PREDESTINATION AS PAUL DESCRIBED IT

"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren (Romans 8:29  KJV)."

This means that sanctification is all about bringing each of us into the love shared among the Persons of the Trinity. Transforming each of us into a holy person, that is, into a saint, is essential to the love we have from the Father. That also is why no particular specific sin has ever been the will of God.

*           *           *

Lost in translation, lost as early as the translation of Greek into Latin, is the fullness of "And the Word was with God (John 1:1)." The Greek pros ton theon is translated by my brother, David Bentley Hart, as "Present to God," indicating that the Word, the Logos, was toward God, or facing God. We see the first relation of love within the godhead, God the Father and God the Son face to face beholding, and with this love as the first Divine attribute the Holy Spirit effects the work of all creation. God is love, and this is not self-love as we would experience, but the honest love of the Persons who share the same unknowable substance of Divine nature, rejoicing in the truth that the object of love is worthy of infinite love because truth delights in perfection and goodness. The whole of creation is the Father's gift of love to His eternally begotten Son, or as Saint Paul also tells us, "All things were created through him and for him, and he is before all things, and all things hold together in him (Colossians 1:17,18  David Bentley Hart - DBH - translation)."

Keep all of that in mind as we consider what it means that God has marked out a destiny, the real meaning of "predestinated (proorizo)," for each one whom He foreknew. It is no more in definition than choosing a destination before setting out on a journey. From at least the time of Augustine, the very word "predestination" has taken on a meaning that is simply not what the actual Greek New Testament teaches. Taken to the extreme it has come to mean, for many people, that God has deprived his intelligent creatures of freewill, and that every decision of the human heart is really as if programmed in advance; for them the script is written. In milder, yet also mistaken, versions of predestination it may mean only that God's plan for salvation and for the end of history on the Last Day requires that He has willed certain people to commit specific sins. They imagine a God of limited power, able to exercise Providence only by giving himself a "handicap" in the game, namely, by predestinating certain individuals to commit evil deeds. As I have written before,

'But God foresaw, and made use of, the outworking of history. God’s will was to save Israel and preserve them in the time of famine. So, when the brothers of Joseph did what was inevitable, foreseen by the God who knows all things, Providence produced what was good. In no way could their evil acts prevent the will of God; indeed, because He “enacts all things in accord with the counsel of his will (Eph. 1:11),” even the most sinful acts have to result in bringing about the good purpose of Almighty God. It was never the will of God for Judas to betray Christ, nor for the Sanhedrin to falsely convict Him, nor for the Romans to go about their violent and murderous acts with such schadenfreude. But, as a master of Chess makes use of every move by his opponent, God works providentially. In the worst of these theological systems Providence is a misunderstood concept. In these systems his wisdom and power must be limited, for why else would their notion of predestination rule out even the very existence of free will? I do not mean the doctrine that man cannot choose God without his grace, for that is sound in itself (especially when one considers that existence itself is a gift, that is, grace). In the extreme forms of Augustinianism, Thomism, and Calvinism everything has been predetermined by God.

'Now, it was the will of God for the Son to offer Himself willingly for the sins of the whole world. It was the will of God for Jesus to surrender himself as the obedient suffering servant. The inevitable evil of a world hostile to God and to all goodness was very much within the foresight of the Almighty. Carrying out his will, to do good, was not prevented by human evil; indeed, whatever evil men do, God has the almighty power, nonetheless, to turn it to good.'

In the words Acts 4:27, 28 "Both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done (KJV)."

What exactly had God's hand and counsel determined? 

"Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father (John 10:17,18)."

Indeed, inasmuch as "the carnal mind is enmity with God (Romans 8:7)" we can be sure that the crucifixion was the inevitable result of the Incarnation. To offer himself as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, Jesus did not need Judas Iscariot to betray him, nor for Caiaphas and Herod to hand him over to Pontius Pilate, nor for any specific sin that required the Father to deprive those men of freewill, to "predestine" them to become evil on that day as one who writes a program for a computer. In Calvinist circles, much is made of God "hardening Pharoah's heart." If one reads carelessly, it comes across as if God worked directly on the mind of Pharoah in such a way that the man was unable to think rationally, or to choose good over evil. But in the actual account of Exodus what we see is God working mighty signs and wonders, and each time Egypt receives a plague, Pharoah reacts by fortifying the stubbornness that was an obvious flaw in his character. But when the first Passover proved to be too much for him, he relented. Even after all that, he relented again, and went after the people of Israel, and sent his ill-fated army into the Red Sea. Pharoah was such a flawed human being that every word and every sign only brought out the worst in him. What hardened his heart was each plague that first taught him, and then each plague that reminded him, that the God of Moses was the One with unlimited power, not himself as an emperor god, the Pharoah.

No matter what time or place in which the Logos would be incarnate, the inevitable result of God coming directly into the sinful and fallen world as a man had to be enmity. The carnal mind must kill God if only to destroy the light that pierces through the comfort of darkness. It must snuff out the truth that shatters the shelter of lies. 

"Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:7,8)." No specific evil on the part of any individual is necessary for the plan of God to be accomplished. As I said before, when it comes to the subjects of Predestination and of Eschatology, many Christians are in danger of adopting a manner of thinking in which the will of God can be separated from the commandments of God. All God needed to do to fulfill what His hand and counsel had determined was to work the miracle of the Incarnation. The deaths of many persecuted prophets was brought to full measure when the owner of the vineyard sent his own son. As soon as the Blessed Virgin Mary said, "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word (Luke 1:38)," the crucifixion was set in motion (and, of course, with it the resurrection). God had determined to save the world, and I do mean that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit had so determined, for God is One. All it took was the incarnation; that was enough to set it all in motion. Indeed, even as a small child his family had to flee for his life to be spared, no doubt to the Jewish community in Alexandria Egypt. For the enmity against God that is the lot of carnal men is dominated by something more evil and more powerful.

Much has been made over the centuries by those who hate the Jewish people, none of it right or good. Persecution of the Jews has been a black mark against many who have called themselves Christians, some even now. The excuse has been to call them "Christ killers." Of course, that Jesus himself, his mother, and his disciples, all make that label a complete lie, for they were all Jews; and without them we would have no Church and no Faith. But we can even take a close look at the Book of the Acts of the Apostles and discover what transpired in the personal lives of many people who, on that first Good Friday, were shouting "Away with this man. Give us Barabbas!" and "Crucify him! Crucify him!" In the third chapter of that book, we see that Peter and John worked the miracle of healing a crippled man at the gate of the temple. A crowd formed, and for the second time in only a few days, Peter preached a sermon and hauled in a mighty catch. Pay close attention to his words, and you will discover that Peter knew that he was speaking to much the same exact crowd, the very individuals who had, only weeks earlier, demanded the crucifixion and death of Jesus. Was it God's will to punish them, or do we see something altogether different from the Apostle's own words to them?

'"You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with our fathers, telling Abraham, 'And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.' And God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways."...But many of those who had heard the discourse had faith, and the number of men grew to be five thousand. (Acts 3:25,26 and 4:4 DBH).'

So, even those who said "His blood be on us and on our children (Matthew 27:25)" were blessed by God, not cursed. His blood was on them, but as the cleansing flood that washes away sin and guilt. God can always bring good out of any evil men can do; that does not mean the He needs the evil. Why did Jesus call Judas "friend" right at the time in which the betrayal was most obvious: "Friend, wherefore art thou come (Matthew 26:50)?" Was Judas there to be his friend? No. Judas was, nonetheless, the object of Christ's love, which "rejoiceth not in iniquity (I Corinthians 13:6)." To will that any particular individual commit a specific sin is contrary to Divine love; but to bring good from evil is consistent with it.

Actual Predestination

Are you a believer in Christ? God has indeed predestined you, but not by programming you. And salvation is not simply "going to heaven." It is not even limited to being raised from the dead on the Last Day. What you are predestinated to become, that is the intended destination of the journey God has laid out for you, is to become a saint, that is, a holy person (I Corinthians 1:2). In a very real way, Paul is giving us a deeper understanding of salvation, that is, that we are predestined by the Father to be "conformed to the image of his son." To this end He richly gives you every grace in His Son. The crowning virtue above all others is charity, and in order to obtain that virtue of saintliness you must know God for Who He is. And we know that "God is love (I John 4:8,16)." How do know this? 

Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? (John 14:8,9 KJV). 

Far from the caricature of those who preach that "Jesus saves us from God," it is Jesus in the Father, and the Father in Jesus, who loves us and saves us from sin and death as we follow on to know the Lord. You can see the love of the Father by seeing Jesus who "Went about doing good, healing all who were oppressed of the devil (Acts 10:38)." And to appreciate that love you should consider that Saint Paul is saying that the destination chosen for you by God is to be "conformed to the image of his son." God cannot will that you learn to see His commandments as separate from His will, or as alien to it. His love is why He wills for you to become holy, to be made perfect in charity, and even now, in this life, to be more and more the image, that is the very living icon, of Jesus. Even in this life you can, thereby, through His grace, have a foretaste of knowing God in eternity, and ultimately to enter into that same love in which the Divine Persons behold perfection and goodness. "The Logos was present to God." 

 

RITUAL NOTES FOR SHROVE TUESDAY

I searched for this and found it. The following was posted on a blog called Anglo-Catholic Ruminations in 2006, but it is older than that. I remember almost falling off my chair laughing the first time I read this. - Fr. Hart

In certain neighborhoods, the solemn pancake
procession will of necessity pass by a restaurant
whose specialty is pancakes, flapjacks, or crepes.
Extraordinary means are not to be taken to avoid this
situation, unless a detour would add dignity and not
unreasonable length to the route. Traditional
ceremonies are to be observed while passing before
such an establishment.

Following the Shrove Tuesday Solemn High Choral Sung
Mass, the solemn procession forms at the head of the
aisle, and the sacred ministers are supplied with
their birettas. The celebrant also receives a large
platter of steaming-hot buttermilk pancakes; the
deacon and subdeacon take up large pitchers of maple
syrup. Acolytes with large forks and spatulas attend
the sacred ministers. Following the deacon's versicle
and the people's response, the thurifer leads the
procession through the nave and narthex and out to the
street.

The choir accompany the procession with appropriate
antiphons, responsories, and plainsong hymns, such as
the Corpus Christi introit, Cibavit eos: "He fed them
also with the finest wheat flour, and with honey from
the rock."

The thurifer with his censer will lead the solemn
outdoor procession. Two bacon strips are draped over
the thurible. When the restaurant is sighted by the
verger, he shall signal to the acolyte, who shall ring
the bell thrice. The procession shall continue, but
the serving of pancakes shall cease until the
restaurant has been passed by. On hearing the bell,
the clergy and lay ministers in procession shall turn
their heads so as to face the establishment directly
whilst they continue forward. Upon a single stroke of
the bell, all shall stop and turn to face the
restaurant. The sacred ministers shall remove their
birettas, taking care not to drop the syrup pitcher as
they do so. The sacred ministers shall then
double-genuflect, first bringing the right knee to the
ground and then the left knee to join the right one on
the ground. The celebrant shall then incense the
restaurant with three double swings. All others shall
bow low. The celebrant shall chant the collect for
Shrove Tuesday. This completed, all shall rise, and
the celebrant shall cover with the biretta and resume
the pitcher. A single stroke of the bell shall signal
the resumption of the procession, all resuming
birettas.

After the station at the restaurant, the procession
turns left, encircling the Unitarian-Universalist
Church next door, as a gesture of hospitality and
ecumenism. Traditionally, the UU minister joins the
procession dressed in a simple cassock-alb and bearing
a large bowl of flower petals gathered by UU
parishioners; these are added to the pancake plates as
a lovely garnish and a reminder of the oneness of
creation with Creator. (A secondary but salutary
effect of the procession in the early years was the
reconciliation of the neighboring Episcopal and UU
churches following the previous year's Trinity Sunday
outdoor solemn procession, which had encircled the UU
church three times to the increasing outrage of the UU
minister and congregation.)

The procession moves south from the UU church down
past the rectory, where a station is made and the
antiphon Sacerdotes Domini chanted.

Finally, having given up the pancake-serving utensils,
the sacred ministers, vergers, acolytes, and servers
proceed to the church and all enter for the Solemn Te
Deum and Benediction. After Solemn Benediction of the
Blessed Sacrament, pancakes are served in the church hall.

THE CORINTHIAN PROBLEM

In light of the Epistle reading appointed for Quinquagesima (I Corinthians chapter 13), I am posting an article of mine that was originally published in December, 2009 in Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. Let us look at that famous "Love chapter" in context.

The Long Reach of an Infamous First-Century Church

by Robert Hart

The disarray, foolishness, and sin that St. Paul addressed when writing his first extant epistle to the Church in Corinth have worked to our benefit, for they gave rise to teaching in the Scriptures that has been needed throughout the subsequent history of the Church, and that we need today. As the selling of Joseph into Egypt was used by God to save Israel from famine, so can anything be used by God for good. This is one aspect of Providence. Thus, we see how the sins and foolishness of the Church in Corinth were used by God through Paul to give us salutary words of Holy Scripture.

It takes effort to understand this epistle. The difficulty we have in seeing what St. Paul was addressing comes from the familiarity we have, on the one hand, with some of the external issues affected by the Corinthian foolishness, and, on the other, with their supernatural and mystical gifts, the manifestation of which was equally affected by their faults. This is puzzling: How can what is good and holy be so sinfully practiced?

“Paul,” begins the apostle,

called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ; That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge; Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you: So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

This apparently upbeat and positive opening does not seem to fit everything that follows.

The essential problem in Corinth is, for many, difficult to discern, even by intense reading of the epistle, for one major reason. We have a bias that blinds us to the reality that the same people who “come behind in no gift” (which means equally that they possess every grace) of the Holy Spirit can be, at the same time, “carnal, babes in Christ.” The same people who have gifts to work miracles and to prophesy, can, at the same time, be guilty of creating and perpetuating sinful divisions within the Body of Christ. The same people who truly discern spirits, and are able to test and know which spirits are not of God, can at the same time be proud to have a notorious fornicator among them, allowing him to receive the Communion of Christ’s Body and Blood along with all the rest.

The alarming fact we must glean from this epistle is that neither mystical and supernatural gifts nor orthodox doctrine were enough to keep the Corinthian Christians from being carnal, childish, divisive, and utterly selfish. And, indeed, selfishness is the most apparent symptom of their carnality, addressed over and over again in several places. But, by Providence, it was that very selfishness that gave the occasion for St. Paul to write his most famous passage, the chapter on charity (chapter 13).

Gifts & Ministers of Gifts

We must define the term charisma. The word can be translated as “gifts” or “graces.” It encompasses more than simply the “spectacular” gifts (as some term them), but includes all of the gifts of the Holy Spirit mentioned in Scripture, including the sacraments themselves. The word charismata (the plural form) includes the “institutional gifts” later explained in the pastoral epistles of Paul to Titus and Timothy, as truth unfolded and as doctrine was developed within the apostolic age.

---

Those pastoral epistles, written years later, would reveal a pattern consistent with apostolic succession, as Paul wrote of laying his hands on Timothy, and as he directed both Timothy and Titus concerning standards for the men they would, in turn, ordain. At the time of the writing of his First Epistle to the Corinthians, that order is not yet apparent, but the basic doctrine of gifts and callings is already evident as a foundation.

It is necessary also to consider that within that larger grouping of gifts are all of the things called gifts by St. Paul in his epistles, along with scenes described by St. Luke in the Book of Acts. The words of Christ himself teach us that no gift, no matter how impressive it may appear to be, is an indication that the minister of that gift is holy.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matt. 7:21–23)

The words of the old Anglican Article XXVI apply:

Of the unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacraments. Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometime the evil have chief authority in the ministration of the word and sacraments; yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ’s, and do minister by His commission and authority, we may use their ministry both in hearing the word of God and in the receiving of the sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ’s ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God’s gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the sacraments ministered unto them, which be effectual because of Christ’s institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.

This was always understood within the Church, and rejection of this teaching was an element essential to the heresy of the Donatists. (More than twenty years ago, when I was serving as a church organist, a curate who was very popular in that congregation was arrested, and eventually convicted, of notorious crimes involving young boys. Several people there were concerned about the baptism of their children, wanting to know if it had been valid; others, if they had really received Communion from his hand over the years. To an informed mind, aware of the teaching of the Church, those questions would not have arisen.)

No Clue to Character

That fact is relevant to solving the apparent mystery: The apparently less spectacular gifts of the charismata, such as the regular administration of Holy Communion, do not indicate that the minister is truly a holy and godly man. But the same is true of the spectacular and overtly supernatural gifts. Gifts of the Holy Spirit, whether “spectacular” or “institutional,” whether astounding or seemingly normal, say nothing about the minister’s character.

Eventually, the false prophet might teach error, or perhaps he may never teach error. He may be able to say all of those things our Lord has predicted, and more. He may be among those who say, quite truly, “Have we not prophesied in thy name?” But in the end, this will not save him. The sheep’s clothing will have come off, exposing the wolf beneath.

Although the Corinthians were not accused of being wolves, that is, false prophets, they were corrected sternly for being carnal, selfish, and chaotic. Nonetheless, St. Paul told them that they came behind in no gift, and that each of them was called to sainthood. This is not self-contradictory at all. It demonstrates two things: (1) God’s work does not depend on man’s worthiness, and (2) it is right, as well as the practice of hope, to place before the eyes of carnal people their calling to become holy.

Those who actually have allowed various charismatic expressions into the context of liturgy have long treated chapter 14 as a kind of Robert’s Rules of Order regarding how and when to exercise these gifts, while others are sure that Paul was contemptuous of the very gifts he himself had identified as coming from the Holy Spirit (an impossibility). But the overall text of the epistle shows that his words about the gifts of the Holy Spirit were not centered on the gifts themselves, but rather on the same problem he was addressing from the very first chapter.

Partisan Divisions

I will glean from places in this epistle that seem to repeat a very noticeable refrain.

Although Paul places before the church in Corinth, at the start of his letter, his high estimation of their gifts, their knowledge and understanding, and their faith, stating his confidence that God will hold them by his grace and sanctify them according to the common vocation of all Christians (“called saints”), he quickly changes his tone. He admonishes them, chastises and rebukes them, for being divided. Somehow, they had developed into parties, and had claimed to be followers of various apostles.

Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

Interestingly, those who said, “I am of Christ” are rebuked with the others. Their pretense to moral and spiritual superiority did not fool the apostle: They, too, were just as partisan, just as carnal, and perhaps a little worse, as they might have thanked God that they were not as other men are.

Learned & Carnal

Despite this outward display of chaos and division, these same people, the Christians in Corinth, came behind in no gift. The “foolish Corinthians” were enriched by God in all utterance and all knowledge. They were both orthodox and learned. Indeed, the problem in Corinth was not scriptural illiteracy, theological ignorance, or false doctrine. They were very knowledgeable.

Indeed, look at chapter 8:

Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but charity edifies.

Yes, they knew the right doctrine about idols. Their knowledge and their orthodoxy were not questioned by the apostle. However, their lack of charity was rebuked in the clearest of terms. Why, for such learned people, should it have been necessary to write these words in the same chapter?

But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak. . . . And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

How, in their knowledge so enriched, with their utterances so gifted, did they miss this obvious point? How could they have been so blind to the simple rule of putting the needs of their brothers and sisters ahead of their own desires? They were orthodox. They were learned. They were gifted. They were also carnal.

Selfish & Self-Indulgent

Look, too, at how they approached the Supper of the Lord, from the eleventh chapter:

When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before others his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? Have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

The evidence from this text is that the Agape feast was connected somehow to the Eucharist in this very early period, perhaps even coming before in imitation of the Last Supper. How correctly or not we may be able to sort out the facts of history, it is clear that even as they approached the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, they were selfish. Their actions indicated that even in this they were carnal.

It is this same theme, that of selfishness, that truly dominates the most “Charismatic” portions of chapters 12–14. The Corinthians’ treatment of the Lord’s Supper, each one looking after himself and no one else, came from the same selfishness we see here, as they treat various gifts of the Holy Spirit in a completely self-indulgent manner, with no regard for each other’s needs. In Chapter 12, Paul has mentioned various gifts known to operate among them, all of which he affirms.

Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

In this Trinitarian passage he identifies the working of the Spirit, of the Lord and of God. He never even hints that any of these manifestations might have come from any lower source.

But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Rather, he goes on to explain to them that these gifts have been given so that each member of the Body of Christ may help others in the same Body. The text is not about tongues, or prophecy or miracles. It is about the Body of Christ, and the care each member should have for all the rest, and that the rest should have for even one member who suffers. He mentions the gifts as another way of saying to them the same thing he has been saying all along. He speaks to them about the unity that ought to overcome partisanship, and the care for others that, as in the eighth chapter, should be placed ahead of their own desires, even their own perceived needs.

Edification & Charity

This is why he writes about tongues and prophecy in the fourteenth chapter.

Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

Already, back in chapter 12, he has identified both tongues and prophecy as coming from “the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.” Here, however, he appears to exalt one of these above the other. But it is not that the gift of prophecy is exalted above that of tongues; it is that serving the needs of others is placed above serving one’s own needs. He is teaching them not to be selfish anymore, and simply using this example as yet another way to say it.

The beautiful chapter 13, about charity, comes between these chapters as part of the same long text extending back deeper into this letter. That beautiful chapter was a rebuke, meant not to inspire but to correct. It was written not to move with poetic sublimity, but to admonish with prophetic indignation. It was a fire lit to melt their frozen, unloving, selfish hearts. Those hearts had taken good and holy things, the very gifts of God, and used them for selfish ends.

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up; Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth.

These words were not addressed to holy men and women crowned with the virtues, but to carnal, selfish, partisan, squabbling babes. They teach what should have been clear and obvious, especially to those who come behind in no gift, those who are in everything enriched by the Lord, in all utterance, and in all knowledge.

The Corinthian problem was simple: They possessed all things richly, but had not charity. When I consider this, I must confess that Christ came to save Corinthians, of whom I am chief.

Rumor Control

After retiring from the position of Rector, I have heard a few things about myself that simply are not true.

First of all, someone said that he heard that my license had been revoked. That is not true. I remain a priest in Good Standing in the Diocese of the South of the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC) under Archbishop Haverland. For geographical reasons I expect to change my canonical residency, and even now am fully approved to serve as a priest, mostly to fill in as needed or invited. 

Someone else said I was "fired." No, I retired after having taken part in the formation and training of my successor for about seven years. And, for the record, one cannot have a successor unless one has succeeded; and by the grace of God, I was able to hand on a healthy church that should endure. Like many Continuing Anglican parishes, it was full mostly of senior citizens when I took the helm there in 2009. I did so many funerals and memorial services over the years that we filled the Memorial Garden. Nonetheless, despite many deaths and relocations, the congregation was a good size at the time of my retirement, and it continues to grow.  "I am a man under authority," even though I do not agree with the management model by which a Rector, upon retirement, is expected to go away. I see nothing about such a mindset in the Bible nor in the Catholic Tradition. Being away from those people causes me sorrow of heart.

I will address a few details. I once said that I had, at times, given Saint Benedict's Anglican Church "Mouth to mouth resuscitation." After that got spun through the rumor mill it came back to me from someone misquoting me as having said that I put the church on "life support." No, that is not what I said. Mouth to mouth resuscitation was a metaphor for something active; putting the church on life support would be a metaphor for something passive. I was very busy during my tenure. The same person said, "Fr. Hart did nothing to grow the church." If that were true, the parish would have closed down years ago. It was never the largest Continuing church, but its membership was always larger than most. We welcomed many new members in over the years, and I personally met with each of them as part of the process. In fact, because of so many deaths and relocations, upon my retirement only three members of the congregation had been there before I was in charge.  But for those three, every member came in while I was the Rector. In a sense, by the grace of God, I built that congregation. 

I freely forgive the people who have twisted my words and presented falsehoods as facts, some perhaps because they believe what someone told them; I have put up with a lot on the internet.

They know who they are. I prefer the idea of reconciliation (Matt. 18:21, 22, Gen. 33:3,4) to unilateral forgiveness (Mark 11:25), because it is always the revealed will of God for His Church. My hand is held out. They still have my love. 

When I first went to Saint Benedict's I went to a parish that had gone through bitter division and that had often treated vestry meetings as occasions for strife. After a brief period of time under my rectorship, no trace of those things remained, and even vestry meetings were usually fun, certainly always friendly. I left the parish in very good spiritual health; better than what I had found. If you live in that area, and are looking for a good church, I recommend it wholeheartedly.

WHITE FOR SAINT PAUL?

Conversion of Saint Paul
Jan. 25th


At first it seems wrong. Saint Paul is the saint of today’s feast, and yet white is the color of the day. He was a martyr, so, why are we not given red for this day? If we are humble enough to be taught by its wisdom, we see that the Church teaches profound things even in the smallest details of liturgy, such as the choice of colors. This is not the Feast of Saint Paul (for whom we should wear red), but a feast centered on the appearance of Christ to Saul as he was approaching Damascus: “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest” This day is a celebration of our Lord. Saint Paul said that he was a witness of Christ’s resurrection “as one born out of due time.” So, this Easter Feast of Christ’s post resurrection appearance is out of due time, in Epiphany, a sort of Easter out of season for one born out of due time. His eyewitness account came later than those of the others.

Indeed, it is the last of the Easter appearances. These words of Saint Paul, from his First Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 15, explain why:

“1: Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2: By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3: For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4: And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7: After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8: And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9: For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.”

Indeed, that fourth fact that he preached was the appearance of the Risen Christ to eyewitnesses (1. Christ died for our sins, fulfilling the scriptures of the prophets, 2. He was buried 3. He rose the third day, fulfilling the scriptures of the prophets and 4. appeared to witnesses). White is the color of the day, because it is about the Risen Christ and His final Easter manifestation, the day that the final eyewitness to His resurrection saw Him.

The rest was the path to what red symbolizes, Saint Paul’s death as a witness.

FAITH AND SCHOLARSHIP

I wrote this in 2020, and believe I should again bring it to the attention of my readers. So, follow this link to an essay useful to everyone, but especially men seeking holy orders.  

EASTER OUT OF SEASON JANUARY 25

As we approach the 25th of January, I want to repost this about the Conversion of Saint Paul. Click (or tap) the icon above to be taken to the post.