amyraldian positions, on the other hand, is that they surely seem to verge on philosophical determinism.

Perhaps the radical problem, which may tilt the playing-field toward the Infralapsarian position, lies in the question which the disciples put to our Lord (Luke 13:23), "Are they few that be saved?" It is commonly assumed and sometimes gleefully alleged that theologians of the Pauline-Augustinian-Calvinist tradition teach that only a remnant, a tiny minority of the human race, will be spared God's eschatological wrath and ultimately saved. While such a view has sometimes been held forth by the gloomier side of Lutheranism, the staunchest defenders of Divine Election have asserted that God's Elect People, those whom He loved before the foundation of the world with an everlasting love, will be a great multitude which no man can number.* The Princeton theologians were emphatic that the overwhelming majority of the human race will be saved at the last. Election, after all, is the decree of a truly gracious God.

While the Arminian emphasis on free well is truly flattering to my prideful ego, I am mindful that my free will has brought me more harm than good, in sin, selfishness and suffering. When it comes to my own eternal destiny, I feel far safer if it is God's decision and not my own.

*Revelation 7:9

Fr. Robert Hart

In the above Fr. Wells has been thorough, and has dispelled many myths, and also many simplistic notions. The historical record he has set straight as well, taking the subject out of the exclusive bounds some call “Calvinism.” This is long overdue for many people who imagine that doctrines were newly minted in the Reformation; for, in fact, there were no new doctrines among the Reformers. Old debates were rekindled that had been going on among catholic doctors for centuries.

Article XVII gives us that special English approach, looking at the old questions with a gracious share of Reason. In words no one can dispute successfully, it teaches us of the grace of God active in the life of a believer, with the words, “such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, etc.” In a very old English manner, it invites each Christian to at least some mystical understanding of what it means to know God, all in terms drawn directly from the clear teaching of Holy Scripture. This it contrasts to the danger for those trapped in the works of the flesh, “curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ.” The contrast should bring to mind the same contrast as St. Paul expressed it in the fifth chapter of Galatians, pitting the works of the flesh against the fruit of the Spirit. The warning that we ought not to set forth continually “the sentence of God's Predestination” before the eyes of carnal persons carries with it the obvious meaning that it is, rather, our duty to urge them to repent and believe; not to presume that we may write them off.

That the contrast between carnality and walking in the Spirit is related to predestination and election should be indisputable on at least one level. Clearly, no one may simply produce the fruit of the Spirit by an act of free will, for it requires the Spirit of Christ. The Holy Spirit alone creates within each believer His own working, “the working of the Spirit of Christ.”

Other points in the Article are simply indisputable also. That the doctrine of election “is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort” to people who live by faith, should not be controversial. Against this we may contrast an idea of those who teach that even the greatest saints have had no assurance of salvation. Rather, we see that God has made promises to those who sincerely repent and believe His Gospel, that He provides Absolution within His Church, and bids us come near and receive the spiritual food of the Body and Blood of Christ. These revealed truths should erase all erroneous notions that we may not have some assurance of faith, assurance that “is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort.”

The Article emphasizes that we have our salvation because we are “in Christ,” echoing the words of St. Paul again:

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved” *

The emphasis remains one of grace rather than something akin to the ugly notion of Kismet, the picture of an unloving God Who simply delights in exercising power to obtain some distorted and twisted kind of “glory.” It has been argued that western man’s exchanges with Islam in the late Middle Ages created an emphasis of the Divine attribute of power over the emphasis of Divine love. Certainly, that cannot help but distort the Biblical picture of predestination and election, robbing us of the beauty as well as of the comfort. It replaces the God Who so loved the world with a devilish god. Some think of that devilish god and of Kismet, and they throw around words they cannot properly define, such as “Calvinism.” But, our Anglican Article XVII emphasizes the grace of God as the basis of predestination and election, not some unfeeling demonstration of power.

Finally, we are treated to that particular Anglican grace of the practical and pastoral approach, reminding us at the end that God’s general will is revealed in Scripture for our daily living, which means, if we love Him we will keep His commandments.

* Ephesians 1:3-6

First Sunday after the Epiphany

2012-01-08T17:51:00.002-05:00

For the video click on the link here.

First Sunday after the Epiphany

2012-01-07T18:20:00.006-05:00

Bible Illustration by Gustave Dore'

Because of His Divine Person, in his human nature he is at once like everyone else, and yet not like anyone else

Romans 12:1-5 * Luke 2: 41-52

The focus in this season of the Epiphany is the revelation of the Word made flesh, and beholding his glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth (John 1:14). Each Sunday, for the first few weeks of this season, we will be told what can be seen, as in beheld, that reveals Divine glory in the man himself, the Lord Jesus. This Sunday is no exception.

Looking at Jesus at the age of twelve, I am reminded of something my friend, David Mills, once wrote in a large email discussion, commenting on the efforts by some writer named Ann Rice to create a biographical sketch of Jesus. About her efforts he wrote; "There is one Person whom we must not try to understand in terms of psychology,"-or words to that effect. How true. We are not in a position to analyze Jesus Christ, or to guess at motivation for his words and actions.

Once I heard the efforts of a priest to create a vivid picture, in some paper he wrote, about the Lord's time growing up and seeing suffering people, and wanting to do something about it, and so forth. He objected, after reading his paper, to my criticism that he had reversed the revelation of Scripture. I told him, "that is not the Word made flesh, but flesh becoming the Word. You have it all backwards." You see, Jesus did not acquire the motivation to become the Light of the World, rather He came into the world as its light. He did not undergo, as we must, a conversion. He came here to save us from sin and death.

"And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world." (John 8:23)

Jesus is the only one who ever came into the world. The rest of us have our origin here. In His Person the Word is with the Father and with the Holy Spirit, eternal, uncreated, beyond our comprehension, hidden from the sight of mortal eye, pure and separate from all sin and evil, unknowable as dwelling in the darkness of mystery and in the radiant light of Divine glory. Every other nature is created, and everything that we can know is from the things that are created. God alone is not created, and therefore no creature shares his nature as without beginning, without end, having neither parts nor passions, utterly transcendent above all we can know or even imagine.

And, so it is that no one ever came into the world except the One who created it. The glory of God is now revealed, and though we cannot comprehend Him in His Divine glory, we can know Him through His Incarnation. "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." So, we should not be surprised to find him as a boy, twelve years old, already possessing wisdom that astonishes the most learned rabbis and doctors of the Torah.

Once I heard a man preach from today's Gospel, and he commented on the bit near the end: "And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them." He preached, essentially, that his youth and inexperience had gotten the better of him, and he needed to go home and learn from the older wiser folks. That would be true concerning anyone of us, we who did not come into the world, but are from beneath. Not so the One who is from above, who is not of this world. The human nature he took was real, and was fully human. And, that human nature was able to grow in wisdom and in stature. But, the Person who took to himself fellowship with us by taking human nature, is, properly, God the Son One with the Father.

The human nature of Jesus was not subtraction (as some have misinterpreted self-emptying), but addition. Added to His eternal uncreated Person is the created nature we share. To fulfill the Law for us, yes he went back to Nazareth and was subject to his adopted father Joseph, and to his mother Mary. And, this he chose willingly, after demonstrating his wisdom by revealing just a little bit of it, and then choosing the way of obedience and humility. This was the choice he made from his internal strength, not dependence due to weakness. Because of His Divine Person, in his human nature he is at once like everyone else, and yet not like anyone else. And, that is what we must learn from today's selection of the Gospel According to St. Luke.

This humbling of himself, subjecting himself to parental authority, and remaining from that time out of public view, was all part of that perfect obedience to the Law by which he saved us from sin and death (that is, the Law of God given through Moses). For, in accepting a place of submission and humility, of obedience and even the role of a servant, he was already obedient, eventually unto death on the cross. This has everything to do with the fact that he, the one who had no sin of his own, identified with us, even with us sinners. In time he fulfilled this perfect obedience.

The curious phrase translated, "How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?" is literally, "Why did you look for me? Did you not know I would be with my Father?" Some have rendered it, "in my Father's house?" This was not an enthusiastic youngster getting above himself. This was God the Son reminding them that He was here as the Son, eternally begotten of the Father. Yet, we see him descend, we see him go down from Jerusalem (for from Jerusalem, the Jews saw everything as descent). Today's Gospel reveals the path of descent which He journeyed for us. He went back with them, and was subject unto them, in perfect patience and obedience. This was not a person humbled by circumstance, but rather the Lord choosing to humble himself.

St. 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)

His coming into the world to reveal the glory of God was for you and me. His death on the cross was for you and me, to save us from sin. His resurrection from the dead was for you and for me, to save us from death. And, now we offer ourselves, not as if we did some great thing. Rather it is the service we owe from gratitude.

Today's Epistle says: "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Reasonable service in the Greek is logika latre’ia (λογικv λατρεία). It is logical, or reasonable, to respond with worship, with liturgy. We will respond even in words, saying in our Holy Communion liturgy, "And here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord, our selves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and living sacrifice unto thee."

Today's Epistle also tells us, "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." So, part of this whole logical liturgy of offering our very selves to God is to love Him with all our mind, filling it with the word He has revealed in sacred Scripture, so as to follow the One who came into the world to choose us out of the world; in our minds transformed so as not to conform to the sinful world around us. For, unlike Jesus, we need conversion; we need to change, and we need to be saved from the sin and death of the Fallen world.

It may seem a big thing to give ourselves to God in a reasonable life of worship as living sacrifices; but, in so doing, as we are transformed with renewed minds, what we give back to God is gratitude by obedient cooperation with Him as He saves us from the darkness of sin and death. Even in giving ourselves to Him, we the are ones who receive a gift, the grace to be transformed as children of God unto eternal life.

This is why we focus in this season on who Jesus is. Soon we will focus on what he did for us and does for us. To understand that, we focus on the Word made flesh, and the glory he revealed from within Himself, the glory of His Divine Person.

The Epiphany

2012-01-05T21:24:00.005-05:00

Isaiah 60:1-9 * Eph. 3:1-12 * Matt. 2: 1-12

Gustave Dore' Bible Illustartions

The most radical line to be uttered in the ancient world must have been the first of the Ten Commandments. “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.” It was completely out of the ordinary in the days when the peoples of the earth were expected to worship the local deities; in fact, for Israel to believe that their God was the only true God, and all others were vain, was as out of place amid the pagans of antiquity as a fervent expression of Nationalism would be out of place on the floor of the United Nations. To what degree any of the ancient pagans may have thought themselves to be refined and sensitive, the Israelites must have come across as ill mannered. And, since the Law and the prophets of Israel denounced the practices of some of the religions, such as child sacrifice, it was very clear that the Jews simply were not willing to change with the times, and that they were intolerant.

Furthermore, not only was the God of Israel considered to be the one and only true God to His own people, but the only true God at all. The phrase that is translated “before Me” is quite significant. The Hebrew expression is al peni, and it means “in front of my face.” That might not be so bad for a local god that stayed within his boundaries; but this God had been in Chaldea with Abraham, called him into Canaan, went with the family of Israel into Egypt, and took them back to Canaan. Everywhere He went He was the ruler, showing no regard for the customs and religions of the people, and treating their idea of divinity as vain and silly. He judged the gods of Egypt in the plagues, even by putting out the light of their supreme deity, the sun. So, to have no other gods before Him, that is, in front of His face, the face of the God who is everywhere, is to make the judgment that only the people of Israel, believing in the One God who made Heaven and Earth, have the truth.

Syncretism was expected in the ancient world, a polite recognition of the various gods of the different places where nations settled. If nothing else, it was just bad manners to treat any religion as false, any god as a mere idol, and any practice as an abomination. Of course, when it became necessary to save mankind from the worst kind of paganism, the better kind came to the rescue; the Romans defeated the Carthaginian Hannibal whose army fought to spread the madness of child sacrifice everywhere. And, nowhere does this receive treatment that has better insight than in The Everlasting Man by G. K. Chesterton.

But, even the Romans fell short of the Israelite standard, the worship of one and only one God, the maker of all things and judge of all men. They allowed the Jews to worship the God of their fathers only because He was the God of their fathers. They tolerated Jewish intolerance out of respect for its antiquity. But, they persecuted the Christians who converted from among the Gentiles, using the excuse that they were rejecting the gods of their fathers and the worship of Caesar. And, even during the early days of the Christian Church, as recorded in the Book of Acts, the Emperor Claudius sought to banish all Jews from the City of Rome itself. The idea of any religion that could not take an equal place among the devotions to the various gods of the peoples was completely strange to ancient peoples everywhere.

Yet, what we know that the pagans of antiquity did not know, is that the revelation of God to man was a gift and the offer of salvation. Jewish monotheism was intolerant of the gods for the same reason that men of medicine are intolerant of folk remedies. The real trouble with all people everywhere is that two-sided coin of sin and death; so the intolerance of Judaism for idolatry was a necessary first step toward what would become the mission of the Church. Inherent in the first commandment of the Law of Moses is the Great Commission of the Risen Christ. “Thou shalt have no other gods in my presence-before my face” is echoed in the words, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. (Matt. 28: 19, 20).” It is expressed in the words of Saint Peter, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12).” Emmanuel, “in ancient times did give the Law, in cloud and majesty and awe,” and now He stood risen from the dead to authorize the Church to go with His presence to all nations, going everywhere among fallen mankind and with all their gods before His face, to root up, pull down and destroy, and to build and to plant. Jesus Christ, after dying on the cross for the sins of the whole world, gave us our commission. He is the only salvation revealed by the only true God, Whom to know is eternal life (John 17:3).

This is the meaning of the wise men coming from afar to worship Him in His infancy. Any other kind of writing would have told us all about these men; where they came from, how large their company really was, and details about the route they took, and alternative route by which they returned. But, sacred scripture was composed by the Holy Ghost, and the focus in the Gospel of Matthew is on Jesus Himself. Therefore, all these interesting details about the Magi have become the study of modern historians and archeologists uncovering a mystery, because the Gospel had no space to give to such minor issues. It focuses attention on the salvation of God in the person of Jesus, and it tells His story. The Holy family’s flight into Egypt and return to Galilee is given the space that follows, and the wise men – or Magi – simply disappear back to the place from which they came. But, their significance is not lost.

Their significance is taken up by Saint Paul in the Epistle we have heard today, about the Jews and Gentiles being made one new man in Christ, the middle wall of division broken down. We, that is those of us whose ancestry is from the Gentiles, are one with the people of Israel through faith in Jesus Christ. A gentile- that is, anybody who is not of Jewish descent- becomes grafted into the heritage of the people of God, made a child of Abraham by faith in Jesus Christ. The truth revealed to the apostles and prophets, as taught in today’s Epistle is this: No Christian is a Gentile. When you were baptized you were taken out of your wild Gentile tree, and grafted into the cultivated tree of Israel.

It is a basic understanding of salvation itself, as Isaiah prophesied that the Root of Israel would grow and blossom and fill the earth, the same earth that is to be “filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Isa. 27:6, Hab. 2:14)” that upon being made part of the Church, one becomes a part of the Israel of God. By faith Abraham is our father, the Lord is our God, and there is salvation in none other than His Son (Rom. 4:11, Acts 4:12). All of our beliefs are based firmly upon revelation, and not based on even the best speculations of the wisest of men.

The difference between revelation and imagination is the difference between the true God and every idol. Even the unseen and unfelt idols of the mind, housed in the Arian speculations of Muslims and Unitarians of an unrevealed and lonely brand of monotheism that cannot possess the eternal attribute of love because it is alone, is an idol. A god who cannot be seen, touched, heard and even tasted, is the new kind of idol; for, “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth (John 1:14).” Apart from this revelation of the Wholly Other uncreated God taking our time and space world into His Person; apart from the revelation of this invisible deity found in fashion as a man whose glory is beheld; apart from this unknowable God made known in the Person of the Incarnate Word, there is no salvation. There is no salvation in all of the other gods that men worship before His Face.

We have the Great Commission to spread the knowledge of the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent. Thou shalt have no other gods in front of His face, for neither is there salvation in any other. The name of Jesus is given under heaven among men, whereby we must be saved. Each of you, as a member of Christ's Body the Church, are called to take your part of this great work that Christ gave to His Church from the beginning, of which prophets had spoken from the dawn of history.

The Circumcision of the Christ

2012-01-01T13:17:00.002-05:00

January 1, 2012. Click here for the sermon on video.

Fr Wells's Bulletin Inserts

2011-12-31T08:19:00.003-05:00

THE CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST

Today is the eighth day of Christmas, on which the Church commemorates a special event, the circumcision of the Infant Son of Mary. This was a special time in the life of an Israelite family. In this ceremony a male child, in his earliest infancy, was enrolled as a member of the chosen people of God. This was a sacrament of the Old Testament, instituted by God in the time of Abraham, the first ancestor of the Hebrew people. In Genesis 17, we learn: "He that is eight days old among you shall be circumcised; every male among you ... both he that is born in your house, and he that is bought with your money, shall be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant." Circumcision inflicted an immutable mark, a sign of God's unbreakable covenant, His indestructible relationship with His elect people.

The point for us is that Jesus Christ experienced this Old Testament sacrament. In just a few days we will celebrate the beautiful feast of the Epiphany, the Manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles, when we rejoice that He came to be the Saviour of all ethnicities, Jew and Gentile alike. But today we remember that He was throughout His earthly career a devout and observant Jew, who kept every jot and title of the ceremonial regulations of the Law of Moses. (His disdain for non-Biblical tradition is another matter.)

His Incarnation, we must remember, from the moment Gabriel came to His mother until His corpse was enclosed in the tomb, was one relentless act of humiliation and self-denial. As the Eternal Son of God, the One who could say, "Before Abraham was, I AM," He submitted, even as a tiny infant, to regulations and ceremonies given to His human ancestor. That same submission continued until the Thursday evening thirty-three years later, when He said to His disciples, "I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer" (Luke 22:15).

This Old Testament sacrament of Circumcision took place on the eighth day of an Infant's life. That number eight is not without significance. Remember the creation-story in Genesis 1, told within the literary framework of seven days. The "eighth day" signifies the beginning of a new week, one which reaches beyond and surpasses creation itself. The eighth day is the beginning of a New Creation. Since the original creation is hopelessly spoiled and ruined by sin, nothing less than a New Creation is necessary. That New Creation began at the very moment Gabriel made an announcement to Mary, and in the Birth of her Son Jesus, it is now underway. While this New Creation is not yet finished, we devoutly hope to be a part of it. LKW

What has been won

2011-12-31T01:25:00.006-05:00

This year we have won a battle for truth and unity. The battle for truth came in the form of liberating some of our fellow Continuing Anglicans from the false notion that another church body, in this case the Roman Catholic Church, has some superior claim to being truly "catholic." We have witnessed the death throes of the entire spectacle of Continuing Anglicans buying a thoroughly revised version of Anglo-Catholicism, one that aggressively misrepresented itself as authentic Anglo-Catholicism, used by Abp. Hepworth and his fellow travelers to sell the idea that Anglicanorum Coetibus would lead to unity. In fact it would have led only to conversion from one denomination to another, which is all it was ever designed to do. It would have caused a bitter surprise to people, in some cases whose marriages would have been deemed invalid, by many others whose entire sacramental history would have been treated as worthless except baptism, and who would have found themselves disappointed with their new home, barred from Communion until further notice, and treated to unbearable rules made by men.

For several years in recent history a new and unrecognizable version of Anglo-Catholicism had been setting the stage for the tragedy we helped to avert. I do not say Anglo-Catholicism, not the real thing as Dr. Pusey and his colleagues saw it (who never argued that Anglicanism needed to become catholic, but that it always has been truly catholic). Instead many had accepted a modern and counterfeit version that has never amounted to much more than imitation of Rome, except when inconvenient, building in people a great inferiority complex about their own church tradition and the validity of its sacraments, and rejection of the vast wealth of its teaching and liturgy.

Finally, a good number of these people see that we have inherited a treasure that includes all the best of Christianity in accord with the most ancient catholic doctors and bishops. For years I had come across people who doubted the validity of their sacraments, who discredited the Book of Common Prayer, and who thought they should look to the bureaucratic Roman Church, despite its many scandals and disorder. They had been brainwashed and indoctrinated, had been ever learning, never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. They readily accepted the criticism of people who sought to convert them by twisting the meaning of such powerful and thoroughly orthodox liturgy as the traditional Anglican Prayer Book Holy Communion, imposing standards unknown to the Apostles and the Fathers, often with absolutely no witness in Antiquity. As a result, they were ripe to be picked.

The work of turning the light on and banishing the darkness of misinformation has come with a price, a price we have paid in some fairly minor ways - after all, no one has had us beaten or killed. But, mostly the work of this blog has come to be recognized as one of the factors that has restored appreciation of our Anglican heritage and identity. The result of winning the battle for truth is that we played a role in furthering the cause of unity. Ironically, we often were told otherwise; but the facts have been rather obvious now for several months, and we have reason to be happy with what has become clear.

The Continuing Church has a new generation of leading bishops. What I have witnessed personally is hearing Archbishops and Presiding Bishops of the major jurisdictions saying the same thing, saying it in the same room at the same event, saying it in concert with each other, making all of us the most important promise they could have made: To establish unity. None of them caused the divisions, and having inherited those divisions, they have said that they plan to end them. The one good thing that Anglicanorum Coetibus, and the push for it, has accomplished, is to give the leading bishops an occasion to end our own divisions and bring unity to the Continuing Church.

Let us pray, all of us, that in the coming year we will see it taking place by the work of the Holy Spirit.

Feast of the Holy Innocents Dec. 28th

2011-12-28T00:02:00.000-05:00

You may read it here.

Saint John Dec. 27th

2011-12-27T17:15:00.000-05:00

Read it here.

St. Stephen Protomartyr Dec. 26th

2011-12-26T16:52:00.000-05:00

Click on the picture fro the link.

Christmas Sermon

2011-12-25T08:44:00.002-05:00

Click here for video.

Fr Wells' Bulletin Inserts

2011-12-24T10:20:00.003-05:00

CHRISTMAS

The Gospel story both begins and ends with a stupendous miracle. At the beginning we are told of a baby boy born with no human father, and in conclusion we hear of a dead man brought back to life. From start to finish the Good News of Jesus Christ challenges our credulity. Notice who were the first witnesses of these things. The first to learn of Jesus' resurrection was a group of women. St Luke tells us (Lk 24:10--11), "It was Mary Magdelene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women which were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not." The first to hear of the birth of Christ were a bunch of shepherds, abiding in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night.

*Now what did women and shepherds have in common? Obviously these women and these shepherds enjoyed the highest possible privilege. They heard the Gospel. No greater privilege than that, is there? But in the ancient world, the world in which the Incarnation took place, both women and shepherds held a lowly place. They had no standing and no credibility. Neither women nor shepherds were permitted to be witnesses in a court of law. No matter if they were eye-witnesses to an event, their word had no weight in the world.

These were the ones to whom God, in His sovereignty and His wisdom, saw fit first to reveal His Gospel of grace. In that amazing Gospel of amazing grace, God over-rules all our notions of what is true, what is credible, what makes sense. The Gospel tells us that after the shepherds had gone to the manger to see for themselves with their own eyes the wonderful thing which the angels had told them about, "And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child" (Lk 2:17). Did anyone believe them? Probably not. After all, this story was transmitted only by a gang of sheep-herders, ignorant and simple men, commonly regarded as horse-thieves and cattle rustlers in American folk-lore.

But the shepherds at the manger and the women at the tomb knew alike what they had seen and heard. Just a few days before the Church's celebration of the Birth Day of Christ, we celebrate the feast of St Thomas, the man who said, "Except I see ... I will not believe." You know what happened next: Jesus came and said to Thomas, "Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing" (Jn 20:27).

We began by saying that the shepherds and the women at the tomb enjoyed the highest possible privilege: hearing the Good News of God's merciful love for fallen mankind, His redeeming grace for hopeless sinners. We celebrate today that same message, rejoicing that we too enjoy the privilege of knowing Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. And at His Christmas Altar He says to us, as He said to Thomas, "be not faithless but believing." LKW

Christmas

2011-12-23T00:54:00.000-05:00

Hebrews 1:1-12 * John 1:1-14

On Christmas, this Feast of the Nativity, the hidden revelation we celebrate on the Feast of the Annunciation becomes visible.

"Then the babe, the world's Redeemer

First revealed his sacred face

Evermore and evermore."

I never tire of the prologue to St. John’s Gospel. This is the Gospel for the first Mass of Christmas, which is also the last Gospel of almost every High Mass. These words are hakadesh hakadeshim- the holy of holies- in all of scripture. The finest and most entertaining story cannot begin to compare with these words which we have heard from scripture. If we heard the opening of St. John’s Gospel on every day owe could not hear it too often.

A Roman Catholic priest of my acquaintance via e-mail, Fr. Joseph Wilson, wrote, in an article, that it is impossible to overemphasize the Incarnation. How right he is. Many heresies come about by overemphasis on one little part of Christian truth at the expense of the rest of it. This cannot happen to the doctrine of the Incarnation, for it contains all of the truth in itself. This truth, that Christ is God the Son come to us in the fullness both of His Divine Nature, and of His human nature, is the truth, the central doctrine, of Christianity. Take it away and we have nothing. Keep it, and we have everything. No wonder St. John also tells us that this simple true statement, that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is the one doctrine that the spirit of Antichrist will not admit.

The doctrine of the Incarnation contains all of the truth of Christianity. The full revelation of the Trinity becomes necessary for God is the Son, and God is the Father; but the Son is not the Father. And the Son is present with us by the Holy Spirit. But, the Son and the Father are not the Holy Spirit. Yet, every Jew always knew that there is only One God- sh’mai Israel... The truth of the Incarnation opens more questions than it gives answers; the questions are because God is revealed fully by Jesus as being, in His words, The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19). The risen Christ revealed this one name for God. We can spend eternity asking questions about the infinity of the True and Living God because He will always be beyond our full comprehension. Yet, because He can walk among us as a man, in the person of the Son, we can know Him. He is beyond us forever; He is with us forever. His name is called Emmanuel- God with us.

The truth of the Incarnation tells us that we are sinners, lost because we are lost in sin. The light shines not against lesser light, but in the very darkness itself, a darkness that neither understands nor can solve the problem of this bothersome light. The darkness comprehended it not, the darkness into which we had fallen, and in which we were blind. Even many of the very chosen people themselves received not this Light; no wonder then that most of the world cannot receive Him either. Those who can receive Him do so because they face the light. This light hurts our eyes at first; for it tells the truth, the truth about ourselves which we wanted never to see nor hear.

The writer to the Hebrews wastes no time in telling us that this Man, the Son of God who is the very icon of the Father, in Whom the glory of God is perfectly seen, has purged our sins. And, in the Gospel of St. Luke, the words of the angels are heard, “Glory to God in the Highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men.” What peace is this? Is it some magic that makes sinful and fallen men stop waging war? Is not the greater war shown to us in scripture? We could say that God might justly wage war upon us because of our sins. As early as the story of Noah’s flood we see that God accepted the sacrifice of Noah after the flood- a sacrifice that pointed to Christ’s own death on the cross as did all the sacrifices. We are told that God hung up His bow as a sign in the heavens. He hung up what we call the rainbow, His bow of warfare, and promised not to destroy mankind from the face of the earth. This is the peace of which the angels speak. God offers to us peace with Himself.

The sacrifice that had been offered in the story of Noah, after he came out of the ark, was only a type and shadow of the cross, the shadow of which hung already, over a newborn infant Son lying asleep in a manger. This night is answered by "the night in which He was betrayed." Only by His cross, by His sacrifice, is peace made between God and fallen mankind.

Nails, spear shall pierce Him through

A cross be borne for me for you,

Hail, hail the Word made flesh,

The Babe the Son of Mary.

All of the events to come, right up to His dying and rising again are foretold in these words of the angels. We do not see goodwill among men, as some misinterpret the angelic words, but goodwill toward men, from God. The whole revelation that God is Love is given to us, also, by the Incarnation. This is the great gift of love, that He would give His own Son; He offers the sacrifice that He would not allow our father Abraham to make. Abraham was ready to obey God, and prepared to offer his son, his only son Isaac whom he loved, upon whom had been laid the wood of the altar while they had climbed Mount Moriah.

Abraham was spared this terrible agony of slaying his beloved son, and in fact God taught His people that He would never accept the sacrifice of their children, such sacrifices as the pagans made to what were no gods. But, God in His love gives His only begotten Son Whom He loves. This is the goodwill toward men. This goodwill was seen that night in the manger in Bethlehem; this goodwill was seen on the cross many years later on a Friday afternoon.

In the Incarnation, now revealed, we see that God would call a people to be His children, adopting them in the very Person of His only begotten Son; for as St. Paul tells us, we are in Christ. It is because we are in the Beloved, in the Son Himself, that we are chosen by God for salvation, instead of having been abandoned to the fate we had deserved for ourselves.

We see also that He would establish His Church, and give to it His Word and Sacraments for the salvation of all who believe the Gospel. St. John, in opening his First Epistle, tells us that he had been among those whose hands had handled, and whose eyes had seen the Word of Life; and he goes on to tell us that we too are called to fellowship with God and His Son Jesus Christ through the invitation of the apostles. St. John is telling us that in the Church the sacraments are given and God’s Word is spoken, that we may know Him. Without the Incarnation the apostles have no word to tell, and there is then no Word from God, nor any sacraments. Because of the Incarnation we are given the Word of His truth. And the sacraments stem from His own coming in the flesh, and are given to us only because He was given to us when He came in our own nature, a created nature that was alien to His uncreated Person as God the only Son, eternally begotten of the Father.

In his classic, On the Incarnation, St. Athanasius said that while Christ walked the earth as man, He still filled the heavens as God. The Council Of Chalcedon taught us that He is fully God, being of the same nature as that of the Father, and fully human, being of the same human nature as ourselves, like us in every way except for sin, having human nature from His mother Mary, the Virgin, the Theotokos- which means that God the Son has a mother; and He is "like us in every respect apart from sin."

None of this is explained to us. How is it that God is made man, that the Word is made flesh and that He dwelt among us, that we beheld His glory? We do not really know all the answers- which is part of the revelation. God cannot be figured out, dissected and explained. He cannot be understood, analyzed and described. But, He can be known through Christ, the Only Mediator Who Himself is God and Man.

How do sacraments work? How does bread and wine feed us the flesh and blood of the Living Christ? How does water, with the right words, give new life when applied to human flesh? How can priests, ourselves sinners, forgive sins? How did Christ’s death take away the sins of the world? How does His resurrection save us from death? If we needed to know the answers in some mechanical way, then salvation would be reserved only for people far too clever for me. The point is to know that it is beyond our understanding, because we are not God. We cannot explain it. But, what we do not understand we can know; we can know the love of God shown to us in the coming of Christ into the world. “For God so loved the world,” and that is the why of it.

I will close with words written in 1765, by Christopher Smart, words which made it into our hymnal, and which work equally well for this Feast of Christmas and also for the Feast of the Annunciation which was nine months ago:

O Most Mighty!

O Most Holy!

Far beyond the seraph’s thought,

Art Thou then so mean and lowly

As unheeded prophets taught?

O the magnitude of meekness!

Worth from worth immortal sprung;

O the strength of infant weakness,

if eternal is so young.

God all bounteous, all creative,

Whom no ills from good dissuade,

Is Incarnate and a native

Of the very world He made.

Now unto God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, be ascribed, as is most justly due, all might, majesty, dominion, power and glory, now and forever. Amen

Crissmas and Exmas

2011-12-22T01:03:00.002-05:00

An essay from "God in the Dock."

“Xmas and Christmas: A Lost Chapter from Herodotus,” by C.S. Lewis

And beyond this there lies in the ocean, turned towards the west and north, the island of Niatirb which Hecataeus indeed declares to be the same size and shape as Sicily, but it is larger, though in calling it triangular a man would not miss the mark. It is densely inhabited by men who wear clothes not very different from the other barbarians who occupy the north western parts of Europe though they do not agree with them in language. These islanders, surpassing all the men of whom we know in patience and endurance, use the following customs.

In the middle of winter when fogs and rains most abound they have a great festival which they call Exmas and for fifty days they prepare for it in the fashion I shall describe. First of all, every citizen is obliged to send to each of his friends and relations a square piece of hard paper stamped with a picture, which in their speech is called an Exmas-card. But the pictures represent birds sitting on branches, or trees with a dark green prickly leaf, or else men in such garments as the Niatirbians believe that their ancestors wore two hundred years ago riding in coaches such as their ancestors used, or houses with snow on their roofs. And the Niatirbians are unwilling to say what these pictures have to do with the festival; guarding (as I suppose) some sacred mystery. And because all men must send these cards the marketplace is filled with the crowd of those buying them, so that there is great labour and weariness.

But having bought as many as they suppose to be sufficient, they return to their houses and find there the like cards which others have sent to them. And when they find cards from any to whom they also have sent cards, they throw them away and give thanks to the gods that this labour at least is over for another year. But when they find cards from any to whom they have not sent, then they beat their breasts and wail and utter curses against the sender; and, having sufficiently lamented their misfortune, they put on their boots again and go out into the fog and rain and buy a card for him also. And let this account suffice about Exmas-cards.

They also send gifts to one another, suffering the same things about the gifts as about the cards, or even worse. For every citizen has to guess the value of the gift which every friend will send to him so that he may send one of equal value, whether he can afford it or not. And they buy as gifts for one another such things as no man ever bought for himself. For the sellers, understanding the custom, put forth all kinds of trumpery, and whatever, being useless and ridiculous, they have been unable to sell throughout the year they now sell as an Exmas gift. And though the Niatirbians profess themselves to lack sufficient necessary things, such as metal, leather, wood and paper, yet an incredible quantity of these things is wasted every year, being made into the gifts.

But during these fifty days the oldest, poorest, and most miserable of the citizens put on false beards and red robes and walk about the market-place; being disguised (in my opinion) as Cronos. And the sellers of gifts no less than the purchaser’s become pale and weary, because of the crowds and the fog, so that any man who came into a Niatirbian city at this season would think some great public calamity had fallen on Niatirb. This fifty days of preparation is called in their barbarian speech the Exmas Rush.

But when the day of the festival comes, then most of the citizens, being exhausted with the Rush, lie in bed till noon. But in the evening they eat five times as much supper as on other days and, crowning themselves with crowns of paper, they become intoxicated. And on the day after Exmas they are very grave, being internally disordered by the supper and the drinking and reckoning how much they have spent on gifts and on the wine. For wine is so dear among the Niatirbians that a man must swallow the worth of a talent before he is well intoxicated.

Such, then, are their customs about the Exmas. But the few among the Niatirbians have also a festival, separate and to themselves, called Crissmas, which is on the same day as Exmas. And those who keep Crissmas, doing the opposite to the majority of the Niatirbians, rise early on that day with shining faces and go before sunrise to certain temples where they partake of a sacred feast. And in most of the temples they set out images of a fair woman with a new-born Child on her knees and certain animals and shepherds adoring the Child. (The reason of these images is given in a certain sacred story which I know but do not repeat.)

But I myself conversed with a priest in one of these temples and asked him why they kept Crissmas on the same day as Exmas; for it appeared to me inconvenient. But the priest replied, “It is not lawful, O stranger, for us to change the date of Chrissmas, but would that Zeus would put it into the minds of the Niatirbians to keep Exmas at some other time or not to keep it at all. For Exmas and the Rush distract the minds even of the few from sacred things. And we indeed are glad that men should make merry at Crissmas; but in Exmas there is no merriment left.” And when I asked him why they endured the Rush, he replied, “It is, O Stranger, a racket”; using (as I suppose) the words of some oracle and speaking unintelligibly to me (for a racket is an instrument which the barbarians use in a game called tennis).

But what Hecataeus says, that Exmas and Crissmas are the same, is not credible. For first, the pictures which are stamped on the Exmas-cards have nothing to do with the sacred story which the priests tell about Crissmas. And secondly, the most part of the Niatirbians, not believing the religion of the few, nevertheless send the gifts and cards and participate in the Rush and drink, wearing paper caps. But it is not likely that men, even being barbarians, should suffer so many and great things in honour of a god they do not believe in. And now, enough about Niatirb.

Dickens and the Construction of Christmas

2011-12-21T15:33:00.002-05:00

"The Spirit of Christmas Present, Scrooge observed, is able 'notwithstanding his gigantic size', 'to accommodate himself to any place with ease'. 'He stood beneath a low roof quite as gracefully and like a super-natural creature, as it was possible he could have done in any lofty hall', just as the Christmas gospel proclaimed the humble stooping down of the Creator to be born at Bethlehem."

See the rest by Geoffrey Rowell here.

Video - sermon for Advent IV

2011-12-18T14:19:00.000-05:00

Not the same as below either. Here is the link.

This video idea was from several members who finally talked me into it.

Fourth Sunday in Advent

2011-12-17T16:42:00.005-05:00

Isaiah 40:1-11 * Psalm 80 * Phil. 4:4-7 * John 1:19-28

Again we see that mysterious image of John the Baptist, the burning and shining light who bore witness by his life and death to Jesus Christ. “He must increase, and I must decrease,” said this prophet, this man whose unique vocation was that he bridged the Old Testament and the New. Two weeks ago we saw that all of the scriptures bore witness to Jesus Christ; and now, this last prophet of the Old Covenant bears direct witness to Christ, baptizing Him, and seeing the Spirit of God come upon Him as a dove out of Heaven. This last prophet of the Old Covenant is the first prophet of the New Covenant. The Lord said through the prophet Isaiah, “Behold, I will do a new thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert (Isa. 43: 19).” God called this prophet, this unique prophet, to show that the new thing, the New Covenant spoken of by Jeremiah the prophet (Jer. 31:31f) was upon them. John’s father was a priest under the Law of Moses, a descendent of Aaron. Therefore, John was also, by that Law, a priest. Yet, John the son of Zechariah, went into the desert to be the voice of one crying in the wilderness, “prepare the way of the Lord.”

Advent is about the last things, and especially meant to remind us that Christ will come again in glory to judge the quick and the dead, to make the heavens and the earth new, and to rule forever on His throne, surrounded by saints whom He has redeemed from sin and death to rule forever with Him. But, as we have seen, instead of having us read the many passages of scripture that deal very directly with eschatology- the study of the end- the Gospel readings appointed by the Church give us a glimpse of Christ’s second coming by reminding us of events that happened when He came at first. The first week we saw that His kingdom brings judgment on the very House of God in the midst of the holy city, and cleanses it by driving out those who defiled it by their practice of unrepented sin. The picture ought to inspire the healthy fear of God, and to make us repentant and resolute to live in such a way that we will be among those who remain in His house forever, instead of being driven out to spend eternity in outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

And now, thanks to the wisdom of the Church, we are reminded of the Baptist who prepared the way of the Lord by preaching repentance and cleansing. John the Baptist bridged the Testaments and prepared the way for Christ by offering hope, by giving sinful people a chance to start over again. The sinners who came to him were given a new beginning, hope and cleansing- themselves cleansed rather than tossed out as the Lord tossed out the money changers when it was the temple that was cleansed of evil presences and practices. In other words, the vocation of John the Baptist was to prepare people to see Jesus as the Messiah, and the preparation was repentance, the only way to be prepared to meet the Lord. The Advent message of repentance is necessary. Modern popular religion tells everyone that they need not repent of their sins, but rather that everyone is accepted with all of their ungodly baggage. The truth is, some churches are simply helping people go into the outer darkness. After all, St. Paul warned of people he called Satan’s ministers (II Cor. 11:13-15). The real ministry of the Church is the most important and serious thing in the world. Here we deal with things more important than mere life and death. We speak and administer the word and sacraments that have to do with eternal destiny. We give out both a warning and hope: "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand."

Now, about the comings of Jesus Christ, and the life of this mysterious John the Baptist, we should dig a little deeper. The word “Christ” is from the Greek for the Hebrew wordMeshiach, or as we pronounce it in English, Messiah. We have come to call the Lord by two names more than all others, Jesus and Christ. The one means Salvation- Y’shua. The other means “the anointed” – Meshiach. The implication is the Old Testament expression, “the Lord’s Anointed.” This comes with two pictures, as the word "messiah" is sprinkled generously throughout the pages of the Old Testament (generally translated "anointed"). The word speaks of priests and kings, and the anointing comes by the hand of a prophet.

The first men to be called meshiach were the brother of Moses, Aaron the High Priest, and his sons the priests. The King James Bible uses the phrase “the priest that is anointed.” The original Hebrew is h’ kohan h’ meshiach- “the priest the messiah.” The second class of men to be called messiah (meshiach) are the kings. David would not stretch forth his hand against Saul, because he was “the Lord’s anointed.” That is, the Lord’s messiah. Every priest was a messiah, and every king was a messiah. And, yet, the scriptures clearly speak of the one Man who would be both priest and king, and who would be the only hope of the whole world, being the one Jews call H’ Meshiach- The Messiah. So, first Messiah is the priest, and then after that He is the King.

His two comings are foreshadowed in these pictures. First he came as priest. The Epistle to the Hebrews is the most explicit New Testament book that tells of Christ’s priestly ministry when he came the first time, and does so in light of the hope of those who look for His second appearing. As the priest He offered Himself as the sacrifice. The Book of Leviticus tells us clearly how a priest made kippur, that is atonement, for a repentant sinner who confessed his sin to the priest and brought a sacrifice. The real meaning is that the priest himself is the atonement, and offers the animal because he cannot sacrifice himself. This is a type and shadow of Jesus, who did offer Himself as priest and sacrifice when He came the first time. The importance of the Suffering Servant passage to the clear New Testament proclamation of atonement cannot be overstated. You will find it in the 53rd chapter of the Book of Isaiah. “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.”

This Suffering servant, after His death in their place, rises and takes up a ministry of intercession for sinners. “When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.” A dead man cannot prolong his days unless he rises again. In this passage, His death and resurrection are priestly, because he dies as the one true sacrifice, the atonement, and after rising “he ever lives to make intercession for them,” that is, for those who come to God through Him (Hebrews 7:25). The Old Testament sacrifices on those altars foreshadowed His true sacrifice, just as our sacrifice on this altar, in which nothing is killed, proclaims it. In fact, there is only one Mass (Eucharist or Holy Communion), and always when it is offered anywhere in the world by the Church, it is joined to the one true sacrifice on Calvary.

When he comes again, the image of Messiah as King will be fulfilled in all of its glory. This is the terror of all that is evil, and it is the hope of the Church. It is a certainty that he will come on the Last Day to judge the living and the dead, to establish Heaven on Earth, to rule and so grant peace forever. Both testaments speak of His coming as the King Messiah. Daniel saw one coming in the clouds of Heaven as the Son of man to rule with the Ancient of Days; Moses saw that “the Earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” Our eternal hope is not based upon imagination and conjecture, but upon the sure promise given in and by Christ’s resurrection from the dead. We are given the “sure and certain hope of the resurrection on the Last Day.” It is the only such hope, and it is impossible to separate that hope from Jesus Christ, because immortality, the hope of eternal life, is granted through His resurrection. So writes Saint John about those who, due to this hope, purify themselves: “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is (I John 3:2).”

John the Baptist prepared the way of the Lord by his message of repentance. Pondering these pictures of the Messiah as priest and King we are both warned and encouraged with both fear and hope. This is the meaning of Advent. It is of eternal consequence that we give heed.

The best way to remember Hitchens

2011-12-17T12:08:00.002-05:00

From a TV interview with David Bentley Hart.

Practical approaches

2011-12-16T15:21:00.001-05:00

One of the helpful ideas we heard from the Rector and pastoral staff of Saint Matthew's Anglican Catholic Church, presented at the Provincial Synod, is their use of an Inquirer's Class for potential members. People who show interest in finding a new church, and who want to join their congregation as members are asked to attend the Inquirer's Class, and afterward come into the services of the Holy Communion or Mass. From the reports, it works better than simply having people jump into the Eucharist from the start.

Why not? The idea may seem revolutionary because we have long used our own modern paradigm; but, it is ancient. It is in keeping with the practice of having people come in as catechumens, something we have lost in modern times. Indeed, we can trace the new approach back into the twentieth century, and as an American I can look at what happened in the Episcopal Church.

Once upon a time it was accepted and understood that becoming a member of a church could require steps, including education. In Anglicanism we have always had at least some amount of catechesis, generally enough to take a person into Confirmation by a bishop in Apostolic Succession as a sacrament that furthers and continues what began in Baptism. That period of Instruction was not burdensome, and in an age when people respected authority more it was considered perfectly appropriate.

Somewhere, back in the twentieth century, it seems that the Episcopal Church slowly began to see catechesis as somehow less than polite, something that is less than friendly or welcoming. The result was a denomination filled with people who joined, but very few who converted to anything. In time, most Episcopalians were not of the cradle variety, but rather those who joined in adult years. This included even most of its clergy. These adult "joiners" brought all their ideas with them, including many that had no place in a church body that was supposed to be truly catholic and reformed. We all know the results, and it continues to get worse.

Furthermore, many people today, if they have any church background, have no experience with liturgy. They think of services as something made up during the week, or perhaps as entertainment like a concert with "spiritual" or emotional content meant to be "inspiring" or "uplifting." The ridiculous and wholly (not holy) "Seeker "Sensitive" movement is almost a caricature of the worst of the worst of it, with no references to sin, repentance or the cross, just as the Episcopal Church is a caricature of the worst thing that can happen where liturgy of any kind sort of remains.

The truth is, we have come to a time when most people have never experienced liturgical worship. Effective Evangelism may require, therefore, other opportunities for people to come into parish churches and both meet the people and learn the meaning of the Faith. I am trying to see how to put together Bible Studies that are informal enough to be both spiritual and social occasions, the sort of thing one may invite friends, neighbors or family to. Fr. John Roddy told us, at our 2011 Diocesan Synod (Diocese of the South, ACC-OP) that this proved quite effective in building up a congregation in Atlanta, Georgia (before his move to Alexandria, Virginia). Our liturgy is powerful, but to the uninitiated it may be like tongues without an interpretation, thus ruling out a sincere "amen."* Some people visit our churches and instantly take to it all; but many go away because they "feel stupid," as, in fact, some have related (and those who instantly take to it still need catechesis).

Teaching people the meaning of what we do and why we do it has to include making sure that they understand the most important truth of all, the Gospel. Yes, the service of Holy Communion preaches the Gospel and prevents us from forgetting it.** But, to many new people it seems difficult to keep up and really pay attention. Having ways to ease some people into our churches, and grounding them in the Faith, has to be part of what we are giving serious thought to; and with churches that are making it work, considering a model to learn from.

* I Corinthians 14:16

** I Corinthians 15:1-11

Laymen's Guide to the Thirty-Nine Articles

2011-12-12T11:40:00.001-05:00

Article XVI

Of Sin after Baptism

Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is sin against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable. Wherefore the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after Baptism. After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given and fall into sin, and by the grace of God we may arise again and amend our lives. And therefore they are to be condemned, which say, they can no more sin as long as they live here, or deny the place of forgiveness to such as truly repent.

De Peccato post Baptismum

Non omne peccatum mortale post Baptismum voluntarie perpetratum, est peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum, et irremissibile. Proinde lapsis a Baptismo in peccata locus penetentiae non est negandus. Post acceptum Spiritum Sanctum possumus a gratia data recedere atque peccare, denuoque per gratiam Dei resurgere ac resipiscere. Ideoque illi damnandi sunt qui se quamdiu hic vivant, amplius non posse peccare affirmant, aut vere resipiscentibus veniae locum denegant.

Fr. Robert Hart

This follows hard on the ending of Article XV in perfect continuity. Article XV ended with a clear quotation from the First Epistle of John 1:8; “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Therefore, the indication is all too clear. Although Article XV forces us to look at the recently added dogma of the Church of Rome called the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, if only because we live after the year 1854, the following of this Article on the last forces us to look at something else altogether. In fact it forces us to look at error not of the Church of Rome, but rather sects that threatened true doctrine from the opposite direction; and, it deals with two basic errors rather than one.

From ancient times to modern, various doctrines have caused individuals to fall into dangerous despair. We can trace heresies throughout history; consider the Donatists, who believed that anyone who had lapsed from fear under persecution could never be forgiven. The Montanists believed that sin after baptism could not be forgiven. And, it is possible for readers of the Bible to misunderstand even the good translations we have. For example, “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries (Heb. 10:26, 27).” The Greek New Testament, however, is even more emphatically present tense than this English translation, indicating a state of mind not yet repentant, but persistent in willful sin.

Passages in the Old Testament and the New give us practical understanding of the mystery of freewill. The eighteenth chapter of Ezekiel lays out the simple reality that a person may fall into sin, but repent. If that person repents, all of the sins are completely forgotten. If someone known for righteous living falls into sin, all of his former righteousness is forgotten. If the same person repents, everything is forgotten, and he may begin again. And, the end of the First Epistle of St. John (5:16,17) speaks of a “sin unto death” from which the phrase “mortal sin” comes. The meaning is that a sin unto death requires more than intercession from others in the Church; it must be dealt with seriously by repentance. The implication is clearly about sin that is chosen, when one sins willfully.

So, the opening of the Article is stated clearly to help individuals avoid despair: “Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is sin against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable. Wherefore the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after Baptism.” Here we find the practical nature of Anglican reason, in accordance with Scripture. As much as Predestination is a mystery, so is freewill. A person baptized is “in Christ” and is told that, for that reason, must not live in sin (see the sixth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans). The person who is “in Christ” remains, therefore, capable of sinning, even of sinning willfully. Otherwise, no exhortation would be necessary.

And, we must conclude that the same person remains “in Christ” even when committing sin, even when doing so with the will. Here is where the mysteries of freewill and predestination come together. The power to sin, and the power to repent are addressed in the Article in terms of freewill and in terms of God’s work, because of that word “grace.” The person who is “in Christ” may yet repent, but only by God’s grace. This article takes into account the whole of Scriptural teaching on all related subjects in a manner that may be called systematic theology, for it squares with all of the related passages in the Bible. It relates freewill and predestination in a balanced and realistic manner, leaving man wholly dependant on the grace of God.

Finally, the Article rejects the doctrine of those who teach a kind of “sinless perfection” in this life. We hear this today from people in various sects who teach that those who are “in Christ” are no longer sinners because they are saints. They lack the balance of reason. Generally, people who fall into this error do so by taking out of context one simple verse from the First Epistle of John (3:9): “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.” They fail to remember that this comes in the context of the very same Epistle in which the Beloved Disciple also wrote the words we have seen:

“If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world ( -I John 1:8-2:2).”

In other words, that one verse they interpret so badly is another way of saying the very next thing that comes in the earlier quotation from chapters one and two: “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments (2:3).” Or, as James says, “I will shew thee my faith by my works (James 2:18)” It means that someone who truly believes cannot live in persistent, unrepentant willful sin. “His seed remains in him,” in terms of the Parable of the Sower, neither destroyed nor hindered by fowls of the air, by shallow ground, nor thorns. That seed is the word of God. One who believes may, by God’s grace, arise again and amend his life.

Fr. Laurence Wells

Once a week I visit an elderly indigent gentleman in a miserably substandard nursing home. He has no family to speak of and circumstances have compelled him to be placed in a facility at some distance from his shrinking circle of friends. He has been dear to me for about twenty years and I value his friendship because he illustrates so well the truths, both painful and joyful, of Article XVI. He was once a man of some means and the spiritual lay leader of his Protestant congregation. He taught me much about prayer and the Gospel. But old age brought great adversity. His wife died, after a long period of affliction, and his tiny Methodist church fell apart through attrition and neighborhood decline.

Left rather alone in the world, some old bad habits returned in his time of weakness. He was victimized by prostitutes and other dishonest people. His retirement savings were run through, his health left him and now, having wasted his substance in riotous living, he is an invalid in a wheel-chair in a dingy facility where the indigent elderly are warehoused. He has nothing left but his faith.

Article XVI alludes to a widespread belief in the ancient Church that if Baptism washes away sin, then there is no remedy for sin after that chronological point. This teaching, which seems so strange to us, led to the practice of delaying Baptism until a person reached the point of death. This seems to have been the case with that famous adult convert, the Emperor Constantine. This led to the slightly more wholesome teaching that the Sacrament of Penance is "the second plank after shipwreck," i.e. the plank sinners grab when the first plank--Baptism-- has been lost. An even better teaching would be that the effects of Baptism as an act of God are not confined to the chronological moment when the sacrament is administered. For the washing away of sin and the gift of new life in the family of God, Baptism has effects which are lifelong. Baptism belongs to the new creation, not to the old. It is therefore not eroded by the passing of time or anything sinners do subsequently.

Article XVI can be reduced to four points. First, sin is a continuing reality in the life of the Baptized. While Baptism is a supernatural act of God, the sacrament does not zap us into instant perfection. It is not magic. If perhaps the old creation began with a big bang, the new creation is still a work in process. As Charles Wesley wrote, "Finish then thy new creation, pure and spotless let us be."

Second, God's pardoning and cleansing love is a continuing reality in the life of sinners. Whatever extravagant claims we may try to make for the notion of "free will," we are simply impotent when it comes to changing God's determination to redeem us. When my elderly friend suffered his shocking lapse in his mid-eighties, a number of friends cast him off and would have no more to do with him. "That old reprobate! He has been a hypocrite through all these years!" Mediaeval theologians amused themselves by speculating on things which God cannot do: making a rock bigger than He can move, creating another god, telling a lie. But we may be certain that we cannot even think of a sin too horrible for Him to forgive. The Cross is proof of that. In the realm of grace, His capacity to redeem is infinite. The Church Fathers were not entirely off-base when they speculated on the final redemption of even the devil himself.

Third, the Christian life (that is, the Baptismal life) is characterized by what C. S. Lewis called "the law of undulation." As the Article says in its usual laconic style, "After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given and fall into sin." It seems clear enough that "receiving the Holy Ghost" here means the gift of regeneration, the new birth which Baptism effectively signifies. But what is meant by "departing from grace given?" Is this a total fall, in which the miracle of regeneration is absolutely eradicated? Some of the semi-Pelagian school have so interpreted the phrase, but the Latin "possumus recedere" does not seem to bear such an interpretation. Every Christian knows that his life has had spiritual "dry spells" when little growth was going on and probably periods, even long periods, any the "growth" was mostly in the wrong direction.

What seems more certain is that "we may" (possumus, more accurately rendered "we can") is a dramatic understatement. Not only "can we" or "may we," but experience tells us we probably will and frequently do. The fourth and final point is that sins committed in the course of the Christian life are real sins, deserving the wrath and curse of God. They are not to be trivialized by unfounded distinctions between sin and concupiscence, or mortal and venial sins. In such a moral universe, there would be no place for the Cross, no voice for the Gospel, no reason for Christ to shed His blood. The Gospel contained in this Article is that "by the grace of God we may arise again and amend our lives."

No exceptions, not even for elderly lechers waiting for death in a waking nightmare.

Video - sermon for Advent III

2011-12-11T17:31:00.002-05:00

My congregation has asked me to do this. Here is the link.

Third Sunday in Advent

2011-12-10T16:07:00.001-05:00

Bible Illustrations of Gustave Dore'

I Cor. 4:1f * Matt. 11:2f

The Gospel reading for today reminds us that John the Baptist was the messenger who went before the face of the Lord to prepare the way. The words "my messenger" are the same as the name of the prophet who wrote the scriptures that the Lord quoted- Malachi. It means "my messenger" or "my angel." For this reason John is pictured in iconography with the wings of an angel. Since the Gospel reminds us that John the Baptist was, in the words of the prophet Malachi, the special messenger who prepared the people to see Jesus Christ and to receive Him, we should ask why it is that we have Penitential seasons; that is Advent and Lent. I believe everyone knows what goes on in New Orleans just before Lent. The Mardi Gras has become completely decadent and pornographically lewd. They have corrupted the idea into one of whooping it up right up until Lent comes, and spoils all the fun. Hardly a good way to prepare for Christ. I am glad that they don't do this before Advent as well

Obviously, we don’t restrict Penance to just two seasons, anymore than we restrict faith in the Resurrection exclusively to the Easter season. Each season reinforces an important element of the Christian life in its fullness. Back in Maryland, before Saint Andrew’s moved into a historic and beautiful church, we had a hot water pot that boiled the water for the coffee, and, with only one room, we had to turn it on long before people came in and began to prepare for the service by praying; because otherwise they would hear the pot wailing and mourning with great lamentation and woe while the water boiled. We decided that it was a water pot for the Penitential seasons, for it wailed more forcefully than a piper’s Lament. But, it was the only water pot; so it always made its noise, and we always had to turn it on early; not just in Advent and Lent. And, like that deeply convicted water pot, we need to carry into the whole year the sober message of these seasons. And, neither, in these seasons, do we lose our joy and hope in Christ. In fact, if you paid attention to the scriptures and to the Collect, you see that the message is the message of John the Baptist; that is, to be prepared for the sudden appearance of the Lord Himself. As I pointed out two weeks ago, to be prepared to meet Christ in the final judgment, we all need to live here and now, properly prepared to receive Him in the Blessed Sacrament of His Body and Blood. So, this message of Advent, with its penance and its hope, is a year-round message, telling us to be prepared to receive Jesus Christ, Really and Truly Present among us and in us.

And, if you were paying attention to the Collect, and how it relates to the Epistle, you will see that bishops, priests and deacons are placed in His Church to be stewards of the mysteries of Christ, in order to teach His people this very thing: To be ready to meet Him. The picture of John the Baptist is used by the Church to remind the messengers that we too must prepare the people for the coming of the Lord, for the day when He shall appear in glory, and we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

So, the scriptures today remind us of the messenger, John the Baptist. People do not understand John. They see his message only in negative terms. They think it terrible that he was a “hell fire and damnation” preacher (though, I need hardly point out, that the real hell fire preacher in the Bible was the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The Baptist was mild by comparison). When John the Baptist appears in movies, he often looks and acts like a wild man, and the wardrobe department replaces the Camel’s Hair garment he wore with something that seems to have come off of Fred Flintstone.

But, if we look at the record of what really happened, as it is in each of the Four Gospels, it was John who gave the people hope. The Pharisees had no message of hope for sinners, and the Sadducees had no message of hope at all, believing that there was no life beyond the grave (which is why the Sadducees were sad, you see). Furthermore, the Pharisees seemed to think of sin in terms of social class instead of in terms of one’s relation to God. But, of course, the most important line was that of the Lord Jesus Christ, when He said to the Pharisees that the tax collectors and prostitutes would enter the kingdom of God ahead of them, because the tax collectors and prostitues repented at the preaching of John. People came from miles around to confess their sins and to be baptized by him, with his baptism of repentance.

You know, we do not have the most affirming message: that is, we do not have a message that says: “I’m okay, you’re okay” like a certain book from the 1970s. Anyone who leaves these services thinking he has been told how good he is, has not paid any attention to our liturgy. We do not approach God thanking Him that we are not as other men, boasting of being “good people.” Rather, “we bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, which we, from time to time, most grievously have committed.” Frankly, there is no other way to approach God.

I will tell you now, that I could not do what I do here for you if I did not, myself, from time to time, go to one of Christ’s priests, confess my own sins, and hear those words, “I absolve you…” I do not know why so many people think that confession is strictly a Roman Catholic thing- just for them. Anyone who knows the Ordinal of the Church of England must know that the priestly power to absolve, to forgive sins, has always been a very important part of Anglican practice. We never abandoned it.

Furthermore, as King David wrote, “Blessed is he whose unrighteousness is forgiven…” Confession hurts before you do it; but it brings joy to the heart after it is done. It is the most healing experience a person can have. Believe me, I know. As a priest I know what it is to be on both sides. You see, I am a sinner too; and without the ministry of the sacrament of Absolution, I would not know the joy, the freedom and lightness of the life in Christ- not lightness as in silliness, but as in liberation from a heavy weight. “Come unto Me all ye that travail and are heavy laden, and I will refresh you.” It is so.

Be prepared for the appearing of Christ Himself. “Every eye shall see Him.” This is what John was sent to prepare the people for. It is what we teach you, as stewards of the Mysteries of Christ, the mysteries revealed in His word, and the seven Mysteries or sacraments.

More for week II in Advent

2011-12-07T15:21:00.002-05:00

The things which are revealed

"The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law (Deut. 29:29)."

More thoughts came to mind on Sunday morning, so that what I said from the pulpit is not the sermon I posted here on Saturday. In addition to the appointed readings for Holy Communion that are in the Prayer Book (Romans 15:4-13 * Luke 21:25-33), the assigned readings for Morning Prayer included as a first lesson the entire 55th chapter of the book of Isaiah. I want us to zero in on vs. 6-11:

“Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”

Often this passage is quoted as an excuse for ignorance. The implication is, we simply cannot know God’s ways, so let’s not form strong convictions about anything; let’s not be dogmatic. It is true that God is beyond our highest thoughts and that he transcends all we can know, "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting (I Tim.6:16)." But, that is not what this passage in the Book of Isaiah is saying. It is teaching, instead that wicked and unrighteous ways and thoughts must be replaced by God’s ways and thoughts through serious repentance. The ways and thoughts of God, in this context, are made known to us, because like the rain and snow, they come down from heaven. His Word goes forth from His mouth. The key words are “ways and thoughts.”

"Let the wicked man forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts…for My ways are not your ways, neither my thoughts your thoughts…” Like the earth drinking up the rain and snow, we must drink up His word that comes down from heaven and that goes forth from His mouth. Our wicked ways and unrighteous thoughts must be replaced by God’s very own revealed ways and thoughts.

Trying to know the secret things

Taking our cue from the words of Moses, quoted above, this passage from Isaiah is not about "the secret things," but about "those things which are revealed." Concerning the readings we were given for this past Sunday, the difference between secret things and revealed things is highly significant. For, the Gospel reading deals directly with eschatology, the study of the end. And, about that subject much has been written and sold to eager readers, as well as much taught and preached, all to satisfy the curiosity of people who are "ever learning, never able to come to the knowledge of the truth (II Ti. 3:7)."

Twice this past year one very unfortunate preacher has predicted...well, we're not quite sure what. Some have called it "the end of the world," and others have called it "the second coming," and still others have used that phrase that never relates to the truth, "the Rapture." Interestingly enough, both times he managed to save some of the money sent in as contributions to get the message out. We need not address the obvious ethical issue that raises.

Let's look at each of those phrases. "The end of the world" is used in English translations of the Bible, but the term means the end of this age. It does not mean the destruction of the planet Earth, because this whole earth will be filled with the glory of God, and become a suitable temple and place of His holy presence among his resurrected saints. Christ cleansed the temple, as we read a week before, and that foreshadows the Day when He will cleanse the earth and make all of it a fit habitation for the holiness of God.

The Second Coming is literally true. Christ will come on the Last Day, the dead will be raised, and He will reign as king forever. There will no more death, no more sorrow, no more war, or any evil thing. Any honest reading of Scripture makes these things clear.

What is not true is what is meant by that unfortunate label, "the Rapture." No more hideous and foolish a doctrine has ever been devised, one that begins to deny the Incarnation by denying the extension of the Incarnation through Christ's Body, the Church, as His chosen instrument among fallen mankind. (I have written about this before.) Christ is not coming in a star ship to beam His people aboard and sneak off to a planet called "heaven." When he comes every eye shall see Him (Rev. 1:7). But, the "Rapture" doctrine is based on a ridiculous and careless interpretation that takes every passage out of context, and that applies the word "tribulation" to unbelievers, which takes away its true definition.

And, by teaching that God's Church will be spared tribulation, it makes a mockery of the persecution that the Church has endured throughout its history, including this present age of martyrdom and suffering by Christians who are not afforded the ease and safety of the modern west. The entire "Rapture" idea requires either irresponsible ignorance or callous disregard of the suffering of others, or the crazy idea that maybe all those persecuted Christians, who live with danger because they remain faithful, aren't real Christians.

But, correct phrases include the Second Coming, or the Last Day (from the 6th chapter of John's Gospel).

Curiosity

The things God has revealed are not written merely to satisfy our curiosity. This is especially relevant to the problem of the "End times" industry. I recall that in 1988 some silly book was selling well among curious people, called Eighty-Eight Reasons Why. The book predicted that Christ would come by the end of 1988, because, as was foolishly reasoned, that was a generation after the establishment of the State of Israel. The entire basis for that is silly anyway, for it involves misunderstanding the Gospel reading we had this past Sunday. The part they get wrong is this: "Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; when they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So like wise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled."

They have decided that the fig tree is the modern, secular state of Israel, and just as absurdly, that a generation is forty years. Neither idea even makes sense. But, they are dogmatic nonetheless. What the passage actually means is far more significant, and something we should understand.

First, we must know what the generation is of which the Lord spoke. It is the Church itself: "A seed shall serve him: It shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation (Psalm 22:30 - or v.31 in the BCP)." We are correctly reminded by the Evangelicals that God has no grandchildren. Every person born from above in the waters of Baptism is a child of God, and so the Church, even after two thousand years, is yet in its first generation. There is but one Father of us all, and so the Church is always but one generation. And, this one generation of the Church has a mission to preach the Gospel among all nations. Only once that is accomplished will the Lord Jesus Christ come back in His glory to judge the quick and the dead (Matt. 24:14).

People who open the Bible to satisfy curiosity need to repent, and open it to learn what to believe and how to live, and to keep their priorities focused on the Mission we all share. Jesus dealt with the pointless and distracting problem of curiosity rather bluntly. We see that in the first chapter of the book of Acts.

"When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth (Acts 1:6-8)."

The challenge in reading the Bible is make our own lives relevant to the will of God. It is not to satisfy curiosity about the secret things, such as that day and hour, that are strictly in God's hands.

Advent 2 Sermon Notes

2011-12-04T07:11:00.001-05:00

Note: Summary notes only given in parts. Also omits some extemporaneous comments about relevant OT prophecies at the beginning, noting that they combine predictions regarding the First Advent with predictions relating mainly to the Second Advent.

“thepowers of heaven shall be shaken” +

The Scriptures tell us here and elsewhere that just before Christ returns to Earth, therewill be signs in the heavens, even effecting the stars. Now, inJesus’ day people did not know how big space was, or how far awaythe stars were. [Illustrate: At least 100 billion of galaxies inobservable universe, each with 100 billion stars or so, closestAndromeda, 2 M l.yr. away. Light seven times around Earth in asecond.]

Nevertheless, God knew howbig the universe was, since he made it, and Jesus, God the Son,through whom the Father made the universe, knew that at the end ofthis world, the whole universe would be coming to an end. (Somepeople think that God and the Big Bang or “Science” arecompetitors for the title of Creator. This is to misunderstandscience completely. Science can explain much, even how one might getfrom a quantum vacuum to all of this via a Big Bang, for example. Inother words it always must assume the existence of and start withsome sort of physical reality, no matter how basic early on, and aset of physical laws. What it cannot do is tell us why any of this,why anything at all, actually exists. The fundamental questions ofexistence thus take us to a deeper level.)

The whole of Creation willbe transformed by God the Creator. It may be that the beginning ofthat process is what will be seen by people then. And then, perhapsalmost straight away since Jesus tells us in other places that hisreturn will catch the human race by surprise, Jesus will arrive andbegin the final judgement.

Now even some Christianshave a hard time believing that such an end will come, that the wholeCreation will be subject to Death and Resurrection, so to speak. But,if we are truly rational, we will understand that if God is theCreator of everything, who brought the whole Cosmos into being,undeniably he must be capable of such a final and completetransformation of that Creation. And if he is capable, and haspromised repeatedly to do so, it is foolishness to doubt it, nomatter how much it beggars the imagination and stretches thecredulity of our human, limited common-sense. To accept God asCreator but disbelieve as too extreme or outlandish the ApocalypticEnd makes no sense. (Let's not forget that there is much even inmodern physics that defies so-called common-sense as well. Indeed,one speculative but quite possible range of scenarios modern physicshas worked out are “vacuummetastability events”,where the Universe can unexpectedly undergo “quantum tunnelling”that leads to the destruction of the Universe as we know it, andrelease of enormous energy. Not unlike some descriptions in theBible. Some of these scenarios would involve very little warning asan expanding “bubble” travels almost as fast as the lightreaching us from its path of destruction. Others could have a moreextended period of frightening oscillations.There is even a videoon Youtube simulating the spread of such a process.) In any case,whatever method God uses to “dissolve” (2 Peter 3:12) the Old andbring in the New Creation, it will involve visible astronomicalprecursors and supernatural acts.

And the reaction to all ofthis by those who have deliberately ignored or rejected Christ willbe fear, as mentionedin today’s Gospel (“distressof nations, with perplexity … men's hearts failing them for fear”).In Revelation it says “allkindreds of the earth shall wail because of him”.Why? At first, the terror will be due to the approach of the end,with everything that seemed so stable and reliable, the very fabricof the Cosmos, “coming apart at the seams”, so to speak. But thenit will be because they realise judgement is coming as was predicted,and that the hardness, self-deception and pride of their hearts,along with the evil of their deeds, are to be exposed and given theirjust reward.

But our response, if wehave followed Christ till the end, is not fear but joyfulexpectation, the hope talked about in today’s Epistle. “Ourredemption draws near” as Jesus puts it.

Why the difference? Thosewho have said yes to Jesus’ Gospel challenge in this world, whohave responded to the Christ-light by turning towards it and lettingit flood their souls will be able to welcome that fullershowing/manifestation of the light when they see Him face to face.But those who have avoided or rejected the light, who prefer to betheir own gods, will be terrified of the truth that is about to berevealed.

You see, what finallycondemns humans in the end is not any of their particular sins,because they have been dealt with potentiallyat least on the Cross. What condemns them is that, despite the factGod has done everything necessary to save them from themselves, evengiven the life of His Son, they still refuse the forgiveness and loveoffered. The divine mercy is spurned, despised, and so all that isleft, by their own choice, is divine judgement.

We don’t know when theuniverse will be changed and Christ will return, but we do know thatif it doesn’t happen in our lifetime, our death will happen first:and we can’t be sure that won’t be today or tomorrow. At death“particular judgement” occurs, before the final judgement.[Expand: Cp. Parable of Lazarus and the rich man, with reward andpunishment before end.] Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler do not havethe same fate awaiting them on the other side! So, we all need to beready for judgement day today.

If we trust in Christ and follow him in love, we neednot fear what is coming, even if we see signs in the heavens.+

Second Sunday in Advent

2011-12-03T18:38:00.003-05:00

Romans 15:4-13 * Luke 21:25-33

Taking a cue from the opening of today’s Epistle, and the last line from today’s Gospel, and of course the Collect, this Sunday has come to be called Bible Sunday. The Collect speaks of two things, one being the obligation of each one of us concerning the Holy Scriptures to “hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them;” the other being the work of the Holy Spirit as he uses those scriptures to grow patience and comfort within us, so to keeps us along the path to eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord. And, if we think about the Epistle and Gospel for this day, we find that hope, the same that our Prayer Book calls “the sure and certain hope of the resurrection unto eternal life.”

Recently, someone questioned me on why we refer to hope of the resurrection; after all, we hope for things that may never happen. I must disagree; we may wish for things that will never happen; but, hope cannot exist in such wishes. Or we may hope for things that might happen, but might not. However, to emphasize the meaning of hope as it relates to faith, we clarify our meaning with the words “sure and certain.” This comes from the Epistle to the Hebrews:

"Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil."
(Hebrews 6: 17-19)

It is clear that St. Paul never separated hope from faith, and never separated either of those from charity. The virtues grow together, and hope depends on faith. Hope believes, and love works; faith hopes and charity labors. What feeds us in our sure and certain hope is the word of God. Faith grows within us when hear that particular voice, the voice of God that we discern so clearly as he speaks to us now within the scriptures. They cannot become irrelevant. Written so long ago, when they are spoken or read God himself speaks in the present. Never are they worn out.

People have asked about the Holy Scriptures, when were they put together? One very unfortunate mark of our times is the quickness with which misinformation becomes “common knowledge.” Over the last few years some con artists have discovered that one way to make a lot of money in a hurry is to write a sensational, wholly misleading but shocking thesis about the Bible or Christian Faith in general, and then sell it directly to the public. The more revolutionary it is, the better. The more shocking, the more blasphemous, above all the more sensational, the easier it is to draw attention to it, and get it promoted on TV. We have seen these sensational works, all claiming to be a challenge to the Christian Faith, each make its rise and fall before burning out entirely.

One very important point about that whole new industry is that none of these authors presents the shocking alleged discovery in the truly scientific arena of the academic world. If they did, they could not make the same amount of money overnight- or ever. If these shocking “discoveries” were put through the genuine process of scientific analysis they would die a quick death and be forgotten, and no one would get to make a killing. As a result of the sensational, irresponsible and unprofessional, thoroughly unscientific misinformation that has been thrown in the face of the public for the last few years, several people think that the bishops of the Church assembled in Nicea and began cutting books out of the Bible. Most of the people who believe this also think the Emperor Constantine was running the Council of Nicea in 325.

A few facts help to clean up this utter fiction. Even though he was the Emperor, and even though the Christians of that time knew that the Edict of Milan in 313 AD had ended two and a half centuries of persecution (a virtual Holocaust that had made the earliest times of the Church a bloodbath), and even though they knew that he had the authority to return to the older laws that had made Christianity an offense punishable by death and revive them, he was not given the power to run the Council of Nicea. When the Council met and the Emperor presumed to address the bishops of the Church, they told him that he was not allowed to address the assembled bishops of Christ’s Church. Basically, they told Caesar, the Emperor Constantine to whom they owed so much, to sit down and be quiet.

Now, about the Bible, the bishops at the Council of Nicea did not go about deciding which books were scripture, and which were not. All they did was to affirm in unity of mind that the books already perceived to be the Word of God were, indeed, just that. The Old Testament was not the issue at all, because it was declared to be the Word of God by no less a Person than the Living Word of God. These books had been received by the Jewish people for centuries, and were passed on to the Church with sure and certain authority. The process of recognizing these books was, by all accounts, the vox populiof the Jews. The Jewish people knew in what books to find that distinctive voice of God, and so it was that when Jesus Christ walked the earth and referred to the scriptures, in every synagogue of the Jews were those specific scrolls that formed the common library for all of them. We see in Luke that he read from the scroll of the prophets, reading from Isaiah and saying that scriptures spoke of none other but himself, Messiah and hope of the world.

In the earliest days of the Church this Old Testament formed the only Canon of scripture. But, by the early years of the second century we find that twenty-seven additional books were already received and quoted as the word of God; these twenty seven books forming an additional Canon of scripture. These books are the New Testament. In some places a few questions were raised about II Peter, Jude and Revelation. But, over time the little bit of skepticism about them disappeared. In a few places some people thought that The Shepherd of Hermas might be part of the Canon of the scriptures of the Church. But, long before the Council of Nicea in 325, the Church had defined its Canon as the books we have now, adding to the Jewish scriptures it had inherited only the twenty-seven books we call the New Testament. Again, as it had been among Israel, when the scriptures were received and recognized vox populi, so it was with the Church of Christ and the canon of the New Testament. There were no books for the bishops to delete, but rather a Canon already established before any of them had been born.

Now, why was The Shepherd of Hermas not among the books of this Canon? Again, by that same vox populi that, by the principle of whether or not the people of God recognized the voice of God, this book had not been under serious consideration. Simply put, our fathers among the Jews and the early Christians simply did not hear the clear and familiar voice of God in any other books as they heard it in the scriptures. They knew the voice of God in the Law, the Prophets, the Wisdom Literature and the Psalms. And, they knew that same voice of God in the four Gospels, the Epistles and the prophecy of St. John the Revelator. They did not hear it as the voice of God in other books (not that most of them were ever aware of the many Gnostic writings given so much undue attention by today’s money making sensation mongers).

St. Paul tells us about the high regard we must give to the Old Testament in today’s Epistle:
“Whatsoever things were written afore time were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.”

Think of that history of Israel, from the calling of Abraham to the coming of Jesus Christ who died for our sins and rose again, the history of one people who were never allowed to give themselves over to sin and so be lost among the many pagan nations that served false gods. A people constantly purified by the prophet’s words, and many times by purging and suffering, given to captivity in Babylon but returned to their home after seventy years never to fall again into the worship of idols. They were a people so purified that among them was found one young virgin who echoed the faith and obedience of Abraham, and more perfectly than the ancient patriarch himself.

Written aforetime was not only this history of the people through whom the Word, Jesus our Lord, would be incarnate, but the predictions made by the prophets of his life, his death on the cross, and his rising again. We all need to read the Book of Isaiah about the Suffering Servant by whose stripes we are healed, and who prolonged his days after dying, that he would live forever as the agent of the Lord’s will. We read of his suffering through the words of King David who foresaw the agonies of the Lord’s crucifixion, able to predict them in the first person as though suffering with him. We read also, in the words of this prophet king, of the joy of the resurrection of our Lord whose death was so brief a thing that he never saw corruption.

The Gospel today also gives us this hope, for the Lord himself assures us that his coming again will be our redemption, and that the fears and darkness of this age will disappear in the light of his glory. We are told to lift up our heads, not to look down and hang our heads. His coming, his rule over heaven and earth, the cleansing of this world from all evil, from death and suffering, and all such things that will be no more, are sure and certain. And, if instead of comfort this fills your heart with fear, then consider that fear with genuine care. It means that you must cast off the works of darkness and out on the armor of light, repent from all your sins and turn to the Lord that you may enter that blessed state of sure and certain hope, and be strengthened by the Holy Spirit.

Does the voice of God fill you with hope or with dread? I hope it does one or the other. For, anyone to be indifferent to these words is the only real danger. As our Lord said in his parable of Lazarus and the rich man, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”1 Our Lord told the Church of the Laodiceans, “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.”2 Indifference to the word of God is a danger beyond any other, closing the ears that they cannot hear. But, even if the word brings dread, this too leads to comfort and hope since the Holy Spirit uses what you hear to bring you to repentance, true repentance from the heart, and to faith in Jesus Christ. May God grant ears to hear, eyes to see and a heart to understand, that each one who has been lost may turn and be healed. 3

The Epistle today speaks of Christ’s ministry first to his own people of Israel, and his ministry through those people of Israel that believed in him and became his disciples as it extends to all nations.

“Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers: and that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people. And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people. And again, Isaiah saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; In him shall the Gentiles trust.”

This brings to mind the words of Simeon, that he spoke when he held Jesus as an infant: “A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.” 4 This light and this glory has been known to the world because it is the purpose of God to shine the light of Christ into every dark place. Into the darkness of pagan dread and superstition, into the darkness of ignorance and foolishness, into the darkest places of sin and death. This glorious light of Christ shines into the darkest places where we try to hide from God due to our own sins; and if we respond to his mercy that same light of revelation brings comfort and hope, the sure and certain hope of the resurrection unto eternal life. The invitation is extended by his word: come, eat and be filled with the food and drink of eternal life. Come feed on the Living Bread that has come down from heaven, and with hearty and true faith to receive Christ through these humble means unto everlasting life with him in glory.

“Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.”

_____________________

1. Luke 16:31

2. Revelation 3:15, 16

3. From Isaiah 6:9

4. Luke 2:32

A meditation on the Advent Collect

2011-12-01T00:00:00.002-05:00

by Fr. David Marriott

Advent...

Look more closely at the collect: which you will hear each and every day at the offices and at the Mass all the way until Christmas. And therefore, it behoves us to be aware of why this is so important in our faith.

‘ALMIGHTY God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armour of light, now in the time of this mortal life, in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty, to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and ever. Amen.’

‘ALMIGHTY God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armour of light’ - We acknowledge that we have no strength in and of ourselves to beat down the devil and all his works: we cannot succeed in our weakness: we need help: and the source of that help has to be the gift earned for us by Jesus Christ in His death on the Cross, at which time He told the disciples that He would send the Comforter to strengthen and help them in their strife. And the Comforter is there, is with us, is always at our side: but needs to be acknowledged, when we take credit for something well done: never let us forget how much we rely on that help sent to us by God on high.

‘in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility’ – We say that we understand that Jesus Christ, the very Son of God, did not come as some sort of conquering hero, as the ‘Terminator’, as the great and powerful conqueror: because he came with a totally different message: it is the message which we are all called upon to hold in our hearts, in our very souls: it is that of the meek who shall inherit the earth, of the merciful, who shall obtain mercy, of the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

It is only when we have learnt the hard lessons of life, when we have come to understand that there are others around us who are far more deserving and needy, and who require our care and understanding, over and above any needs we may have: it is only then that we can start to fathom out what our role in this place called earth is: that the drive and aggression we see around us might bring wealth and so-called success in the earthly life, but we must take great care that any earthly success that we may enjoy does not in any way jeopardize our eternal salvation: for it is there that Satan is waiting, lurking in the shadows, for his chance to grasp our souls for his benighted realm.

‘…that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty, to judge both the quick and the dead’ – because it is this that is of true and enduring importance, as Christian faithful: the understanding that what we experience now, here on earth - that this is but a part of life: and that true life shall begin after this life is ended, when we might come into His glorious Kingdom having passed the test of the Judgment seat, as we all pray most fervently that we might so do.

‘…we may rise to the life immortal’ – and this sums up the goal and purpose of all, of everything that should occupy our thoughts as we prepare and make our due repentance for sin committed, for grace omitted: before we celebrate the joy of Christmas: we reflect on the gift He has brought, far, far greater than any gift ever created or even imagined in the minds of men: a pearl beyond price, and worthy of the sacrifice of all worldly ambition in its attainment.

Today's wrap up

2011-11-30T15:50:00.003-05:00

Hepworth & Rome

I have been sent several news links about Archbishop Hepworth and the RCC. We are told he can go back to them as a layman, which is hogwash. He can go to them as a laicized priest, which is not quite the same thing, but effectively about the same. However, we must pity the members of the Press since they are almost always the last people to know anything, though they "inform" the rest of us: For journalists out there, the word is "laicize" - just look it up (apologies to Albion Land, one journalist who does know his way around the barn).

We are told that Abp. Hepworth is sticking to his story about sexual abuse, but that the RCC has investigated itself, and cleared itself of the accusations. Gee, golly, and all that: Who has more credibility? Just flip a coin, and don't bother to see which side comes up. So, we have nothing more to say about it, because it's all a waste of cyberspace.

On to more important things.

SAINT ANDREW'S DAY, November 30,

This brings to mind the theme of Evangelism. In the Epistle for today, Rom. 10: 9ff, we read about the need for sent laborers who preach the Gospel. In the Gospel reading for today (Matt. 4;18f), we see that the first Disciples who would become Apostles, were told by Christ at the time of their calling, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men." So, there is an emphasis on preaching the Gospel, which always brings to mind the unchanging and universal truth that Christ died for our sins, was buried, rose the third day and appeared to witnesses, all in fulfillment of Scripture (I Cor. 15:1f).

The readings for Morning Prayer include John 1:35-42. That passage includes these simple words: "[Andrew] first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, 'We have found the Messias,' which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus."

Those simple words, "he brought him to Jesus" get to the heart of personal evangelism, and also to the heart of all evangelism and mission. We cannot separate the Man from the message. Jesus Christ did not come as a philosopher or teacher, but as our Salvation, the One Who takes us to the Father. Andrew did not tell Simon about a great message he had heard. He did not mention the teachings of Jesus. Rather, he brought him to Jesus. It is to Jesus that we come, and to Jesus that we bring others.

Advent music. Fugue on Veni Emmanuel

2011-11-29T15:38:00.000-05:00

First Sunday in Advent

2011-11-26T09:58:00.000-05:00

Bible illustration by Alexandre Bida

Romans13:8-13 * Matthew 21:1-13

What a confusing choice for today's Gospel, the same reading we have in the Blessing of the Palms on Palm Sunday, before the first Eucharist. What does this have to do with the main theme of Advent, that we must be prepared for the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in glory to judge both the quick and the dead? After all, as everyone should know, it is about our own real preparation to come face to face with God. The season is about the Four Last Things, Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell. Among these, Heaven and Hell take on powerful significance as the Resurrection to immortality, to live and reign with Christ forever, and the resurrection of those who will go into the lake of fire. As the Lord said: "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."1 In light of these themes, it is not enough to be aware of the joy that awaits those who will enter the blessed state of glorification as the sons of God. We must also be aware of the terror of the Lord so as to persuade men,2 including ourselves, to be in a state of Grace at all times.

Several religious leaders from various churches must have voted, about a century or more ago, to close Hell. Like some prisons, it has perhaps become overcrowded, and so nobody else can go there, even though some people are dying to get in. Why else would it sound so strange to hear it mentioned in a sermon-in church of all places? Maybe Hell has become the sort of topic, like for example, sin; something that fashionable people just do not discuss in church. It's not nice, it's not warm and fuzzy, and it contributes, no doubt, to global warming. The problem is, the ultimate "fire and brimstone" preacher in the Bible is Jesus Christ-no more Mr. Nice Guy to anyone shocked to learn it. Yes, St. John the Baptist has a few words to say about it. St. Paul never mentions it directly, though clearly warning about it indirectly. Some theologians want to blunt the effect of every passage that does mention it. If we are to be serious about the words of the Lord Jesus Christ, we must face this subject, namely, the danger of being lost forever, going into the outer darkness "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."3 The Greek word for that ultimate Hell is Ge'enna (γε’εννα). It refers to a terrible place mentioned in the Old Testament as a site where children were murdered in sacrifice to Molech, the Valley of Ben-Hinnom. In the First century A.D., this place had become a dump, and trash was burned there day and night. In that dump the worm was kept alive, and fires were always burning. And so, our Lord spoke of it in terms of that final and dreadful verse in the Book of Isaiah: "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh."4 The terror of the Lord that ought to persuade each of us, and with which it is a mercy to persuade others, is that of being thrown away as the garbage.

No one need be thrown away, because God "commandeth all men everywhere to repent."5 The Gospel command to repent is also a word of hope. It is centered on the grace of God, and the love of God demonstrated and revealed in the cross of Christ. 6 How simple and yet powerful are those words of St. Paul, "Christ died for our sins."7 In that light, we obey the command to repent, and therefore are filled with joy because he gives us the certain hope of eternal life. "Repent, confess, thou shalt be loosed from all."8 This alone gives hope. A false gospel of acceptance and inclusion cannot revive and comfort anyone's conscience. The words of today's Epistle tell us how to live our lives in this world in the fear of God, and also in the grace of God. "The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light. "

Why are we given this selection from the Gospels? Why this picture of Christ being welcomed as the Son of David, the king, and then getting off the donkey, going into the temple, and casting out the money changers? We understand why this leads to the Passion, and is read at the start of Holy Week when we bless the palms. We understand that other judgment, that in the cross of Christ it was the Prince of this world who was judged and cast out. 9 When we begin Holy Week it makes sense. What, however, does this have to do with the coming again in glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, to judge the quick and the dead? As an event in history, how do we place some meaning of it in the future? as a recorded past event, how does it find its way into eschatology (the study of the End)?

The simple answer (so obvious once we realize it) is that, in her wisdom, the Church puts before our eyes this picture of our Lord Jesus Christ, from his first coming, that most closely resembles his second coming. Here is the Lord who suddenly comes to his temple and cleanses it. We see the Lord who casts out from the place of that holy presence of the Shekinah, those who have been living unrepentant in sin. The authority of the Lord, to mete out judgment, to evict sinners from his presence, to cleanse, to purge, and to purify, is seen in this Gospel passage. That harder side of the One who was able to forgive and heal with compassion is here made visible. This picture shows the judgment of the Lord; it shows his unique authority as the Word and Son of the Everlasting Father, that power that comes so genuinely from within Himself that all of these men felt compelled to obey his voice, and had no power in themselves to resist his words of eviction from the Holy Place. He had no visible army to carry out his commands, no soldiers to enforce his decree; and yet his power was such that no one could resist, and no one could refuse. Just as He had power to cast out demons so that people would not be tormented any longer, so His word with power casts out the money changers. Yes, this is the best picture we have of the Lord coming again as Judge.

Bible illustration by Gustave Dore

St. Peter wrote: "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?"10 If we submit to the work of the Holy Spirit among us, we will experience that gentle judgment that saves us here and now. After all, even though St. Peter makes direct reference to the End, that is the Last Day when Christ comes again, and does so with words to place the fear of God in our hearts, he begins with "the time is come." If the message is about "the end" of those who are removed, thrown into the dump of Ge'enna with its hungry worms and perpetual burnings, what judgment is there that begins now in the house of God? Jesus cast out the works of darkness from the house of God, the temple in Jerusalem, casting out those who had worked that darkness openly and unashamed, and who insulted the holy place no less than the sons of Eli had done long before.11 But, St. Peter urges us with a present hope: "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." What is this judgment that must begin now? Pray God, let it be for each one of us the very self-examination that aids those who repent to make a good confession of their sins with all of the sincerity of a heart moved by the Holy Spirit.

What are we planning to do here today? What follows every sermon in a Mass? Before I supply the answer, let us recall that other name, that specifically Anglican name that we give to this service: "The Holy Communion." Other names are good too, such as The Divine Liturgy (the Orthodox name), and the Holy Eucharist. But, I like the Anglican name, The Holy Communion. It was first used to make something very clear to the people of the Church of England, which is that the purpose for which Christ instituted this sacrament of His Body and Blood is that it be taken and received. The Catechism tells us that two of the sacraments are generally necessary for salvation, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. The purpose of coming here and receiving this Blessed Sacrament is to feed on the Living Bread that comes down from heaven, which if a man eat, he may live forever. Jesus told us that He is the food and drink of eternal life, and to eat his flesh and drink his blood.12 First we make confession of sin based on the self-examination we should make every time; as St.Paul wrote: "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup."13 It is in that self-examination and the resulting sincere confession, that we prepare for the coming of the Lord right now, that is, His coming to our altar, and then into our very bodies as we eat the food and drink the cup of eternal life-His flesh and blood. If we live always ready for this Sacrament, we will live always ready to meet the Lord face to face.

In today's Gospel passage, we see important elements of His Second Coming, elements that are true to the Person of the Son of God, the everlasting Son of the everlasting Father. He is the only king and savior. He is the judge “Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather His wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” 14 Judgment will begin at the House of God, until His whole creation is cleansed and purified, made ready for a habitation of His righteousness, a dwelling place of His glory among men. The purpose of a Penitential season is to learn to sharpen and focus our self-examination, the same self-examination that we should do every time we draw near to receive the Body and Blood of Christ. I know that a “feel good” religion is the popular model for success in today’s “spiritual” market; but the only good feeling we should ever trust is that spoken of by the Psalmist: “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.” 15

To be ready for the last Judgment, we must be willing to let the Holy Ghost shake up our world, we must allow Him to shake up our very selves. Indeed, to prepare for the coming again of Jesus Christ, we must draw near "with hearty repentance and true faith" in order to make a good confession, sincere and resolute of purpose to "walk in newness of life ." Indeed, to prepare for the coming again of Jesus Christ, we need do no more, and no less, than we do when we prepare to receive the Communion of His Body and Blood. 16

1. John 5:28, 29
2. II Corinthians 5:11
3. Mark 9:42-50
4. Isaiah 66:24
5. Acts 17:30
6. Romans 5:8
7. I Corinthians 15:3
8 From Weary of Earth and laden with my sin, Hymn 58 in The Hymnal 1940.
9. John 12:31, 32
10. I Peter 4:17, 18
11. I Samuel 2:12f
12. John 6:26-59
13. I Corinthians 11: 29
14. Matthew. 3:12
15. Psalm 32:1
16. I Corinthians 10:16

TAC ARCHBISHOP REPORTED ABOUT TO ANNOUNCE HIS RECEPTION AS A ROMAN CATHOLIC LAYMAN

2011-11-26T09:33:00.005-05:00

The Rev. Canon John Hollister has sent the following:

Thanks to the sharp eyes of Fr. Larry Wells, who spotted on Fr. Anthony Chadwick’s blog, “The English Catholic”, an article which contained the link to the following report from “The Australian”:

“Archbishop John Hepworth to return to Catholic fold as Indian, not chief

“by: Verity Edwards

“From: The Australian

“November 25, 2011 9:33PM

“ARCHBISHOP John Hepworth will be forced to relinquish his role as the primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion if he is to reconcile with the Catholic Church, after being informed he will only be accepted as a layperson.

“Archbishop Hepworth has been notified by the Catholic Church that his bid to reunify the TAC with Rome has been successful,* but his own case is conditional.”

Downloaded 11/25/2011 from The Australian.

The accompanying information in Fr. Chadwick’s article adds further details, including that Abp. Hepworth was given this notice in an official letter from the Australian [Roman Catholic] Bishops’ Conference that was delivered to him by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne. Apparently the reason given for this determination is Article 6, §2 of the “Complementary Norms” that are attached to Pope Benedict’s Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus, under which the new Anglican Ordinariates are to be organized. This Section states that former Roman Catholic clergy who left that communion to become Anglicans will not be received back into the Roman Church as functioning clergy but will only be permitted to exercise the lay state.

On a number of occasions since Abp. Hepworth announced that the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) would be engaging in a “corporate merger” with the Roman Catholic Communion (RCC), he stated that if it became necessary for the success of such a merger, he was prepared to resign his position as a bishop. Based upon these assurances, it is understood that those TAC members who still support the TAC’s entry into an RCC Ordinariate expect Abp. Hepworth to continue leading them “across the Tibur” by shortly announcing his reception back into the RCC as a layman.
____________
* A strange use of the word "successful," since it has only attracted an underwhelming minority. - Fr. Hart

We are not a mission field

2011-11-23T17:10:00.000-05:00

On implications of wider unity

One of the priorities we must have is real unity among Continuing Anglicans, and that for the sake of our portion of the overall mission of the Church as Christ authorized and commanded it. This keeps the priorities of unity, evangelism and Anglican identity closely related. Having survived the recent storm, it is useful to learn from the dangerous misapplication of the whole subject of unity as it often was related to the Two One True Churches, or as it was during the controversy that enveloped Anglicanorum Coetibus, to the Church of Rome.

It was fashionable among the contingent advocating and misrepresenting that Roman constitution, to quote part of John 17:21, "That they all may be one," in a thoroughly confusing and misleading manner. This practice belonged to the modern "soundbite" culture in which words and phrases are used to prevent rather than aid the art of thinking. The misapplied words of Christ were used to appeal to sentiment, to impart guilt, and in every way simply to manipulate adults. Inasmuch as I have already given my defense of the true meaning of Christ's words (in The Theology of Unity) I will not restate it here. Suffice to say, for now, that even a number of people simply transferring from one denomination to another, say from the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) to the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), would not bring the Universal Church even so much as one step closer to outward and political unity; it would not end divisions that date back to the sixteenth century, or to 1054 AD.

Does this mean we should not hope for eventual outward and political unity? Anglican writers as early as Richard Hooker have always held out that hope. We would not seek to close the door to it. We do, however, see it as more practical to work on unity among our own people as a realizable goal; and it is happening anyway.

More to the point, at this time it is terribly obvious that both Rome and Orthodoxy see unity only in terms of joining them, losing our own identity and ceasing to be Anglican, submitting to them and putting ourselves completely in their hands. To them we are not a real church in any sense (indeed, in reality they still rule out each other as the true Church, though idealistic and misinformed, indeed misinforming, individuals have convinced themselves it isn't so). Whether we deal with the Orthodox or the Roman Catholics, when we talk of unity, they think of evangelism as they see it, regarding us as a mission field.

We are not a mission field, and our place in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is certainly no less secure than theirs; and to the degree that true doctrine is part of the Apostolic Succession, we would argue that our place is more secure. And, it is high time for all Continuing Anglicans, especially Anglo-Catholics, to acquire that security. True doctrine is the issue that divides us still, at this time, from both of the Two One True Churches, because each of them remains muddled and unclear about important elements essential to the very Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is not we who need their claims about history to somehow give us perfect validity. It is they who need clarity of doctrine that goes back to "the most ancient catholic doctors and bishops" of the Church; and that clarity is more readily at hand to us.

Some will be fooled by arguments based on unverifiable claims about history, such as the entire basis for the Papal claims, mixed with just plain impossible interpretations of scripture. You may be very sure that polemicists have already lost the real argument when they come back with derisive and silly attempts to dismiss us as "merely five hundred years old." Aside form being incorrect history, it means they have no Biblical or theological point in mind. Of course, that non-argument fits a perverted kind of logic that does not recognize their own divided state, nor the fact that we have maintained the Catholic Tradition that goes all the way back to the beginning. We have merely removed the dross.

If we want real unity, we must begin with our own people. If we hold out a hope for wider unity, it cannot be by accepting the lie that we are a mission filed for either One True Church to harvest. Sadly, that was what the recent storm was all about, Anglican bishops trying to accept the status imposed by Rome on behalf of those who intended loyalty to the truth of the Gospel, faith in the Anglican way, and the understanding Affirmed in St. Louis. Those who believe they need one or other of the Two One True Churches to be valid, or have "the fullness," or whatever, may go with our prayers and charity. But, we already belong to the Church; we are not a mission field.

Sunday before Advent

2011-11-19T23:58:00.000-05:00

JOHN 6: 5-14

The Collect has resulted in this day being known as “Stir Up Sunday.” And, of course, it means that next week we will enter into Advent. Some things will be different for these weeks that lead up into Christmas. It is a penitential season. Despite everything you will see in the stores- I would say in the shopping malls, remember please what this season is not. No matter what songs they will pipe through the air, it will not be Christmas time in the city- not yet. We are entering a Penitential season. Both of our most joyous feasts of the Church, Christmas and Easter, are preceded by the penitential seasons of Advent and of Lent. Some things in the Church will be different. The color will be violet (which looks a lot like purple, I am told). There will be no flowers on the altar. We will not have the Gloria during the Mass.

In my days in Arizona I called a couple whose absence from church every Sunday, for a long time, had been the most noticeable thing about them. I was told that they would try to get back, but that, of course, I would understand why, with Christmas coming, they would be awfully busy, too busy for church until it is over. Now, I know that a priest should not use this word very carelessly or often in the pulpit; but that is, frankly, the most (and here it is) stupid thing anyone has ever said to me; the worst part being that I would "understand." Right. We, the clergy, are supposed to expect everyone to stay away from church all through Advent, because they are busy with the Christian duty of shopping and preparing parties. I trust we all know that Christmas is a feast day of the Church, the Christ Mass, no less than every Sunday in importance, and even more of an obligation than golf or shopping. And, I hope we all know why we should be in church during the very serious and reflective penitential season that leads up to it.

In the weeks ahead, we need to consider why the Church year ends its Sunday Gospel readings with this story from the Gospel of Saint John. Two main reasons come to my mind. First of all, we have prayed for God to “stir up…the wills of [His] faithful people”…to continue to bring forth the fruit of good works. And, in the Gospel we see that a little boy placed into the hands of Jesus Christ a rather small thing. He gave Him his lunch, five barley loaves and two small fish. Not only were the fish small, but the loaves were probably no bigger than those little round pita breads you see in the grocery stores. It was not much, but the Lord Jesus was able, with this bit of food, to feed thousands of people.

As you most likely know, very soon all the members of this congregation will be asked for a renewal of your pledge to this church. In case you think money is not a spiritual subject, let me point out that the question of what you do with your money, as well as what you do with your time, is very spiritual. Do you give to God that little bit that He has given to you? The important thing is to place what you have in the hands of Christ by faith, and let Him multiply it and feed many.

Remember, we do not belong to that rich, though shrinking, institution called the Episcopal Church, and we do not have its millions of dollars of endowment money. Thanks be to God that we can remain faithful without leaving our Anglican way, that is, without leaving the teaching and practice that the Episcopal Church used to believe in. We have chosen to remain faithful to the Tradition of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, preserving, specifically, the Anglican way of being Christian.

I mention this because you need to know that we are healthy, but we are not that big rich organization that has the endowments. We have a more valuable treasure than all those endowments put together, and we must pass it on to future generations. I want this church to grow. I want it to be filled with families, with children and young people who can learn our faith and take it into the future. The very fact that this church exists speaks volumes about faith, hope and charity. Faith that God is alive and active, and can use what we put in His hands. It is about hope, because we look ahead to a future in which we hand on the faith to generations yet to come. And, it is about charity, because we are here to meet the needs of people who are not yet here.

As we ask you to place, yet again, your loaves and fish in Christ’s hands, that is to renew your pledge, remember that those hands have been wounded. “Those dear tokens of His Passion, still His dazzling body bears: Cause of endless exultation by His ransomed worshipers.” We need to be here so that the people of this community can come into this place and meet the Christ Who died for each one of them; to come and to find here the Risen Christ. He is here in the breaking of bread. Ultimately, that is the greater message of this Gospel passage. The bread and fish handed over to the Lord Jesus, He then multiplied because He was teaching, by this miracle, that He Himself is “the True Bread that comes down from heaven, which, if man eat thereof, he shall live forever.” He taught that His flesh is food indeed and His blood is drink indeed, and that by Him we are nourished with eternal life.

I have spoken to you in a very straightforward way, because I do not want the pressures of this coming season to distract you from the true purpose of it all. How ironic that the coming of Christmas could keep some people out of Church, as if the main event is not to rejoice in the revelation of the Word made Flesh. The Incarnation, celebrated months ago on the Feast of the Annunciation, was almost hidden away, and unnoticed, until "the babe, the world's redeemer, first revealed His sacred face," that Feast of the Nativity that we prepare for.

Shopping malls, and secular parties, are not the preparation. How fitting that Bethlehem means "house of bread," in this case the Bread of Life. The preparation for that feast is to be here, using the penitential season to examine yourself, as St.Paul teaches. It is time to reflect on every change and adjustment each of us may need to make, and therefore, to be receiving each Sunday the Living Bread that comes down from heaven, which, if a man eat, he may live forever.

He commanded that the fragments left over from this miracle be gathered up and that nothing be lost. In this world, by His creation first, and then even more so by His coming in the flesh, as fully God and fully Man, we see that material things can take on the quality of holiness. This bread was too holy to be treated with disdain and left to spoil. And, it was only a mere symbol of this bread and wine, which will become in the Blessed Sacrament of His body and blood. If you wonder why we go to so much trouble not to profane the sacrament, to preserve it set apart in the tabernacle, remember this story. It was a miracle that only served to shadow this miracle that will happen here today; it was used by Christ to teach that we must feed on Him, and do so in faith, to have His risen life within us.

Laymen's guide to the Thirty-nine Articles

2011-11-18T16:24:00.013-05:00

Article XV

Of Christ alone without Sin

Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only except, from which He was clearly void, both in His flesh and in His spirit. He came to be the lamb without spot, Who by sacrifice of Himself once made, should take away the sins of the world: and sin, as S. John saith, was not in Him. But all we the rest, although baptized and born again in Christ, yet offend in many things: and if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Christus in nostrae naturae veritate per omnia similis factus est nobis, excepto peccato, a quo prorsus est immunis, tum in carne tum in spiritu. Venit ut agnus absque macula esset, qui mundi peccata per immolationem sui semel factam tolleret: et peccatum, ut inquit Iohannes, in eo non erat. Sed nos reliqui, etiam baptizati et in Christo regenerati, in multis tamen offendimus omnes: et, si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus, nos ipsos seducimus, et veritas in nobis non est.

Fr. Laurence Wells

As far as I know, the sinlessness of Christ was not under debate in the 16th century controversies. Whatever new thoughts were circulating among the more radical theological currents of that period, there was no debate at all between Rome and the various wings of the magisterial Reformation regarding this point. So it may come as a surprise to find this article bristling like a porcupine with a number of hot-button issues.

First, we have the assertion of our Lord's moral impeccability. Next, we have the assertion of His exclusive uniqueness in this attribute. The word "alone" lacks the punch of the original Latin, "Nemo praeter Christum."

Then there is a strong assertion that otherwise, His humanity was in no respect different from ours. Next, there is a definite nod in the direction of the doctrine of the atonement, anticipating a major theme dealt with more fully in Article XXXI. Finally, there is yet a second assertion of the universality of our sinful condition, along with a statement on the vexed question of residual sin in those regenerate and justified.

Before reflecting on the sinlessness of the Saviour, we need to review the nature of sin itself. There are basically two ways of thinking about sin, which go back to the heresiarch Pelagius and the sainted Church Father Augustine. In a Pelagian world-view, "sin" is a term which describes occasional occurrences which interrupt the normal flow of life for morally neutral creatures. Occasionally they get angry, have impure thoughts, say unkind words, or even do more heinous things. But these are deviations from the norm, extraordinary events, moral anomalies. But as Augustine heard the Word of God, sin is not only things we do or fail to do; sin is the underlying condition, the spiritual disease, which explains our behavior. Worse than that, sin blemishes all our behavior and to a frightening degree controls it. Understood as a spiritual disease, sin is a terminal condition, from which its victims cannot heal or extricate themselves. Augustine grasped the painful Biblical truth that sin is rooted in human nature at its very core:

"But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart comes evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander (Matt. 15:18--19."

Sinful outward behavior originates in the heart itself.

Now the New Testament insists in many familiar texts that Jesus was "without sin." It would tax the patience of our readers to enter into a scholastic discussion as to whether He was "able not to sin" (posse non peccare) or "not able to sin" (non posse peccare). He Himself insisted on His sinlessness in John 8, with the stinging question, "Which of you convicts me of sin?" (John 8:46). This follows on Jesus' own assessment of the human condition, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin." St Paul clarifies the "everyone" with an emphatic "all" at Romans 3:24, "For all sinned and are falling short of the glory of God."

If Pelagius was right, then the sinlessness of Christ is hardly significant, save perhaps as an important (but not necessarily unique) moral example. But from Augustine's Biblical point of view, the exemption of Christ from the fatal predicament of sin is both miracle and mystery. Sin is not only an internal disease of our spiritual DNA; it is part of the warp and woof of social relationships in the human community. Since God Incarnate did not live on earth as a "boy in a bottle," in an antiseptic cage of moral isolation, then how did he manage to stay sinless? The New Testament does not invite us to believe that as the Second Adam He entered the world in Edenic safety and bliss. His sinless humanity was still our miserable fallen humanity: "By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, [God] condemned sin in the flesh" (Romans 8:3).

The sinlessness of Christ is in itself a miracle. The drama of His Temptation, told by Matthew and Luke and alluded to by Mark, comes across as a surprising Victory, like the Resurrection itself, an outcome the reader could not anticipate. This miracle is rooted in His Virginal Conception (although that fact has larger meaning). Only a sinless One could redeem sinners, and for a truly sinless One to arrive in this fallen world a new beginning, a New Creation, was necessary.

Although Old Testament foreshadowings of His sinlessness are not lacking, no sinless human being existed between Adam and Christ. To suggest such a thing diminishes His uniqueness and denies His role as "the only mediator between God and man."

When we look at the NT texts which state His sinlessness, the uniqueness of Christ is always close to the forefront.

In Hebrews 4:15, we read, "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin." His unique sinlessness is part and parcel of His unique priesthood. To indulge in speculations of any other sinless mortal compromises His unique role in the Gospel and inexorably leads to unwholesome thoughts of co-redeemers and co-redemptrices. He is exclusively our Great High Priest and we are not invited by God's Word into any sentimental notions of a Great High Priestess.

Fr. Robert Hart

Fr. Wells has provided the meat of what this Article is saying, and closes with an obvious allusion to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, a doctrine that was never a dogma of the Universal Church, though declared a dogma exclusively by the See of Rome in the nineteenth century without even so much as the appearance of conciliar assent. In the centuries prior to the sixteenth, going as far back as St. Thomas Aquinas, the theory of the Immaculate Conception was under debate, and so it remained even in the Church of Rome until 1854 when Pope Pius IX issued Ineffabilis Deus. It was not a doctrine of the Church of Rome when this Article was composed.

What matters in that connection is that Mary’s sinless state was a matter of grace at the moment of the Virginal Conception of the Lord. The Scriptures use a word that is stronger than the standard word for “grace,” and in the King James it takes two words to translate it; “highly favored.” This is obviously echoed in the famous “Hail Mary” as “full of grace” (i.e. instead of the standard χάρις Luke used the word χαριτόω).

But, the theory of the Immaculate Conception does not flow naturally from the texts of Scripture. It is a theory that, if true, certainly solves no problem. The Medieval “problem” that Christ needed a mother free of original sin in order to be free of it Himself, fails to take into account the miraculous nature of the Incarnation and the power of God. You may believe the theory if you want to; but I cannot teach it as doctrine, for it is not a doctrine of the ancient Church, nor of the Universal Church to this day; which is to say, it is not revealed and is not recorded in Scripture among all things necessary to salvation.

The unique sinlessness of Christ, however, perfectly meets that whole standard as necessary and infallible doctrine. Without this understanding we fail to understand the One for the many as set forth in the Suffering Servant passage in the Book of Isaiah (52:13-53:12) and the fifth chapter of St. Paul's Epistle to the Church in Rome.

It also seems likely that the ending of the Article was aimed at Enthusiasts of the time, among some Puritans and Anabaptists, who believed themselves to be sinners no longer after a personal conversion. We hear echoes of this error today from people who say they were once sinners, but now are saints. Therefore the Article closes with a quotation from chapter one of the First Epistle of St. John, to remind everyone of the need to confess and repent daily.

The Dutch Touch

2011-11-16T23:38:00.000-05:00

A study in irrelevance.

(rerun from June 11, 2009)

Recently, in private e-mail, the Dutch Touch was mentioned, to borrow a phrase coined by someone else for the Infusion of Old Catholic Orders into Anglican Orders by co-consecration. It was mentioned by someone who seemed to suggest that I might consider Anglican Orders to have become valid by the Infusion. Indeed, some who call themselves Anglican may embarrass the rest of us by holding this position, but I do not. We never needed the Infusion, and our Orders were defended against Roman non-sense quite thoroughly before the idea ever presented itself into our history. Reassuring ourselves was never the motive.

For those who are not familiar with the history of this Infusion, I will explain briefly and simply, as to the historic facts and to the concept. In the 1930s the Church of England invited Old Catholic Bishops to participate in consecrations of new bishops. The Dutch Old Catholic bishops, Mgr. Henry van Vlijmen, Bishop of Haarlem, and Mgr. John Berends, Bishop of Deventer, took part in the consecration of Anglican bishops in St. Paul's Cathedral, in 1931 and 1932. The first co-consecration was that of Bishop Graham-Brown, a well known Anglican of the Evangelical party (as it was defined in the 1930s, which is considerably different from how contemporary Reassereters have redefined it). From Bishop Graham-Brown infused orders spread; and the co-consecrations were repeated in several venues, such as co-consecrations with bishops of the Polish National Catholic Church in the United States, so that by the early 1960s every Episcopal priest had these orders in his lineage, catching up with the rest of the Anglican Communion which had been thoroughly infused since some time during the 1950s. Therefore, the Orders of all Continuing Anglicans began (1978) with this in our history; all Continuing Anglican Orders have the Infusion somewhere in their family tree. And, to this interesting fact I have only a two word reaction:Who cares?

Unfortunately, some of our Roman Catholic detractors have assumed, wrongly, that the Anglicans sought co-consecration because Rome considered Old Catholic Orders valid, and this meant that Anglicans could supply what was missing, or fix their allegedly bad and defective orders. But, as documented by Brian Taylor 1 from correspondence between Archbishop of Canterbury Cosmo Lang and other high ranking Church of England officials, the expressed, written and recorded motive was ecumenical. Not only was it to serve as a way to improverelations with the Old Catholics, but to make Anglican orders "more acceptable to Rome in the event of some future Reunion." 2

The idea, therefore, was never to make them valid, or more acceptable to ourselves. It was an ecumenical gesture, and as such a potential gesture for some day in which it may please God to grant Catholic unity in the West. But, Anglicans had already defended their orders many times over the centuries, and at no time after the Infusion was it mentioned as a relevant factor by any serious Anglican apologist, not even by those who noted it, such as Claude Beaufort Moss in 1965. 3 Dom Gregory Dix made no mention of it in 1944 when writing The Question of Anglican Orders, Letters to a Layman 4. Neither did E. J. Bicknell's book A Theological Introduction to The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, in any of its later editions after revision in the 1950s, so much as say one word about it in the portion of the book where Anglican orders are defended. 5 In short, the Anglican apologetic treatment of the Infusion appears to be summarized by my own reaction: "Who cares?"

Frankly, Saepius Officio,written in 1897 by the Archbishops of England (Canterbury and York) said everything that needed to be said in defense of our Orders, and the best summary anywhere is that of Bicknell.

As for the subject of the Infusion itself, it is a relic of an innocent age of ecumenical hope, that innocence and hope that would suffer destruction for the official Anglican Communion in 1976. If the Infusion may help someday between orthodox Anglicans of the Continuum and Rome or, restart some ecumenical relations with the Polish National Catholic Church, then maybe it will not have been a big wasted effort after all.

Until such a time, who cares?
_________________________
1. In his 1995 paper, published in Great Britain, Accipe SpiritumSanctum.

As our reader who goes by the name of Canon Tallis also pointed out in a comment months ago:

"Marc Antonio de Dominus, sometime Archbishop of Spaleto and Dean of Windsor, participated in Anglican consecrations in the Caroline age before he made the mistake of returning to Rome and their so kind ministrations? I think someone in the Continuum needs to reprint Littledale's The Petrine Claims and make it required reading for both postulants and the clergy."

2. This possibility was never rejected by Anglicans. See this older post analyzing a section of Richard Hooker's Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity.

3. THE CHRISTIAN FAITH: AN INTRODUCTION TO DOGMATIC THEOLOGY - By CLAUDE BEAUFORT MOSS, D.D.LONDON - S.P.C.K 1965 Holy Trinity Church MarylboneRoad London NW 1 - Printed in Great Britain by Richard Clay (The Chaucer Press) Ltd Bungay Suffolk - First published in 1943 - Prepared for katapi by Paul Ingram 2004

4. Westminster : Dacre Press, 1944.

5. A Theological Introduiction to the Thirty-Nine Articles, (Downloadable) Wittenberg Hall Copyright: © 1955 Public Domain (originally printed before revisions in 1919)

Twenty-first Sunday after Trinity

2011-11-12T21:23:00.004-05:00

Ephesians 6:10-20 * John 4:46-50

“Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.”

Why is this story even written, inasmuch as it is nowhere near as spectacular as the really dramatic miracles, such as the raising of Lazarus from the dead? What was the Apostle John thinking? And, yes, we believe he was guided and inspired by the Holy Spirit; but, inasmuch as that inspiration was to his mind and reason, it is right to ask what John was thinking.

Like the healing of the centurion’s servant, this is the kind of miracle all too easy for a skeptic to dismiss. So, we must learn why each of those stories is included in the Gospels. The centurion’s story is not very spectacular either; but what it teaches us about faith is. This story seems to be addressing more the subject of faith than anything else.

What we read seems contradictory at first glance. “Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.” Is this a rebuke? Is the Lord displeased? If so, He doesn’t show displeasure. If needing to see a sign was a weakness, then the Lord gave the weak man what he needed most.

Near the end of John’s Gospel we see the resurrected Christ saying to Thomas, “Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed (20:29).” Is this a rebuke? That seems unlikely, inasmuch as it was the will of God for the Apostles all to be eyewitnesses of His post resurrection appearances.

As terrible as this may seem to the advocates of “tough love,” it seems very obvious that Christ was making allowance for human weakness, even a weakness in faith. To Him it is not great faith that is necessary, but only faith as small as a grain of mustard seed (Matthew 17:20, Luke 17:6). People who present themselves to others as possessing great faith generally are those of little faith, little in quantity and quality. Even a grain of mustard seed is much larger, and that is because it is real.

One of the ways in which the popular American “faith & prosperity” message does damage is in convincing true believers that they don’t have enough faith to please God; otherwise, the logic runs, they would be in perfect health all the time, they would have no economic problems, and they would always be happy all the time. That kind of religion doesn’t produce faith, but rather it demands a show, an outward presentation of a jolly, successful and happy life; people who belong to such churches can show no sign of weakness (no wonder they have no confession of sin), and risk being on the outside if they do. So, in the place of faith, they learn hypocrisy and denial.

Their error is a reflection of a very old one. Those who think they can earn salvation by the accumulation of merits never know if they have accumulated enough. Those whose faith must be great never know if their own is great enough. None of them can have any assurance that their sin is forgiven, and that they will inherit eternal life.

But, in the Church as established by Christ, there is no need to impress each other; and the sacrament of Confession and Absolution is for everybody, even bishops and other clergy. Simply put, there is no room for pride, including the pride of being “spiritual” and “fervent in faith” to all outward appearance.

The passage we read from Ephesians warns of the danger we face if we forget we are in a spiritual battle. We are not told to go boldly about proclaiming our own “victory” in life as we enter into battle; but, instead to put on the whole armor of God in order to stand against the wiles of the Devil. Armor is made to protect us because of our weakness and mortality.

Back in the 80s, as the people of one church I belonged to were awaiting a bus to Washington D.C. for the March for Life, we allowed some Pentecostals to meet at our church and use the same bus. They decided to pray with us, and one of them went through a very theatrical prayer in which she attacked the forces of Hell with alarming self-confidence. After she had her say to God, and to all the forces of Hell, I asked everyone to turn to the General Confession, and asked the rector (I was not yet a priest) to follow with the Absolution. For, I knew that God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble (James 4:6).

When we were present in Washington at that event, several speakers were on a platform, and a rabbi was asked to lead prayers. His words included, “O God, our hands have not shed this blood…” But, looking at that vast crowd I could not accept his words. His prayer was empty as long as he boasted (and I know of a number of Christian clergy who would say, essentially the same thing he did). We must never pray thus to ourselves, “I thank Thee God that I am not as other men are (Luke 18:11).” Some of those people had indeed shed this blood; some had indeed paid for or received abortions. But, they had repented and gone to God for forgiveness. That was part of why they had come.

The point John was making was very simple. When Jesus said, “Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe,” indeed, He was not pleased with that. But, God is gracious. This brings us into deeper things that must be understood. I have said before: Beware of a religious teaching that says that life is a test. Life is not a test. Life is a shipwreck. If life is a test we all have failed already.

“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one…But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus (Romans 3:10-12, 21-26).”

So, you see, life is not a test. We did not need an examiner, and we do not need a grade. The grade we each and everyone receive is “F.” We don’t need proof that we were born as fallen creatures given to sin and death. Jesus did not come into the world to grade our report cards. He came to this shipwreck to rescue us from sin and death. It is called the grace of God; it is called mercy; it is the manifestation of the love of God meeting us at the point of our real need, even if we do not perceive our need at all. It is summarized in those words of Jesus that each of you should know:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved (John 3:16, 17).”

It seems so simple, so basic; and so why do we lose sight of it? Because we are in a spiritual war, and the main weapon of our common enemy is deception. It is good and right to preach about sin, because we also have the message of mercy and forgiveness. The world today doesn’t want to hear about forgiveness. They want instead to have Divine approval stamped on every choice they have ever made or will make. Until they recognize that sin is still sin, but also that repentance and confession bring about forgiveness and healing, as a priest I can do nothing for them.

God met us in our weakness, at the point of our real and greatest need. That is why He poured out His life on the cross, letting His blood be shed as the one perfect offering, the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. It is why he did not cast off His human nature, but rose from the dead to remain one of us forever. It is why He met the need of a man who needed to see signs and wonders to believe, and healed his son. It is why he gives mercy to you. It is why he came into the world.

Our priorities

2011-11-11T00:56:00.000-05:00

At this point in the history of the Continuing Church it seems that three things must be emphasized. These three things are really about our future. They are unity, evangelism and Anglican identity. At this time, the leading bishops of the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC), the Anglican Church in America (ACA), the United Episcopal Church North America (UECNA), the Anglican Province of Christ the King (APCK) and the Anglican Province in America (APA) have, at one time or other recently, committed themselves to establishing that unity. Four of those leading bishops, as readers of The Continuum know (from this and this) were at the recent Provincial Synod of the ACC-OP, and there each of those four said that the recent effort of the pope in Anglicanorum Coetibus has had the unforeseen effect of renewing commitment to Anglicanism, and with it a desire to bring about unity among the major jurisdictions of Continuing Anglicanism. They have each credited the Holy Spirit for this.

Unity will mean that one Continuing Anglican presence can finally be free of the old range wars. None of the leading bishops (whether Arch or Presiding) ever created the divisions in the first place. They inherited them. Unity would have made us grow larger in the past, and it can do so in the future. It has been obvious to the laity and to observers that we all have more in common than any issues that cause division. In fact, it was not generally doctrine that caused divisions, as we all know. That would, at least, have been principled.

Evangelism is not an option. It is the direct command of Jesus Christ Himself; and any church that does not have His mission as part of its very reason to exist is not the Church He established. Sacramental validity is not enough to make up for that lack. Without the Gospel being preached and the mission of the Church as a priority, the Apostolic Succession is not complete; for the Apostolic Church was given the Great Commission. Just think about that for a while.

Finally, Anglican identity as we understand it and have Affirmed that understanding, is also not an option for us. Yes, we are free of destructive and erroneous One True Church theories, and unlike both of the two One True Churches we know ourselves to be but a part of the whole (as we know them to be). But, we have chosen to be Anglicans because we believe it to be, although not the only way to be Christian, the way that is most faithful to the revelation of God as revealed and recorded in Scripture, and as that scripture was understood by the most ancient catholic doctors and bishops.

These three priorities must be embraced as we go forward. Each has been attacked by the great enemy of our souls. It is time to stop being ignorant of Satan's devices (II Cor. 2:11). For too long the enemy has been able to say the words of Israel's enemies of old:

"But it came to pass, that when Sanballat heard that we builded the wall, he was wroth, and took great indignation, and mocked the Jews. And he spake before his brethren and the army of Samaria, and said, What do these feeble Jews? will they fortify themselves? will they sacrifice? will they make an end in a day? will they revive the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish which are burned? Now Tobiah the Ammonite was by him, and he said, Even that which they build, if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall. Hear, O our God; for we are despised: and turn their reproach upon their own head, and give them for a prey in the land of captivity... (Nehemiah 4:1-4)"

If you have had enough of that, as I have, it is time to pray and do everything possible to put resources and energy into unity, evangelism and maintaining Anglican identity.

The Evangel

2011-11-08T15:03:00.000-05:00

Following the article we posted about evangelism last week, the question arose as to what the Evangel, the Gospel, is. I want to restate my own thoughts about the most basic answer to that question from an older sermon for the 11th Sunday after Trinity:

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 theChurch 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.

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, Paulwas 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 sayChrist. 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 underPontius 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 22nd Psalm. 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 ofHoly 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 16thPsalm:

“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 christand 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.

Monday diversion

2011-11-07T20:26:00.001-05:00

J.S. BACH Toccata & Fugue in D minor BWV 565

Twentieth Sunday after Trinity

2011-11-05T15:33:00.000-04:00

Ephesians 5:15-21
Matthew 22:1-14

"For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." Malachi 3:6

The Gospel today brings up a very ancient doctrine of the Church, and the term for that doctrine is Divine Impassibility: It means that God does not change. In fact, as our own Anglican Article I teaches, he is "without passions." Some modern theologians object to this, and insist that the scriptures present to us an emotional God who makes up his mind by reacting to events. They see metaphorical language as literal, forgetting that God has revealed his word to our minds by use of our own language. Emotion includes motion, that is movement and change. But, God does not change.

The reaction to the king's kind invitation, bidding people to attend the wedding of his son, reminds me of the fifth seal in the Book of Revelation:

”And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.”- Rev. 6:9-11

When the guests who were invited snub him, and refuse his invitation, and then persecute the messengers of his gracious invitation to the death, the king becomes "wroth." His judgment falls on those murderers, and he sends his army to slay them. The word "wroth" is, of course, a form of the word "wrath." In many passages of scripture we read about the wrath of God. What is the wrath of God?

To answer that, we look at the image of God in this parable. The king represents God, and the invitation represents the proclamation of his mercy offered in the Gospel. The invitation is to attend "the marriage supper of the Lamb" (Rev.19:9), the marriage feast of the King's Son. The image in the parable includes the obvious implications of forgiveness of sin (purchased by that Son on the sacrificial altar of the cross, and his resurrection that destroys death), showing that the heart of the king is generous, benevolent and gracious. "God is good."

When the invited people refuse this kindness, and persecute his messengers, they incur his wrath. The king has not changed, the people have. His principles are solid and unmoving. His wrath comes from the same heart as his generosity. Of course, the wrath of God is not exactly like the wrath of this king, for the king is a man who changes due to emotion. The king in today's Gospel appears to be moved, sometimes by anger and sometimes by his own generosity. Unlike God, this king can be surprised, because he does not know all things before they happen. But, he is in the story only to represent God as an imperfect human illustration, a character who is metaphorical in nature. God's wrath is itself a metaphor. What it means is that you stand on one side of the line or the other, either accepting his kind and gracious offer in the Gospel of his Son, or you refuse that offer and side with the world, the flesh and the Devil. Because God never changes, you stand either on the side of "wrath" or on the side of mercy.

Look at the word that the king uses when he must have his "bouncers" kick out an impolite guest: "Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?" This word, "friend", seems rather odd. In fact, it means that this impolite guest, the one who refused the wedding garment (that is, refused the vestment handed out by the king's servants at the door) in a gesture of disrespect, was in some way beloved of the king. That is what it means that he was called "friend" (ἑταῖρος, hetairos). The same word is used later in this same Gospel (According to St. Matthew) when Jesus addresses the traitor Judas in the Garden of Gethsemane.

And forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail, master; and kissed him. And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him.-Matt. 26:50

What could better demonstrate that the Impassibility of God is consistent with the fact that God is love? (I John 4:8, 16) He does not change. Jesus loved Judas, even knowing that the man was a devil, the traitor, for whom it would have been good had he never been born. Jesus was not changed toward Judas, though Judas had renounced him, had abandoned his apostolic office to betray him to the death. "Friend, wherefore art thou come?"

The king casts the impolite and contemptuous guest out of his palace because that man had placed himself beyond the reach of the king's generous and gracious nature. The man did not need to buy some expensive garment, because it was the host of such a feast who provided these garments, outer garments or vestments, at the door. And, in polite society it was expected that a guest would put the garment on over his own clothes.

”The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof.” -Rom. 13:12-14

We are told to "put on Christ." But, first we are instructed to cast off the works of the flesh. Everything is provided for us. We put on Christ by hearing the word of God, remembering that in Hebrew the word for "hear" is the same word as "obey." We put on Christ by staying within his Church. We put on Christ by hearty repentance and true faith. We put on Christ by the sacraments that are generally necessary to salvation. We put on Christ by cooperating with the Holy Spirit who forms within us the virtues, above all charity.

These are gifts of God, provided like the wedding garment given to each guest. We are invited and granted mercy and grace, to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light, to be partakers of the divine nature having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. We are given everything we need so that we become behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. As you are called in Christ, to become saints in Christ, so live in Christ, having been baptized into his death unto sin, and in whom you live unto righteousness.

If you refuse the invitation, or if you come to the feast but refuse the gracious provision of the king, it is your choice to come under wrath, never understanding the heart of one who calls you "friend." Above all, from the cross he has called you "friend." Do not turn from his love, and so place yourself under wrath by your own stubborn willfulness.

Put on the Lord Jesus Christ.