I was planning this week on a continuing a series of teachings regarding the major events of the Church year, as this past couple of weeks we celebrated both the Feast of the Ascension, as well as coming up this Sunday the Feast of Pentecost. I may combine those later in an attempt to kill two proverbial birds with one stone, but today I was wanting to share something that really has been objectified in my thinking recently, as it relates to a number of things.
As many reading this are aware, I am a graduate Theology student at Franciscan University of Steubenville, and as I am writing this I am in the process of finishing up a couple of courses, one of which is called Theology of the Church, taught by a very brilliant professor, Dr. Regis Martin. One of the texts used in this course was a little book authored by the late Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthazar entitled Raising the Bastions, and the contention von Balthazar raises in the text is this idea that the Church has been building up many of its own walls of division, and in many aspects, the walls need to be "razed." The purpose of doing this is to allow for the Church to fulfill its primary mandate, which is to bring Christ to the world in order to offer salvation. Although the material I present here was not specifically dealt with in the von Balthazar text, it was addressed in class in a lecture Dr. Martin gave us talking about "Dangerous Dissociations." As if it were a divine mission of fate bringing things together, at the same time I am taking these courses I am also finishing up a book of my own dealing with Christian history, in particular small movements that have caught my interest over the years (for those who have been following my articles for a while, it is part of my "Highways and Hedges" project I talked about). One of the movements I have examined in that project is the German Seventh-Day Baptists, which interesting enough evolved out of the German Dunkards (of which my own family has deep roots), in particular an 18th-century religious community in Pennsylvania called the Ephrata Cloister. In researching the information for that particular part of the project, one of the books I read was Jeff Bach's Voices of the Turtledoves, which is one of the best and most comprehensive volumes specifically dealing with the Ephrata Cloister and the movement it spawned. All of this together constitutes the inspiration I have now for writing this. Now, let us begin.
Over the centuries of the Church's growth and development, the human aspect of those of us who are her members is to gravitate toward two extremes. On one hand there is what is called juridicalism, meaning the unbending devotion to legalistic interpretation of the Church's teaching in such a way that in many aspects this emphasis becomes almost idolatrous in that it practically deifies the "rule of law" over the mercy and grace Christ promised to us. A recent example of this is something I addressed a few months back concerning Fundamentalist megachurch pastor John MacArthur and his "Strange Fire" conference. People like MacArthur do have their place in the Body of Christ, and indeed they have made some good contributions to it. However, the problem comes when the legalist like MacArthur reduces God to a one-dimensional abstraction, and therefore faith becomes highly codified and intellectualized. The danger in this is that it creates a God who is easily provoked to wrath, but has no concern for the maladies of the human condition and its weaknesses. This "God" of the juridicalist is one I also served for some time, and the result was that I was faithful in my religious practice, but God never became real to me until much later. Lest you think it is just cessationist Fundamentalists though who get caught up in this, I have also seen it to a lesser degree even among some more conservative Pentecostal folks, as well as among some Roman sedevacantist traditionalists and Orthodox Christians. Juridicalism is a form of idolatry, in other words, and it seriously limits the spiritual development of those who subscribe to such a system. However there is also a danger in the other extreme, and we'll talk about that now.
Mysticism is the polar opposite of juridicalism in that it stresses the primacy of human experience over religious dogma in many cases. The problem with mysticism, however, is that it often creates a blurred boundary between the truly Christian and the esoteric. In my reading of Bach's aforementioned text, I noted that he devoted a good section of his book to the fact that Ephrata often stressed mysticism in its own spirituality, leading to some odd extremes. This, however, is a danger that many who hold to what is called Radical Pietism (the movement Ephrata grew out of) fall into - even today, you see it being propagated by many Emerging Church writers such as Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, and Richard Foster, and what it does is it diminishes Jesus by making Him too human. An important point must be made here in that although Jesus assumed human nature, He didn't absorb it. Church doctrine has always affirmed that Jesus was 100% God and 100% human, and these were inseparable in Him. The problem with some of a more mystical mindset is that they diminished Jesus to just human (an ancient heresy which seems to be resurrecting itself today) although verbally they may affirm orthodox teaching - saying with your lips though does not always mean that you believe with your heart. Hence, the problem. As I was reading Bach's account of this happening on some level at Ephrata, it was important for me to trace where this stuff came from. Conrad Biessel, the founder and leader of the Ephrata Cloister, was a highly intelligent and well-read individual who absorbed the earlier teachings of Pietist mystic Jakob Boehm (1575-1624) like a sponge. Boehm was a bit of an enigmatic figure in that he was both a radical Pietist, but also a mystic who incorporated what he called "good magic" into his writings, drawing much from astrology, alchemy, and the Qabala, all of which many figures of the time (Sir Isaac Newton, a contemporary of Boehm's, was one such individual). Biessel took this a further step by calling this "good magic" a form of "faith magic," as he truly believed it was the power of God's working through Christ and faith in the believer's life (Jeff Bach, Voices of the Turtledoves {University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2002} p. 173). Boehm, in turn, was inspired by an Italian philosopher, Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola (1463-1494), who taught, based on Qabalistic influences, a form of universalism with an astrological basis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Pico_della_Mirandola). Reading some of this material got me a bit concerned, because many of the things mentioned - astrology, alchemy - have been thoroughly forbidden as occultic practices by the Church and by Scripture. However, the danger that the mystic risks is the blurriness that experiential religious practice can often bring if it is not grounded in proper teaching. However, also as I was reading Bach's text about this, something occurred to me too - upon reading what Biessel defined as "faith magic," it sounds vaguely familiar in a positive way - the way he defined it in his writings was an obedient surrender to the will of God, allowing him to work in the soul in such a way that if one transcends one's own flesh and reaches God, then "godly results" could be achieved. To me, this sounds more like an Acts 2 experience and has a sort of resonance with Pentecostal fire-baptism. Therefore, the question I have is this - could both Biessel and Boehm have called this experience "magic" because they didn't have a better word for it at the time? After all, the idea here was "magic" as a power of God to work beyond human power, as accessible by faith (Bach, 174). The issue still is raised though about drawing inspiration from astrology and alchemy, and this is where I believe the real issue is raised.
Both juridical faithfulness to Church teaching and mysticism have their place in the Christian experience, but an emphasis on either/or can risk one losing one's Christianity. Some Protestant Evangelicals view mysticism in a negative light, due to its overly experiential emphasis and potential for heresy and abuse, but in reality the mystical is also a part of Christian spirituality whether we want it to be or not. Modern-day forms of mystical spirituality are, I believe, embodied in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, and for the most part these traditions have enriched Christian spirituality. Also, in the past, great saints of the Church - notably St. Hildegarde of Bingen in the West and the yurodivi ("Fools for Christ") in the East - have contributed some great things to the Body of Christ. And, as Christians, our faith is not just an intellectual exercise, but is also experiential in that we live out our faith, so mystical experience does have its place. However, it can also be abused as well - the recent excesses we have seen in such movements as the Emerging Church phenomenon are prime example - and therefore the mystical needs to be tempered with the juridical, but not supplanted by it. Vibrant spirituality is to be encouraged, but at the same time any type of spiritual experience is also to be within the boundaries of Christian orthodoxy too. Of course, that doesn't mean that necessarily every spiritual practice that affirms orthodoxy may be exactly safe, as risks are involved - one reason I have always maintained that most serpent-handlers from my native Appalachia are Christians, for instance, is that they also believe and uphold the central truths affirmed by Church teaching and Holy Scriptures. Despite one's acceptance or rejection of the practice of serpent-handling, the fact remains that there is no real precedence for rejecting them as non-Christian. On the other hand, some popular speakers in certain Christian circles would be rejected as heretical because their mysticism has caused them to compromise orthodoxy - Rob Bell and Brian McLaren, as well as certain theological faculty at some professed Christian universities, come to mind here. That being said, Pentecostalism as a whole is a legitimate movement of God's Holy Spirit, and although at times admittedly excesses do happen (there is a risk of this in any mystical expression of Christianity though) the majority of Pentecostals and Charismatics would be definitely orthodox and would also maintain there must be a balance between doctrine and experience, and therefore that is a good quality. On the other hand, the overly-juridical people like MacArthur have also diminished Christianity by more or less reducing it to just an abstract, codified, sterile, and quasi-Gnostic system in which God cannot possibly work in his creation because - God forbid! - creation is corrupted. However, is it really creation that is corrupted and needs to be rejected, or is it rather the fact that mankind in his propensity to sin has corrupted what God created? That indeed is something to think about.
In conclusion, I am here to say that maybe some who have reservations about the word "mystic" need to understand it better. Mysticism has been a part of the Christian tradition since its earliest days, and it has a valid place in Christian spirituality. A lot of times the objections come from those who are uneasy with the terminology due to excesses they see and rightfully condemn. My challenge to these individuals is not to judge the whole thing by excesses, but rather see it in its historical context. I mean, after all, you would not throw out the skin on your body just because you get a couple of skin tags or other blemishes would you? My guess regarding your answer to that is probably that it would be "no," because the answer to your problem is not discarding your skin, but eradicating the blemishes on your skin. Think of the mystical tradition in Christianity the same way - it is skin, and serves a purpose, but just like your skin, it is subject to blemishes. Treat the blemishes without destroying a vital organ. So, "study to show yourselves approved," and learn what the rightful place of the mystical tradition in the Church is before judging it too harshly as well. In doing so, I guarantee it will give you a deeper appreciation of your faith and may enrich it. God bless you all until next visit.
Friday, June 6, 2014
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Synod 2014 - the Report
Last year I neglected to report on our first Diocesan Synod, only saving it for a footnote for my end-of-year post. This year however, I wanted to give it a showcase of its own, as it was a great synod and there was a lot to talk about this year. So, without further delay, let me jump right into it.
The Diocese of the South, Anglican Catholic Church, held its annual Synod again at St. Stephen Pro-Cathedral in Athens, GA, from April 30 to May 2. Barb and I were both voting lay delegates this year too, and we attended all the meetings as well as the liturgies and other events hosted by the good people at our Cathedral parish. Although the turnout was somewhat less this year, it was good to see a lot of old friends from last year, make some new ones, and even had a reunion with a former professor, Patrick Malone, who is now pursuing Holy Orders with our church! I will have to relate Dr. Malone's (or soon to be Father Malone, as he is currently wrapping up his theological studies at Nashotah House) story later, as I am a little vague on the details, but it was so good to see him after all these years. Dr. Malone was part of the music faculty at what is now Baptist College of Florida (then it was called Florida Baptist Theological College, formerly Baptist Bible Institute...it gets really tough keeping up on names of that place!) and Barb originally sang in the choir he directed all those years ago. I know a few of our old classmates from the BBI days would probably be in shock over this one, but you know something, I believe Dr. Malone is going to make a fine priest, and he is a blessing to have now as part of our Diocese.
The Diocese of the South, Anglican Catholic Church, held its annual Synod again at St. Stephen Pro-Cathedral in Athens, GA, from April 30 to May 2. Barb and I were both voting lay delegates this year too, and we attended all the meetings as well as the liturgies and other events hosted by the good people at our Cathedral parish. Although the turnout was somewhat less this year, it was good to see a lot of old friends from last year, make some new ones, and even had a reunion with a former professor, Patrick Malone, who is now pursuing Holy Orders with our church! I will have to relate Dr. Malone's (or soon to be Father Malone, as he is currently wrapping up his theological studies at Nashotah House) story later, as I am a little vague on the details, but it was so good to see him after all these years. Dr. Malone was part of the music faculty at what is now Baptist College of Florida (then it was called Florida Baptist Theological College, formerly Baptist Bible Institute...it gets really tough keeping up on names of that place!) and Barb originally sang in the choir he directed all those years ago. I know a few of our old classmates from the BBI days would probably be in shock over this one, but you know something, I believe Dr. Malone is going to make a fine priest, and he is a blessing to have now as part of our Diocese.
Barb and I with Patrick Malone, former music professor from our Graceville days and soon-to-be Anglican Franciscan priest.
I want to now give a brief summary of the information received at the Synod, as referenced by this package of reports I have in front of me. As of 2013, our total Diocesan parish membership is 1068, which reflects a slight increase in members (of which our own parish, St. Mary in Winter Haven, also reflects). Fr. Nick Athanaelos, our Diocesan secretary who also serves as rector of St. Stephen Cathedral, noted in his report that baptisms and marriages were up overall, while burials were down (St Mary's had both a wedding and a funeral last year). Numbers for all services also increased but not substantially for attendance for Mass, Morning Prayer, and Evening Prayer services. However, there was a bit of weakness noted in the area of Christian Education, and to be honest, it is because many parishes in the diocese are rather small and many more (including ours) limit their activities to one weekly service - that is something I feel needs to definitely change in the future, and I want to do my part to see that happen. Fr. Nick seems to concur with this assessment too, as in his concluding remarks on the report he stated this - "Commitment alone will not cause substantial growth. We must explore new initiatives in our efforts to evangelize. The ACC is sometimes known as 'the best-kept secret.' May God give us the grace and wisdom to know how best to release this 'secret' to bless us with many souls." Well said, Fr. Nick, and I now want to give some commentary on that briefly myself.
The average ACC parish, by looking at the statistics I have in hand here, has maybe about 20 regular attending parishioners. Many of our churches are tiny, and we have a lot of competition out there. The feel-good "Gospel" of the megachurches, the postmodernist Emerging Church movement, and even new moderately conservative schisms from the Episcopal Church such as ACNA present a big challenge to us. These particular groups have a sincerity in supposedly "reaching" the youth and others, but in doing so they often compromise important aspects of faith that people need. We as traditional Anglo-Catholics need to be the witness these people can see. I am not going to divulge it in this writing, as it is not the forum, but there are ideas I have which integrate things such as my six-fold ecclesiology into the Anglo-Catholic outreach and evangelism mandates, and at some point I am going to write up something on those things to share. However, Barb and I felt challenged by all of this, as our own area here that the parish serves has a myriad of possibilities. Again, I will save the details of that for another discussion, but the bottom line is that Fr. Nick is spot-on - we do need to explore new initiatives in our efforts to evangelize that are consistent with the historic teaching and witness of the Holy Catholic Church in her Anglican expression, which is what we are. And, I want to say that I am totally on-board personally with all this, and will offer myself to both our local parish and our diocese as I am able to do so.
(from l to r) Nancy Barrett, assistant to Archbishop Haverland; Fr. Nick Athanaelos, Diocesan secretary; and Archbishop Mark Haverland conducting Synod business on May 1st.
The other big subject of discussion of this Synod is one we had been reading about in our paper, The Trinitarian, for a couple of months now. There was included in our registration packets a series of proposed constitutional amendments that would in effect set the stage for establishing a third ACC Province on the continent of Africa, and that is great news. The exact timing for when the new Province will materialize is still being determined, but the Archbishop in his wisdom felt it best to begin to make preparations for it now, and I agree. At present the ACC has two Provinces - the Original Province, which is based here in the US and covers most of the planet, and the Second Province, which encompasses the Indian Subcontinent. The formation of an African Province is actually a very good move on the ACC's part, as in recent decades Africa has actually become a more Christian continent than America and Europe are presently. Christian denominations of all traditions are on the rise in Africa - the Pentecostals have had explosive growth, and now both the Greek Orthodox and the Coptic Church have major outreaches to many nations on the African continent as well. And, the ACC in Africa has followed suit as well, so they definitely have the numbers and presence to be considered as a Third Province. When that day happens - we will know a little more about that at Provincial Synod in Richmond next year - it will be a historical occasion for the ACC, and I would love to be part of it. Things are happening in Africa, and the future of the Church until Christ's coming will experience its greatest moments in Africa as well, I truly believe.
Lay and clergy delegates schmoozing between sessions in Lewis Hall (the gentleman standing at the left is Brother Nicholas Lawrence {Chris Davis} who is the superior of the Order of Anglican Franciscans of the Divine Compassion - he is a gem of a human being too. Behind him with the dark hair and tie is Richard Tarsitano, whose father Fr. Louis Tarsitano was a theological master for traditional Anglicanism)
On a more personal note, at the House of Laity meeting, I found myself elected as Deputy Speaker of the House, thanks in part to Barb nominating me! That is actually a neat thing though, and I hope I can serve the Diocese well. I may have been ordered to be in that position by God himself for some purpose, as the ACC is our church now and I love it and want to do what I can to be more involved, and maybe God used Barb to give me the kick in the butt I needed to launch out.
We also had some beautiful worship services, including a sung High Mass on Thursday morning and a beautiful St. Francis Litany led by Brother Nicholas Lawrence and his order that evening just prior to the banquet. Hearing that great organ playing in St. Stephen's was an experience too - what a magnificent instrument it is!
Synod was, by some standards, a little boring - we are a close-knit group in the Diocese, and everyone gets along great; of course, they are wonderful people and I count it a privelege to be part of them now. I am looking forward to next year too, as Synod is fast becoming a yearly tradition for us, and may it continue to be so for a long time. Blessings to all, especially our ACC family.
Monday, May 12, 2014
Dealing with Abuse and Snubbery From a Spiritual Perspective
Today I want to bring some encouragement to some of you who may face much adversity. I am not going to claim to know everyone’s individual situation, because in reality there is no way I can do that anyway, but hopefully by sharing with you some of my experience you may be encouraged to know you are not alone, as some of us have faced trials as well and there is some level of empathy that I can relate to what the situation is.
Yesterday evening, I was having an interesting discussion with a lady named Tammy on a discussion board. I am not sure if Tammy was her real name, as I honestly don’t have available to me the conversation here to recall it, but we’ll use the name anyway. Tammy went to a church where there was a lot of bad activity going on in small-group settings that bordered on the abusive, and although her pastor was not at fault, his silence encouraged this behavior among his parishioners. To summarize her experience without going into a lot of detail, Tammy suffered a bad experience from this incident that almost caused her to lose her faith, although thankfully it didn’t. As she was telling her story last night, I reached out to her to encourage her, and it gave me inspiration to talk about this type of thing more specifically as I have gone through this to a degree, and also there are others who really could use the encouragement.
Rejection often takes on many forms – abuse, neglect, snobbery, and outright hostility. I have some experience in several of these areas, and today I want to relate some of that and then share with you how I have dealt with it. The struggles are often hard – being attacked, ignored, and rejected can take its toll on a person, and especially when it is coming from a religious context, it can be particularly devastating. Writing an article like this is a bit of a challenge, but I feel it is needed at this time because there are many people struggling, and they are trying to salvage parts of their life that have been so casually desecrated by others who honestly should not be in leadership of churches or anything else. Granted, there are also elements of people who are just “attention hogs,” who want to be the center of attention and will often easily get offended when they are not responded to in the way they desire people to respond to them – I am not talking about those people. On the contrary, often some of those who inflict the abuse or other bad behavior on others are sometimes “attention hogs” themselves with their own issues of insecurity, etc. In most cases though, it is a classic power struggle situation in which the person in authority has more authority designated to them than they can handle, and as a result they often wreak chaos on those who trust them. These ill-gained people are often pastors, professors, department managers in companies (large corporations are notorious for this) and even civil servants. Confronting such people is often not an easy task, as they have well-developed defense mechanisms which provide answers to every challenge they are confronted with, and often they develop this calloused persona to escape any questioning of their own motives. However, their callousness claims casualties, and Tammy is one such casualty of the callousness of immature pastoral leadership and lay leaders of a church who often get off on spiritual tangents.
The problem with the type of issues Tammy has had to face is that ignorant people are often the perpetrators of this type of duress on people like Tammy. Ignorant people who, in essence, don’t have a clue about the lives of those they adversely affect, nor do they care to know. In some cases, that is probably for the best, as our life experience is often too valuable to cast before spiritual swine like them anyway. However, it devalues the person who is being affected when someone is that ignorant and callous as to afflict that sort of abuse or snobbery on them, and at this point is where we want to pick up by applying some philosophical and Biblical support, interspersed with my own experiences in these areas, to combat such behavior.
The fortunate thing about the timing of this issue is that I am actually taking a graduate-level Philosophy of the Human Person course at present, and much I have learned about the value of the human person can be attributed to this course, as well as its very capable professor, Dr. John Crosby. In his book, The Selfhood of the Human Person (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1996) which also serves as our main class text, Dr. Crosby begins by talking about four "statements," as he calls them, about personal selfhood that provide a fundamental foundation for the rest of the thesis of the book, and those are as follows:
1. Persons are ends in themselves and not mere instrumental means - What Dr. Crosby means by this is that persons exist for their own sakes, and not as objects to be used by others. To reduce a person to a mere commodity to be used at will is degrading at a fundamental level, and thus does violence to the individuality God created us with (Crosby, p. 14)
2. Persons are wholes of their own and never mere parts - Essentially, this means that when a person contributes to a community, he or she does so by free will and still retain their integrity as whole persons.
3. Persons are incommunicably their own and never mere specimens - This is one of the ultimate counters to racism or ethnic violence, as well as debunking stereotypes. A person is not a mere microcosm of their own race or ethnicity, but rather a person in their own right.
And finally, the anchor holding it all together is this:
4. Persona est sui iuris et non alterius iuris - or, each person belongs to himself and not to another - This has theological and Biblical support in the Imago Dei, but it goes further than it has been often interpreted. Being "created in God's image" doesn't necessarily mean we are an exact clone of God, but is rather more like singing evangelist Jeff Steinberg once said in a concert when he noted that God saw us as an image, his image, and therefore we are created in perfect likeness of what God saw in the image. Another Scriptural idea here that is closely related is found in Genesis 1:10 - God saw that it was good, meaning humanity he created as well! A fresh explanation was provided of this a few months ago at a crusade we attended in which Dr. Kip Laxson, the evangelist and also pastor of the Asbury Methodist Church in Birmingham, AL, preached into one of his sermons about this verse. What Dr. Laxson in essence said was that God saw the fruit, and it was good. God, in his infinite omniscience, saw what the lowly seed transforming under the ground was going to turn into because he willed it to do so! God created us like that as well, and although we belong to him in a different dimension outside of this philosophical context, on this dimension, he created us as individuals who are capable of personal liberty. Therefore, to violate the liberty of another is a true sin, as it violates the will of God.
Dr. Crosby then talks about something called subjectivity, in which learning to live with oneself through personal recollection (meaning, in Crosby's text, means "coming to oneself," or in lay terminology, having self-presence) also helps in respecting the personhood of others through intersubjectivity (Crosby, pp. 102, 115-117). The foundation of this is all Bible-based, and supported by historic Church teaching, although these things are philosophical rather than theological concepts. It is similar to the Martin Buber "I/Thou" relationship, but as Romano Guardini elaborates, it goes a bit further in that the Christian ideal is more of an "I/I," being that Buber's "Thou" often can reduce the person to an object, and this is not ideal when talking about Personhood (Romano Guardini, The Personal Relation, pp. 126-129). With this philosophical basis formed, we can now specifically talk about why spiritual abuse is wrong, and why it violates the fundamental imago Dei we all have as individual human persons.
Spiritual abuse and intellectual snubbery are in reality evil twins, both spawned of Satan himself, and neither have a place in the Christian life. When talking about spiritual abuse here, I prefer to use Ronald M. Enroth's definition when he defines it as being afflicted by pastors and others in spiritual authority by using the Bible to "pull rank" with their office and assert authority in such a way as it violates the trust of those who follow them (Ronald M. Enroth, Churches that Abuse {Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992}p. 29). There are many variations on this theme, but for the most part they all bear something in common - these are not cults, but rather professing Christian ministries and leaders perpetrating this abuse. For the most part, the churches these people are part of are doctrinally orthodox, are usually part of a recognized religious denomination, and their clergy may even have some status in their local communities. However, that being said, there is also a fine and blurry line between an abusive Christian church and an outright cult, and that is a line which has been crossed by some notorious figures before (remember Jim Jones and the Jonestown tragedy in 1978? Jones was a licensed minister in the Disciples of Christ denomination, and he also had some educational ties to the Assemblies of God if I recall correctly, but in time his congregation, People's Temple, became a cult). However, the majority of abusive pastors and churches are products of poor discipleship, some personality issues, or poor theological foundation, and if they are able to submit to their denominational authorities in a humble spirit, many can be corrected. However, the problem may be deep, and the damage extensive, before that happens, and the casualties of abusive pastors will be people like the aforementioned Tammy at the beginning of this article. That being said, it is time to talk about my own experience in an abusive church background.
It was the summer of 1989, and I was fresh out of high school, 19 years old, and ready to get to college. During that summer I stayed with my father in the small town of Brunswick, GA, earning some money working at the Holiday Inn on the nearby resort of Jekyll Island. Up to this point, I was a very new Christian, having been born again just three years previous in 1986, and I was also (or so I thought!) a very staunch Baptist. When I first became a Christian, it was somewhat refreshing for me because I was in a church that didn't literally try to scare the hell out of me, as some of the old-fashioned mountain Holiness/Pentecostal churches I grew up around tended to do to their people. This is something endemic to Appalachian culture too, in that at times we mountain people tend to set a high moral/religious bar and tend to be critical of those who fall short, and that can cause some issues for people later - we need to understand that we are not quasi-gnostic spirits floating around, but we are in a world God created, and share in its weakness. And, even with our best efforts, we still are embued with a propensity to sin (note I didn't say original sin, as that is washed away at our baptism), because we are subject to all the limitations of our humanity. Although we should strive to rise above them, we cannot set a bar so high that we almost invite falling on our face. The problem with legalism though is that often it does just that - it sets an unreasonably high standard that makes it almost impossible to understand the joy of one's Christianity, which we must experience too. Although I have what may seem like a harsh critique of my upbringing, to be honest my upbringing is not the problem or focus of this discussion in this case, as in many cases that same upbringing also instilled within me some strong values and convictions, and in itself it was a rich spiritual legacy albeit not a perfect one. The problem area would come approximately three years after leaving home, and we'll get there shortly, but let me first get back on track here.
In June of 1989, something happened to me that gave my own Christian walk a new dimension, and it was something I totally didn't expect. You see, when I got born again and became a Christian in 1986, I also had to get over some of the more negative aspects of my earlier upbringing, due in large part to my own mother who didn't adequately reflect the faith tradition she claimed to represent. So, I became very resentful of Pentecostals and wanted nothing to do with them, and in lieu of that I threw myself into the work of the Baptist Church into which I was baptized. But, curiousity got the best of me about Pentecostalism, and just before graduating in 1989, Gary McGee's monumental Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements was released by Zondervan, and I just had to get one. And, so I did. As I read that excellent text, I began to appreciate my Pentecostal roots better and also began to identify with them more, wanting to even be actively part of that rich heritage. That opportunity came in June of 1989, when I attended revival services at what was then the First Pentecostal Holiness Church in Brunswick, GA. The evangelist, a middle-aged man from Michigan with a mustache, was practically preaching at me that balmy Thursday night as he was preaching on the Holy Spirit and his life-transforming work, and as he did so, the Holy Spirit began to stir up a desire in me to be baptized in him, and when the altar call was given, I went up and asked to be prayed for to receive the Holy Spirit. Instantly, about 5 little old glorybun-clad Georgia Pentecostal Holiness ladies gathered around me and started praying over me, and as they did, I felt this whirlpool coming from deep in my gut, and as it intensified I felt led to speak, and that night I spoke in tongues, "as the Spirit gave utterance." And, although I am no longer a part of a Pentecostal church, I still believe it today. Again, the Pentecostal experience was not the issue either, but it would ultimately be used in an abusive context, which we will get to now.
I was in a Baptist college, and I knew that remaining Southern Baptist was out of the question now, so I began to look into which type of Pentecostal church I wanted to be part of. In those days, one of the preachers I really loved listening to was Dr. Jack Hayford, and as I found out more about who he was, I discovered he was part of the Foursquare denomination and I wanted that to be my church too. The nearest Foursquare church was in Dothan, AL, at the time, and I ended up going there for the first service I ever attended in February 1990. Although it definitely wasn't Jack Hayford's church, I dealt with it, and I became part of it officially later that spring. Not long after, trouble started to stir under the surface, and here is where the problem started.
The pastor of the Dothan church was an older man, then in his 50's, and he came across kind of strong in his messages. At some point in the past too, this church experienced some kind of intense revival thing as well, and the pastor and many church members were under the impression that in order to get that revival back, they had to do exactly what they did then. So, before long, dancing in the Spirit was emphasized heavily, as was other more expressive and emotive acts, and it wasn't long until the mentality was that if you didn't participate in them, something was wrong. Also at around the same time, the pastor and some others - in particular a rather unbalanced woman named Judy - got on this "deliverance ministry" kick, seeing demons everywhere, etc. By mid-1991, these two factors created something bizarre - the church, the pastor said, must have the revival back, and only by "letting oneself be moved" by the Spirit (dancing around, running, etc.) could that happen. The pastor and this Judy woman also came up with the hypothesis that for those who resisted, it must be demons hindering the revival through these people, and therefore deliverance and exorcism were a must. I am by nature not an overly expressive person - as a matter of fact, I am quiet in my worship and hold reverence as a personal conviction. But, my own way of doing things got unwarranted attention directed at me and I became a target for "deliverance." However, fortunately I was taught better, and although it was a great deal of duress for me to remain in that church, I resisted as long as I could, but eventually we had to leave. There is some other details to the story I cannot share as time doesn't permit, but to sum it up after I transferred to Southeastern College in Lakeland to finish my degree in 1992, the church had a serious split and eventually closed. A couple of years ago, a Hindu group bought the old Foursquare church (which to be fair was a gorgeous building) and converted it into a temple, which it is today. The pastor too retired, and a happy end to that story is that after many years of personal healing, I have reconciled differences with that pastor, who has grown up a lot, and we are friends today. Thanks be to God for his mercy.
I tell you my story to make the point that anyone can be a victim of spiritual abuse, even well-informed theology students! However, we must let God do the healing in us, as it is a process that takes time, and if we yield to that, restoration awaits. Now that I have talked about that, let's talk about the other extreme I have witnessed in some circles, and that is snubbery.
I am a student of Theology, and am pursuing graduate studies in it even as I write. And, I believe that intelligence and the capacity to learn and apply all the knowledge one can have access to is a gift, blessing, and mandate from God himself, as it is he who created our minds. However, the problem with academics sometimes is that those who are engaged in it often have a disconnect from others, and even their Christianity becomes a mere specimen to digest (some have even reduced Jesus to both a specimen and a mere means, which is truly unfortunate). The problem lies with our own self-importance at times, which makes us so solipsistic to others that we fail to connect to them, and we do so with the Church as well. The Church, to some academics, has become a lab rat to dissect, demystify, and humanize, and in doing so these academics lose perspective. So, if someone demonstrates a love for the historic teaching of the Church, or an enthusiastic spirituality, the academic is quick to dismiss and pooh-pooh them. You wouldn't think that would be possible in some circles, but some of the worst offenders I have come across recently in this regard are professed Pentecostal scholars. Despite the fact that I and some of their students have the same intellectual capacity in many cases the professor does, the professor often gets snobby with them, and so overly critical, that some students begin to doubt their faith. This to me is about as abusive and depersonalizing as anything a borderline cultic abusive local pastor does, and what the professor in essence does is treat the student as a mere means to advance his own end, thus doing violence to the personhood of that student. And the soapboxing - instead of being a mentor and guide to students, teaching them how to be firmly established in what they believe, the professor often uses his students as guinea pigs to promote his own pet causes. For instance, the new thing with some Pentecostal professors is this whole "Pentecostal Liberation Theology" thing, in which we all must be poor in order to know Jesus. It sounds noble and good, but first off, Jesus never taught that ideology Himself - He told the Church to take care of its own, especially its own widows and orphans, and to be a light in a dark society, but He never advocated altruistic poverty for everyone. Many of these professors (who, as Bible experts should know better!) utilize the verse in Scripture where Jesus tells the rich man to sell all his goods, give them to the poor, and then he would have eternal life. However, if you read that same verse in context, there are a couple of things worth noting. First, Jesus rightly discerned that the young ruler put a lot of devotion into his wealth, and therefore it had the potential of becoming an idol to the young man - Jesus told him to do what He told him because he saw this as a potential hindrance to that man's spiritual growth. Second, it was also characterized by a sarcastic dimension - in essence, Jesus told him, "if you want to be exactly like me, then travel light!" Riches, when managed properly, are a blessing and not a curse, but we need to make sure those same riches don't enamour us and are used by Satan to divert our attention away from more important things. But, there is something else as it relates to these professors - I hear these characters wasting valuable tuition monies of their students standing in front of a class bewailing the plight of the poor, and manipulating students with that guilt, while at the same time here they are in their nice expensive cars, $300K homes, and wearing tailored Armani suits with smart little bowties and horn-rimmed glasses. If this is such a big issue for them, here's what they could do - tuition, first of all could be reduced or eliminated altogether, and these professors could feed a lot of homeless people if they would learn to settle for a $500/month apartment rather than buying opulent homes (my priest is a fairly well-off attorney, and even he doesn't have as extravagant a house as these professors do!). A final point at this juncture of the discussion is this - many of these professors bellyaching about the plight of the poor could care less about the poor, but are using them as a means to promote their own activist agendas, and unfortunately they are succeeding (for now, but judgement is coming!). That leads me to ask what the bigger sin is - using the poor to advance an agenda, or making a nice living for yourself to take care of your family? Or, what is the bigger vice - a secure bank account or blatant hypocrisy? You judge for yourself as you weigh the evidence.
The bottom line of all this is simple - abuse and snubbery both devalue the personhood of others, and no Christian should be guilty of either, yet so many unfortunately are. A person made in God's image (as we all are) will see that image also in others (intersubjectivity), and thus in doing so, one honors God. You don't have to like every person you see though - I mean, a house can be beautifully and masterfully built and still have an ugly paint job, termites, woodrot, etc. But, the basic design is still God's and in being it is always good, although in action it can be hideous. And, that should be a new way we see others in lieu of our own Christian walk. God bless until next time.
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Holy Week and Good Friday - a Basic Teaching.
As we approach the Paschal season in the Church, I am vividly reminded of the real reason as to why I started the Sacramental Present Truths blog to begin with - it was to provide sound teaching from a traditional Catholic (not necessarily synonymous with Roman Catholic, although as fellow Catholics our Roman brethren do share much of this with us) perspective with a renewing focus. In the past months, I have gotten off into a lot of polemical writing, and the excesses of one of my friends who became obsessed with what she hated caused the Holy Spirit to put a check in my spirit which reminded me of this fact - what is the passion of your Christian faith all about, and why don't you share that? That little rhema word of the Lord to me got me back into focus as to what it means to be a committed Anglo-Catholic Christian myself, and what the splendor and mystery of my faith is all about. Of course, my Theology of the Church course through Franciscan University, taught by a great theologian by the name of Regis Martin, also inspired some of this too - I have learned so much by being exposed to some great Roman Catholic theologians and philosophers such as Henri de Lubac, Romano Guardini, and Hans Urs von Balthazar. As I am getting so much out of the theological aspect of that wonderful course, I wanted to apply some of that to these teachings I share with you, so I hope you will find them appreciative.
I want to focus this week on the upcoming practices and theologies behind Palm Sunday, Holy Week, and Good Friday. As the Lenten season closes, the abstinence from those things which maybe command a large part of our lives build to an anticipation of the Paska miracle, the Lord Jesus Christ risen from the dead! We are not going to talk about the miracle of Easter though yet, as its time will come in a week or two, but rather about the events leading up to it as we in the West observe them next week. There is a great richness to the observance of Holy Week, something that many iconoclastic Protestant Fundamentalists really miss although they would rightly affirm the truths of what we as Catholic Christians commemorate. I don't mean to knock Fundamentalists, but at times I do wonder why they attack things they don't understand, and the only explanation I can fathom is what Bishop Malcolm Smith calls "acute Romophobia" (the fear of anything that looks too "Catholic" to them). Hopefully, this small lesson will dispel some of that nonsense, and you can truly be open to what the Church commemorates in practice as well as in word - Christianity is not a religion of mere verbal assent to a doctrinal statement, as many Fundamentalists have reduced it to, but rather it is about living the Gospels and using something God gifted us with that our Fundamentalist brethren sometimes dismiss as a curse almost, and that is the use of physical, tangible symbols and actions. Holy Week is all about that too, as by our participation in the various liturgies and other sacramental practices we become closer to Jesus - not for salvation either, which blows out of the water that old "salvation by works" BS the Fundamentalists often accuse Catholic Christians of when we worship with inclusion of the tangible and physical (for self-professed Biblical literalists, they also don't follow the various passages of Scripture that exhort us to worship the Lord with our whole being, and that includes sight, sound, touch, taste, and hearing!). Rather, like Lent, the Holy Week worship traditions serve to reaffirm and renew our worship of Jesus Christ, who is indeed God the Son, in a way that is expressed through all we do. Now that we have discredited some common Fundamentalist mythologies and accusations, let us now talk about some practices of Holy Week common to both the Eastern and Western Churches.
First is Palm Sunday. Palm Sunday, exactly one week before Easter, marks the beginning of Holy Week and is a commemoration of the Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem on a donkey as recorded in the Gospels in a passage in Matthew 21. In the narrative, Jesus is going up to Jerusalem to observe the Passover, and he sort of sets up lodging in the Jerusalem suburb of Bethphage (Matthew 21:1). There is something very important to remember here - Jesus was not a Roman Catholic, nor was he an Evangelical Protestant. Jesus was an observant Jew while He walked this earth, and as an observant Jew He participated in the religious life of His people. This is important, as it goes back to the Abrahamic Covenant found in Genesis 17, in that Jesus first came to the Jews, and through the Jews the Church would be birthed, and all nations would be reached through that plan. This was true of practically all the early Church as well, as Hebrew Catholic writer Roy Schoeman points out in his book, Salvation is of the Jews (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2003), on page 51. Unfortunately, as Roman Catholic theologian Brant Pitre points out, for centuries Christian theologians - East and West, Protestant and Catholic, etc. - have largely ignored the Jewish context of Jesus' humanity, focusing more often on His divinity. However, Jesus was fully both, and as Pitre correctly points out, it is absolutely necessary to also understand Jesus' humanity, and understanding it in its Jewish context is fundamental (Brant Pitre, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist {New York: Doubleday, 2011} p. 12). Therefore, yes, Jesus did observe and celebrate Passover! However, as we find out later, He would reveal the true purpose of the Passover on what we in the West call "Maundy Thursday" in Holy Week, which is when the institution of the Eucharist was initiated by our Lord Himself, based on a traditional Passover Seder. This now leads me to soapbox a little about a particularly dumb statement (one among many, I regret to report!) I heard in a New Testament Theology class at the Pentecostal university I previously attended, and anyone with any sense of Hebraic tradition or even history would laugh this professed academic out of the room. The professor who was teaching this particular class (who is a nice guy as a human being, and actually good to get along with) is part of an emerging group of Pentecostal academics who for all intents have gone theologically liberal, although neither he nor his colleagues would see it that way. Any rate, during this class, he actually said that when Jesus fed the 5,000 as recorded in Matthew 14, He was celebrating a Passover Seder! First of all, Jesus fed those people with fish, which is not part of the Seder meal - as a New Testament scholar, this good professor really should have known better than that! And, no evidence from the Gospel accounts suggests what time of year it was, and also the Seder is never celebrated by devout Jews (and Jesus was one!) as a quick lunch date with his theology class, as it were. The Passover protocol is very intricate, and a lot of ceremony goes into its preparation. Although I personally like this professor, he was off his beam a little when he said that! This same professor, in discussing Jesus enacting the miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding at Cana (John 2) actually said he believed Jesus was attending His own wedding! None of this of course is affirmed by the Church, and because of hearing wild and wacky nonsense like this spouted by supposed Christian leaders, I appreciate being a Churchman now who upholds the Holy Tradition of the Church Catholic, and Holy Week is one way the Church reminds its people that the Gospels are true, and that Jesus is real. Those who don't have the benefit of an acting faith like this are deprived of so much - maybe not their salvation, but a deeper faith though. Any rate, let's get back to Palm Sunday!
The verse in the NKJV I use for study stays they lay tree branches and clothes before Jesus as He entered Jerusalem, and does not specifically mention palms. However, being palm trees were in great abundance in the region, it would make sense that palms would be used, and again, it is an appeal to Holy Tradition on this one. The Church has used palms in the liturgy of this day for many generations, and they got it from somewhere - my guess is it was passed from the Apostles themselves to those they shepherded. In some parts of the world, such as the cold Slav lands of central Europe, palms were not readily available, and therefore some people had to "make do," to utilize a concept of my Appalachian upbringing. Therefore, in Russian and other Eastern Christian churches on Palm Sunday, pussywillows are often distributed in lieu of palms, and the important reason is this - in those parts of the world, the pussywillow flowered at around that time of the year, and was a sort of "firstfruits" after what was often a harsh winter. Therefore, the Slavs, after they became Christian in the 7th and 8th centuries, utilized the symbol of the pussywillow. In the US, many Slavic churches now distribute both palms and pussywillows, as it presents a powerful ecumenical affirmation, and that is not a problem - a pussywillow is a tree, and Matthew 21 says nothing specifically about exclusively using palm branches, so therefore I don't see a problem with it. Palms and pussywillows also have other important symbolisms as well, being the palm tree is often interpreted in dreams as being a symbol of righteousness (Perry Stone, How to Interpret Dreams and Visions {Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2011} p. 232). That would make sense, as Jesus represents the true Passover Lamb, of pure righteousness and sinlessness. As for the pussywillow, Father Czeslaw Krysa explains it thus: "The Pussy Willow is also our Easter symbol. One of the most prominent Easter symbols, because of the fact out of this dry, kind of twig all of a sudden bursts forth this beautiful flower of life, and it is the first bush that blooms." (accessed from http://news.wbfo.org/post/polish-legend-pussy-willow-palm-sunday on April 7, 2014). As this Polish Catholic priest explained it, we see a picture in the pussywillow of the Resurrection! So, when you receive palms and pussywillows at a Russian, Polish, or Ukrainian church on Palm Sunday, they should bring to mind righteousness and the fact we are granted that righteousness ourselves through the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ! Pretty powerful stuff, if you ask me. So, I must hand it to my Slav brethren; they "made do" with a substitutionary symbol, and made a theological application that is valid and consistent with Church tradition, as well as being appropriate to the season, and God bless them for that!
After Palm Sunday, Holy Week goes quiet for a few days until Maundy Thursday, which commemorates the Last Supper Christ had with the Apostles in the Upper Room. So, what is this word "Maundy," and what does it mean? After looking into that, I discovered that it is an Old English word denoting a "mandate," or a command, based on John 13:34 (accessed from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maundy_Thursday on April 8, 2014). That verse contains what is in essence the message of the Gospel itself - we should love one another as Christ loved us. And, the ultimate symbol of Christ's love is the giving of Himself for us, and the Eucharistic mystery is celebrated to continue that sharing of Himself with us, as He is truly present in the elements of the Eucharist. Again, Maundy Thursday in essence instituted the Eucharist, which is taken directly from the Jewish Passover seder, and the Church maintains that Christ is indeed our "Passover sacrificed for us." It is another of those Old Testament covenants which finds its culmination in the New.
Maundy Thursday also includes two vestigial practices that were lost at some point by the Church, the act of washing one another's feet and the Love Feast. Although sacramental communions like the Roman Catholics and our own Anglo-Catholic tradition recognize and practice this on Maundy Thursday, it would be good to see both of them become part of our regular worship on a more frequent basis. Some Protestant sects - notably the Dunkards, some Pentecostals, and some groups of old-time mountain Baptists - do retain them in some form or another, and the forms in which they preserve them hearken back in many instances to the early Church itself. I say that because although I am fully Anglo-Catholic, I am not going to dismiss everything Protestants do as wrong - as a matter of fact, there are some good things that certain Protestant traditions practice that have a strong case in the writings of the Church Fathers, and regular foot-washing and the Love Feast are two of those. The Love Feast, however, is not the same as the Eucharist, but on the other extreme it is also not a sanctified coffee hour or potluck dinner either. The purpose of the Love Feast and foot-washing, as is noted by many writers, was to prepare the faithful for the reception of the Body and Blood of Christ, and if you believe as we do in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, then preparation is an important aspect, as it is not to be taken for granted. The purpose of the Love Feast was to create a unity among the worshipping community, in that sharing a meal together at a common table cemented and reinforced spiritual bonds. This included an emphasis on reconciliation - if there was an issue among two brethren, the Love Feast was the time to resolve that, because in good conscience it was not good to partake of the Eucharist later if unresolved "ought" against one's brother was in the equation. And, this is why foot-washing was often tied with the Love Feast, for the humble act of washing the feet of another promoted an attitude of service and humility, rather than arrogance and haughtiness. With the Body then brought together, Christ could then reign among them as the source of their peace. And, this feast, much like the Eucharist itself, is among the members of the worshipping community and not open to outsiders. A general proposed order for the events of this would be as follows - 1) receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation from the priest, 2) Going to each other as brethren, and resolving any issues that may exist, 3) washing one another's feet, 4) the Love Feast meal, which is not to be eaten out of hunger but out of fellowship, and finally 5) the Mass, or Liturgy, with the Holy Eucharist at its center (note 1 Corinthians 10:16 and John 6:11). Brethren writer Paul Fike Stutzman also notes in his excellent text, Restoring the Love Feast (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2011) on page 57 that there was also a penitential element in particular to footwashing, in that it represents what Christ did for us at our baptism, and that sacramental dimension reminds us that we are to forgive others as Jesus forgave us, and that forgiveness must start in the household of faith, the Church. And, this is a reason why Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Churches have a footwashing rite as part of the Maundy Thursday liturgical form. As with all things though, these sacramental acts are not just for a once-a-year "housecleaning," but rather are to be practiced in our lives throughout the year and throughout our Christian lives. Therefore, it is common practice also to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation on Maundy Thursday, and it is also a good time to have a time of healing and renewal in the local parish, a time when people can offer apologies for offenses and open up to their brothers and sisters in Christ in order to receive (and give!) forgiveness for one another's sins. This way, we are prepared for the Paschal celebration to come on Sunday, celebrating the Risen Christ!
I now want to talk about Good Friday a little. Good Friday commemorates the Crucifixion of our Lord on Calvary, and at its central focus is the Cross - in the Cross, we have redemption, as a perfect sacrifice - a holy, sinless God who became man and gave Himself for our sin. Depending on whether one is Eastern or Western Christian, there are several powerful rites of the Church that commemorate this event on this day. Perhaps the most common one in the West is the Stations of the Cross, which we as Anglo-Catholics walk as part of the Good Friday commemoration. Any person who was born or raised Catholic, Anglican, or even High-Church Lutheran will know about the Stations, as there are 14 of them that are symbolized by small iconography or statuary around the inner perimeter of the church. The Stations represent a sort of mini-pilgrimage that chronicles the route taken by Jesus from His trial before Pilate to His nailing to the Cross on Golgotha, and each "station" along the pilgrimage commemorates a particular moment within that pilgrimage as recorded in Holy Scripture. It is a practice with roots that go back at least to the time of the Crusades, but may have its genesis even further. Although customarily a private devotion with no official requirement, over the centuries it has become an Anglican tradition in particular to walk the Stations on Good Friday, and as each station is approached, often the person leading the devotion in that setting will recite the event that Station commemorates: for instance, the first Station is the Condemnation of Jesus to Death, and after reciting the event itself, and praying the Act of Contrition ("O God, we love thee with our whole hearts and above all things and are heartily sorry that we have offended thee. May we never offend Thee anymore. O, may we love Thee without ceasing, and make it our delight to do in all things Thy most holy will.") after which a verse commemorating the event is chanted, such as this one after the First Station:
I want to focus this week on the upcoming practices and theologies behind Palm Sunday, Holy Week, and Good Friday. As the Lenten season closes, the abstinence from those things which maybe command a large part of our lives build to an anticipation of the Paska miracle, the Lord Jesus Christ risen from the dead! We are not going to talk about the miracle of Easter though yet, as its time will come in a week or two, but rather about the events leading up to it as we in the West observe them next week. There is a great richness to the observance of Holy Week, something that many iconoclastic Protestant Fundamentalists really miss although they would rightly affirm the truths of what we as Catholic Christians commemorate. I don't mean to knock Fundamentalists, but at times I do wonder why they attack things they don't understand, and the only explanation I can fathom is what Bishop Malcolm Smith calls "acute Romophobia" (the fear of anything that looks too "Catholic" to them). Hopefully, this small lesson will dispel some of that nonsense, and you can truly be open to what the Church commemorates in practice as well as in word - Christianity is not a religion of mere verbal assent to a doctrinal statement, as many Fundamentalists have reduced it to, but rather it is about living the Gospels and using something God gifted us with that our Fundamentalist brethren sometimes dismiss as a curse almost, and that is the use of physical, tangible symbols and actions. Holy Week is all about that too, as by our participation in the various liturgies and other sacramental practices we become closer to Jesus - not for salvation either, which blows out of the water that old "salvation by works" BS the Fundamentalists often accuse Catholic Christians of when we worship with inclusion of the tangible and physical (for self-professed Biblical literalists, they also don't follow the various passages of Scripture that exhort us to worship the Lord with our whole being, and that includes sight, sound, touch, taste, and hearing!). Rather, like Lent, the Holy Week worship traditions serve to reaffirm and renew our worship of Jesus Christ, who is indeed God the Son, in a way that is expressed through all we do. Now that we have discredited some common Fundamentalist mythologies and accusations, let us now talk about some practices of Holy Week common to both the Eastern and Western Churches.
First is Palm Sunday. Palm Sunday, exactly one week before Easter, marks the beginning of Holy Week and is a commemoration of the Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem on a donkey as recorded in the Gospels in a passage in Matthew 21. In the narrative, Jesus is going up to Jerusalem to observe the Passover, and he sort of sets up lodging in the Jerusalem suburb of Bethphage (Matthew 21:1). There is something very important to remember here - Jesus was not a Roman Catholic, nor was he an Evangelical Protestant. Jesus was an observant Jew while He walked this earth, and as an observant Jew He participated in the religious life of His people. This is important, as it goes back to the Abrahamic Covenant found in Genesis 17, in that Jesus first came to the Jews, and through the Jews the Church would be birthed, and all nations would be reached through that plan. This was true of practically all the early Church as well, as Hebrew Catholic writer Roy Schoeman points out in his book, Salvation is of the Jews (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2003), on page 51. Unfortunately, as Roman Catholic theologian Brant Pitre points out, for centuries Christian theologians - East and West, Protestant and Catholic, etc. - have largely ignored the Jewish context of Jesus' humanity, focusing more often on His divinity. However, Jesus was fully both, and as Pitre correctly points out, it is absolutely necessary to also understand Jesus' humanity, and understanding it in its Jewish context is fundamental (Brant Pitre, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist {New York: Doubleday, 2011} p. 12). Therefore, yes, Jesus did observe and celebrate Passover! However, as we find out later, He would reveal the true purpose of the Passover on what we in the West call "Maundy Thursday" in Holy Week, which is when the institution of the Eucharist was initiated by our Lord Himself, based on a traditional Passover Seder. This now leads me to soapbox a little about a particularly dumb statement (one among many, I regret to report!) I heard in a New Testament Theology class at the Pentecostal university I previously attended, and anyone with any sense of Hebraic tradition or even history would laugh this professed academic out of the room. The professor who was teaching this particular class (who is a nice guy as a human being, and actually good to get along with) is part of an emerging group of Pentecostal academics who for all intents have gone theologically liberal, although neither he nor his colleagues would see it that way. Any rate, during this class, he actually said that when Jesus fed the 5,000 as recorded in Matthew 14, He was celebrating a Passover Seder! First of all, Jesus fed those people with fish, which is not part of the Seder meal - as a New Testament scholar, this good professor really should have known better than that! And, no evidence from the Gospel accounts suggests what time of year it was, and also the Seder is never celebrated by devout Jews (and Jesus was one!) as a quick lunch date with his theology class, as it were. The Passover protocol is very intricate, and a lot of ceremony goes into its preparation. Although I personally like this professor, he was off his beam a little when he said that! This same professor, in discussing Jesus enacting the miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding at Cana (John 2) actually said he believed Jesus was attending His own wedding! None of this of course is affirmed by the Church, and because of hearing wild and wacky nonsense like this spouted by supposed Christian leaders, I appreciate being a Churchman now who upholds the Holy Tradition of the Church Catholic, and Holy Week is one way the Church reminds its people that the Gospels are true, and that Jesus is real. Those who don't have the benefit of an acting faith like this are deprived of so much - maybe not their salvation, but a deeper faith though. Any rate, let's get back to Palm Sunday!
The verse in the NKJV I use for study stays they lay tree branches and clothes before Jesus as He entered Jerusalem, and does not specifically mention palms. However, being palm trees were in great abundance in the region, it would make sense that palms would be used, and again, it is an appeal to Holy Tradition on this one. The Church has used palms in the liturgy of this day for many generations, and they got it from somewhere - my guess is it was passed from the Apostles themselves to those they shepherded. In some parts of the world, such as the cold Slav lands of central Europe, palms were not readily available, and therefore some people had to "make do," to utilize a concept of my Appalachian upbringing. Therefore, in Russian and other Eastern Christian churches on Palm Sunday, pussywillows are often distributed in lieu of palms, and the important reason is this - in those parts of the world, the pussywillow flowered at around that time of the year, and was a sort of "firstfruits" after what was often a harsh winter. Therefore, the Slavs, after they became Christian in the 7th and 8th centuries, utilized the symbol of the pussywillow. In the US, many Slavic churches now distribute both palms and pussywillows, as it presents a powerful ecumenical affirmation, and that is not a problem - a pussywillow is a tree, and Matthew 21 says nothing specifically about exclusively using palm branches, so therefore I don't see a problem with it. Palms and pussywillows also have other important symbolisms as well, being the palm tree is often interpreted in dreams as being a symbol of righteousness (Perry Stone, How to Interpret Dreams and Visions {Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2011} p. 232). That would make sense, as Jesus represents the true Passover Lamb, of pure righteousness and sinlessness. As for the pussywillow, Father Czeslaw Krysa explains it thus: "The Pussy Willow is also our Easter symbol. One of the most prominent Easter symbols, because of the fact out of this dry, kind of twig all of a sudden bursts forth this beautiful flower of life, and it is the first bush that blooms." (accessed from http://news.wbfo.org/post/polish-legend-pussy-willow-palm-sunday on April 7, 2014). As this Polish Catholic priest explained it, we see a picture in the pussywillow of the Resurrection! So, when you receive palms and pussywillows at a Russian, Polish, or Ukrainian church on Palm Sunday, they should bring to mind righteousness and the fact we are granted that righteousness ourselves through the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ! Pretty powerful stuff, if you ask me. So, I must hand it to my Slav brethren; they "made do" with a substitutionary symbol, and made a theological application that is valid and consistent with Church tradition, as well as being appropriate to the season, and God bless them for that!
After Palm Sunday, Holy Week goes quiet for a few days until Maundy Thursday, which commemorates the Last Supper Christ had with the Apostles in the Upper Room. So, what is this word "Maundy," and what does it mean? After looking into that, I discovered that it is an Old English word denoting a "mandate," or a command, based on John 13:34 (accessed from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maundy_Thursday on April 8, 2014). That verse contains what is in essence the message of the Gospel itself - we should love one another as Christ loved us. And, the ultimate symbol of Christ's love is the giving of Himself for us, and the Eucharistic mystery is celebrated to continue that sharing of Himself with us, as He is truly present in the elements of the Eucharist. Again, Maundy Thursday in essence instituted the Eucharist, which is taken directly from the Jewish Passover seder, and the Church maintains that Christ is indeed our "Passover sacrificed for us." It is another of those Old Testament covenants which finds its culmination in the New.
Maundy Thursday also includes two vestigial practices that were lost at some point by the Church, the act of washing one another's feet and the Love Feast. Although sacramental communions like the Roman Catholics and our own Anglo-Catholic tradition recognize and practice this on Maundy Thursday, it would be good to see both of them become part of our regular worship on a more frequent basis. Some Protestant sects - notably the Dunkards, some Pentecostals, and some groups of old-time mountain Baptists - do retain them in some form or another, and the forms in which they preserve them hearken back in many instances to the early Church itself. I say that because although I am fully Anglo-Catholic, I am not going to dismiss everything Protestants do as wrong - as a matter of fact, there are some good things that certain Protestant traditions practice that have a strong case in the writings of the Church Fathers, and regular foot-washing and the Love Feast are two of those. The Love Feast, however, is not the same as the Eucharist, but on the other extreme it is also not a sanctified coffee hour or potluck dinner either. The purpose of the Love Feast and foot-washing, as is noted by many writers, was to prepare the faithful for the reception of the Body and Blood of Christ, and if you believe as we do in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, then preparation is an important aspect, as it is not to be taken for granted. The purpose of the Love Feast was to create a unity among the worshipping community, in that sharing a meal together at a common table cemented and reinforced spiritual bonds. This included an emphasis on reconciliation - if there was an issue among two brethren, the Love Feast was the time to resolve that, because in good conscience it was not good to partake of the Eucharist later if unresolved "ought" against one's brother was in the equation. And, this is why foot-washing was often tied with the Love Feast, for the humble act of washing the feet of another promoted an attitude of service and humility, rather than arrogance and haughtiness. With the Body then brought together, Christ could then reign among them as the source of their peace. And, this feast, much like the Eucharist itself, is among the members of the worshipping community and not open to outsiders. A general proposed order for the events of this would be as follows - 1) receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation from the priest, 2) Going to each other as brethren, and resolving any issues that may exist, 3) washing one another's feet, 4) the Love Feast meal, which is not to be eaten out of hunger but out of fellowship, and finally 5) the Mass, or Liturgy, with the Holy Eucharist at its center (note 1 Corinthians 10:16 and John 6:11). Brethren writer Paul Fike Stutzman also notes in his excellent text, Restoring the Love Feast (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2011) on page 57 that there was also a penitential element in particular to footwashing, in that it represents what Christ did for us at our baptism, and that sacramental dimension reminds us that we are to forgive others as Jesus forgave us, and that forgiveness must start in the household of faith, the Church. And, this is a reason why Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Churches have a footwashing rite as part of the Maundy Thursday liturgical form. As with all things though, these sacramental acts are not just for a once-a-year "housecleaning," but rather are to be practiced in our lives throughout the year and throughout our Christian lives. Therefore, it is common practice also to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation on Maundy Thursday, and it is also a good time to have a time of healing and renewal in the local parish, a time when people can offer apologies for offenses and open up to their brothers and sisters in Christ in order to receive (and give!) forgiveness for one another's sins. This way, we are prepared for the Paschal celebration to come on Sunday, celebrating the Risen Christ!
I now want to talk about Good Friday a little. Good Friday commemorates the Crucifixion of our Lord on Calvary, and at its central focus is the Cross - in the Cross, we have redemption, as a perfect sacrifice - a holy, sinless God who became man and gave Himself for our sin. Depending on whether one is Eastern or Western Christian, there are several powerful rites of the Church that commemorate this event on this day. Perhaps the most common one in the West is the Stations of the Cross, which we as Anglo-Catholics walk as part of the Good Friday commemoration. Any person who was born or raised Catholic, Anglican, or even High-Church Lutheran will know about the Stations, as there are 14 of them that are symbolized by small iconography or statuary around the inner perimeter of the church. The Stations represent a sort of mini-pilgrimage that chronicles the route taken by Jesus from His trial before Pilate to His nailing to the Cross on Golgotha, and each "station" along the pilgrimage commemorates a particular moment within that pilgrimage as recorded in Holy Scripture. It is a practice with roots that go back at least to the time of the Crusades, but may have its genesis even further. Although customarily a private devotion with no official requirement, over the centuries it has become an Anglican tradition in particular to walk the Stations on Good Friday, and as each station is approached, often the person leading the devotion in that setting will recite the event that Station commemorates: for instance, the first Station is the Condemnation of Jesus to Death, and after reciting the event itself, and praying the Act of Contrition ("O God, we love thee with our whole hearts and above all things and are heartily sorry that we have offended thee. May we never offend Thee anymore. O, may we love Thee without ceasing, and make it our delight to do in all things Thy most holy will.") after which a verse commemorating the event is chanted, such as this one after the First Station:
By the Cross sad vigil keeping,
Stood the Mother, doleful weeping,
Where her Son extended hung.
(from Fr. Stanton's The Stations of the Cross)
Here are the actual 14 Stations as walked:
I. Jesus is Condemned to Death VIII. The Women Mourn
II. Jesus Receives the Cross IX. Jesus Falls the Third Time
III. Jesus Falls the First Time Under the Cross's Weight X. Jesus Stripped of His Garments
IV. Jesus Meets His Blessed Mother XI. Jesus Nailed to the Cross
V. The Cross is Laid on Symeon of Cyrene XII. Jesus Dies Upon the Cross
VI. St. Veronica Wipes the Face of Jesus XIII. Jesus Taken From the Cross
VII. Jesus Falls a Second Time XIV. Jesus Laid in the Tomb
In the Christian East, there is another beautiful and solemn Good Friday ritual that is enacted by the priest and cantors of the parish which involves an actual funerary procession. It is called the Office of the Burial of Christ, and this hymn is sung as the procession begins and progresses:
The Noble Joseph, taking down your spotless Body from the wood and wrapping it in a clean shroud with aromatic spices, carefully laid it in a new tomb....The angle stood by the tomb and said to the ointment-bearing women, "Ointments are for the dead, but Christ has proved Himself free from decay."
(from MR Joseph Raya and Baron Jose de Vinck, Byzantine Daily Worship {Allendale, NJ: Alleluia Press, 1969] p. 825)
This is one of the most moving services that I have ever had the priveleges of participating in, and it is truly humbling to watch. The normal practice in many Eastern Orthodox and Catholic churches is to take the crucifix or icon of Christ, anoint it with myrrh, and lay it in a specially-made sepulcher that is draped with a shroud called an epitaphios, as well as often being adorned with flowers, and it is processed around the perimeter of the church while the above chant is repeated before it is put to rest in its own "tomb." Accompanying this procession, a subdeacon or cantor strikes a clacking instrument that symbolizes the nailing of Christ on the cross, and the whole ceremony serves to remind the faithful that Christ really did die for our sins, was buried, and on the third day, Easter, He rose again. Whether the Orthodox funerary procession or the Western Stations of the Cross, the message of Good Friday is crystal - it commemorates our Lord's death on the Cross, thus shedding His Holy Blood for the redemption of our sins. It is only through Good Friday that we can fully participate in the great celebration of Easter Sunday, and without the Cross the Resurrection is incomplete. Both East and West also have customary fasting on Good Friday, as that hearkens back to an ancient practice where fasting was seen as a part of the mourning process.
This is by no means an exhaustive treatment of Holy Week and the events it commemorates in the final week of our Lord's life before He was slain as the Agnus Dei for the sins of the world, but it gives you a basic foundation as to why we as Catholic Christians take these events seriously. Many Protestant Evangelicals miss an important dimension in their faith, because although they do affirm (and passionately so, I must admit) the truths that Holy Week communicates, they have also made their own faith so cerebral at times that they casually dismiss actually participating in a physical commemoration of these truths. It is really too bad they do that, because as a Catholic Christian myself now, I have been greatly enriched by the various rites and ceremonies of our Church in regard to the events of our Lord's life. If you are an Evangelical Christian reading this now, I have two closing thoughts to impart to you. First, the fact you do take Scripture seriously enough to affirm the events of our Lord's life, death, and Resurrection is commendable, and as a former Pentecostal myself, those same convictions I shared with you provided the foundation for me to appreciate more liturgical expressions of these truths. In short, Catholic Christians not only verbally affirm the eternal truths of Holy Scripture, but by the various practices we have we live them out in our own lives too. That being said, I move onto my second point - if you are a professed Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Pentecostal, or some other sort of conservative Protestant, please do not be too quick to dismiss liturgical practices as being "too Catholic," for that is only a straw man which has been oft-assaulted by many polemic-minded but misguided people in your churches for generations. Maybe if you learn to read about them for yourself, and even observe them at your local Anglican, Catholic, or Orthodox parish, you might find out that far from disobeying Scripture, these practices bring Scripture to life by encouraging worship with our whole being and all the senses God gave us. And, for fellow Catholics and Anglicans, I encourage you to have a blessed upcoming Holy Week, and will see you here after Easter with hopefully some more fascinating insights.
This is by no means an exhaustive treatment of Holy Week and the events it commemorates in the final week of our Lord's life before He was slain as the Agnus Dei for the sins of the world, but it gives you a basic foundation as to why we as Catholic Christians take these events seriously. Many Protestant Evangelicals miss an important dimension in their faith, because although they do affirm (and passionately so, I must admit) the truths that Holy Week communicates, they have also made their own faith so cerebral at times that they casually dismiss actually participating in a physical commemoration of these truths. It is really too bad they do that, because as a Catholic Christian myself now, I have been greatly enriched by the various rites and ceremonies of our Church in regard to the events of our Lord's life. If you are an Evangelical Christian reading this now, I have two closing thoughts to impart to you. First, the fact you do take Scripture seriously enough to affirm the events of our Lord's life, death, and Resurrection is commendable, and as a former Pentecostal myself, those same convictions I shared with you provided the foundation for me to appreciate more liturgical expressions of these truths. In short, Catholic Christians not only verbally affirm the eternal truths of Holy Scripture, but by the various practices we have we live them out in our own lives too. That being said, I move onto my second point - if you are a professed Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Pentecostal, or some other sort of conservative Protestant, please do not be too quick to dismiss liturgical practices as being "too Catholic," for that is only a straw man which has been oft-assaulted by many polemic-minded but misguided people in your churches for generations. Maybe if you learn to read about them for yourself, and even observe them at your local Anglican, Catholic, or Orthodox parish, you might find out that far from disobeying Scripture, these practices bring Scripture to life by encouraging worship with our whole being and all the senses God gave us. And, for fellow Catholics and Anglicans, I encourage you to have a blessed upcoming Holy Week, and will see you here after Easter with hopefully some more fascinating insights.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
The Cost of Compromise
Earlier this week, a major Evangelical ministry, World Vision, really stuck its proverbial foot into its mouth when its President, Richard Stearns, decided to allow same-sex couples to be "married" and remain in the employ of World Vision. He said it was not about politics, but rather about "unity," although he meant unity at the cost of apostasy. A good part of this story is that a couple of days later, Stearns and the other leaders of World Vision came back to say that "after looking at the Scriptures more closely," they decided to rescind that policy. However the damage was possibly done, much as it was to Exodus International a couple of years ago. Despite the right move to reverse what was a stupid statement on the part of Stearns, some questions still remain:
1. How is it, first of all, that only now are they "discovering what Scripture has said all along?
2. Secondly, being that Stearns had his brainfart spasm a couple of days ago, it begs the question as to what else he's going to make stupid statements about?
3. Thirdly, being that World Vision is a ministry of compassion, isn't it odd that Stearns pulls in a $350K annual salary? This is something I find odd, as World Vision was one of the founding ministries of the Evangelical Council for Accountability (ECFA), and they didn't find that odd?? To me, Stearns is reminiscent in that regard of the professors at Southeastern University these days who make a lot of stink about the "plight of the poor," yet they too have extravagant salaries and $300K homes, drive around in fancy cars, etc.
4. Finally, the fourth question is what really warranted this change of heart - was it the prayerful seeking of the Holy Spirit's direction through Bible study, or was it the potential loss of donor dollars? After all, there were many staunch pro-family Evangelical Christians from a variety of denominational backgrounds who embrace traditional values and would not even consider the possibility of "gay marriage," and many denominational leaders, heads of theological schools, and others (including the president of Dallas Seminary, as well as the heads of both the Assemblies of God and the Southern Baptist Convention) have advocated ceasing support among their members for World Vision.
These questions have provoked questions from others on social media sites such as Facebook, and one woman I saw who posted on a FB discussion about this had a very legitimate question - she wanted to pull her support from World Vision, but she was worried about the child suffering that she was supporting through them and she didn't know what to do. So, I want to offer some bits of advice on dealing with something like this, as it might help give some answers and elimate some confusion:
1. First, if you are supporting a child through World Vision, don't necessarily stop but also start demanding a higher level of accountability from them - this should be a standing rule with any ministry or organization actually. In World Vision's case, they have membership in ECFA, and ECFA requires that its members provide quarterly or annual financial disclosures to their supporters, so take full advantage. If your support, for instance, is giving more towards lavish executive perks rather than helping the children or whoever the ministry is supposed to serve, this is a problem that needs to be addressed. Also, grill these people to explain exactly what "administrative costs" are, because oftentimes these are loopholes that hide unnecessary perks and ridiculous expenses. If you see excessive "administrative costs" that take up more than 5% of an organization's budget, it's time to maybe pull your support.
2. Despite some heart-tugging advertising campaigns some of these organizations use regarding specific children, the fact is one of these children may be the beneficiary of aid from a variety of sources, as it should be - one source often doesn't cut the living expenses of the families of these children. It may take some homework, but if you are dissatisfied with the accountability of an organization like World Vision, it would be wise to research into similar ministries, because you may be able to financially contribute to the same child and their family through another organization that is helping them. If I were a donor, I would research similar organizations such as Compassion International and Food for the Poor, as a chance exists that you may be able to continue sponsorship of the same child you have been donating to through one of the other organizations. If that be the case, shift your support then to them.
3. It must also be remembered that just because an organization claims to be "Christian" does not mean it is necessarily. A perfect example is Christian Children's Fund, whose ads you may recognize by the Miss Piggy-esque mug of a fat Sally Struthers trying her hand at tear-jerking. CCF was founded over 100 years ago, and at its beginning may have been more Christian, but the evolving theological liberalism of the mainline Protestant denominations that supported it have caused it to be about as Christian as the Church of Satan. It appears that World Vision and other "Evangelical" ministries may be headed in a similar direction, given their permeation with the Emerging Church movement which has infected mainstream Evangelicalism sort of like crab lice infect a hooker. Charity is a fundamental Christian conviction, but we also must temper charity with responsible Christian stewardship as well, not throwing money at every cause, campaign, and crusade that rolls down the pike just because it has a "Christian" label on it. God is not the Haines Underwear lady, folks! Therefore, in stewardship as well as anything else we must do as II Timothy 2:15 exhorts us, and be diligent to "study to show ourselves approved." Being (and staying) well-informed is the most exemplary exercise of Christian stewardship, and one much of the American Church lacks today.
I hope this will be of service to those of you who struggle with supporting even supposedly "Christian" ministries that oftentimes see fit to compromise their convictions. With Exodus International, Joel Osteen, and now World Vision doing its thing, there are bound to be others, and we live in a day and age where we need to exercise sharp discernment, because the deception of the enemy is getting more intense. Use these tips I have provided, and may God's blessings be with you as you are encouraged that ultimately HE is still on the throne!
1. How is it, first of all, that only now are they "discovering what Scripture has said all along?
2. Secondly, being that Stearns had his brainfart spasm a couple of days ago, it begs the question as to what else he's going to make stupid statements about?
3. Thirdly, being that World Vision is a ministry of compassion, isn't it odd that Stearns pulls in a $350K annual salary? This is something I find odd, as World Vision was one of the founding ministries of the Evangelical Council for Accountability (ECFA), and they didn't find that odd?? To me, Stearns is reminiscent in that regard of the professors at Southeastern University these days who make a lot of stink about the "plight of the poor," yet they too have extravagant salaries and $300K homes, drive around in fancy cars, etc.
4. Finally, the fourth question is what really warranted this change of heart - was it the prayerful seeking of the Holy Spirit's direction through Bible study, or was it the potential loss of donor dollars? After all, there were many staunch pro-family Evangelical Christians from a variety of denominational backgrounds who embrace traditional values and would not even consider the possibility of "gay marriage," and many denominational leaders, heads of theological schools, and others (including the president of Dallas Seminary, as well as the heads of both the Assemblies of God and the Southern Baptist Convention) have advocated ceasing support among their members for World Vision.
These questions have provoked questions from others on social media sites such as Facebook, and one woman I saw who posted on a FB discussion about this had a very legitimate question - she wanted to pull her support from World Vision, but she was worried about the child suffering that she was supporting through them and she didn't know what to do. So, I want to offer some bits of advice on dealing with something like this, as it might help give some answers and elimate some confusion:
1. First, if you are supporting a child through World Vision, don't necessarily stop but also start demanding a higher level of accountability from them - this should be a standing rule with any ministry or organization actually. In World Vision's case, they have membership in ECFA, and ECFA requires that its members provide quarterly or annual financial disclosures to their supporters, so take full advantage. If your support, for instance, is giving more towards lavish executive perks rather than helping the children or whoever the ministry is supposed to serve, this is a problem that needs to be addressed. Also, grill these people to explain exactly what "administrative costs" are, because oftentimes these are loopholes that hide unnecessary perks and ridiculous expenses. If you see excessive "administrative costs" that take up more than 5% of an organization's budget, it's time to maybe pull your support.
2. Despite some heart-tugging advertising campaigns some of these organizations use regarding specific children, the fact is one of these children may be the beneficiary of aid from a variety of sources, as it should be - one source often doesn't cut the living expenses of the families of these children. It may take some homework, but if you are dissatisfied with the accountability of an organization like World Vision, it would be wise to research into similar ministries, because you may be able to financially contribute to the same child and their family through another organization that is helping them. If I were a donor, I would research similar organizations such as Compassion International and Food for the Poor, as a chance exists that you may be able to continue sponsorship of the same child you have been donating to through one of the other organizations. If that be the case, shift your support then to them.
3. It must also be remembered that just because an organization claims to be "Christian" does not mean it is necessarily. A perfect example is Christian Children's Fund, whose ads you may recognize by the Miss Piggy-esque mug of a fat Sally Struthers trying her hand at tear-jerking. CCF was founded over 100 years ago, and at its beginning may have been more Christian, but the evolving theological liberalism of the mainline Protestant denominations that supported it have caused it to be about as Christian as the Church of Satan. It appears that World Vision and other "Evangelical" ministries may be headed in a similar direction, given their permeation with the Emerging Church movement which has infected mainstream Evangelicalism sort of like crab lice infect a hooker. Charity is a fundamental Christian conviction, but we also must temper charity with responsible Christian stewardship as well, not throwing money at every cause, campaign, and crusade that rolls down the pike just because it has a "Christian" label on it. God is not the Haines Underwear lady, folks! Therefore, in stewardship as well as anything else we must do as II Timothy 2:15 exhorts us, and be diligent to "study to show ourselves approved." Being (and staying) well-informed is the most exemplary exercise of Christian stewardship, and one much of the American Church lacks today.
I hope this will be of service to those of you who struggle with supporting even supposedly "Christian" ministries that oftentimes see fit to compromise their convictions. With Exodus International, Joel Osteen, and now World Vision doing its thing, there are bound to be others, and we live in a day and age where we need to exercise sharp discernment, because the deception of the enemy is getting more intense. Use these tips I have provided, and may God's blessings be with you as you are encouraged that ultimately HE is still on the throne!
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Great Lent
This is the season of Lent (or the Great Fast, as our Eastern Christian brethren call it). Lent is an important time of the year for us as Catholic Christians as it is a time of prioritizing our relationship with Christ by laying aside those things which distract us from living our Christian lives as individuals. I wanted to do an important teaching on Lent this year because it has a lot of misconceptions from Protestant Evangelical/Fundamentalist brethren who, through the nasty disorder called Romophobia, have weaved an entire mythology around Lent based largely on fallacious information supplied by spurious sources such as Alexander Hislop. However, not only is Lent fully Christian, but I want to show from Scripture that many practices of Lent have support there as well, provided you are not viewing them through Romophobic-tainted Fundamentalist lenses. So, I will begin by first discussing some specific practices - Ash Wednesday, fasting and abstinence, etc. - and then I want to show how Lent is a time for us to make Jesus Christ central in our lives, and how it establishes a pattern for the whole year and not just a season.
I want to begin with a discussion about Ash Wednesday, which marks the start of Western Lent (in the East, it begins on that preceding Monday). According to The Catholic Encyclopedia (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1987) on page 55, Ash Wednesday was instituted by Pope Gregory the Great in the 7th century, but it has roots in a much older practice that goes back to Old Testament times. Throughout Scripture, ashes have always symbolized mourning, penance, and sorrow, and this is evident in such Scripture passages as Jonah 3:6, Job 2:8 and 30:19 in the Old Testament as well as Matthew 11:21 and Luke 10:13 in the New. The Middle Eastern custom was generally to dress oneself in sackcloth, and sit in an ash bed when a penitential season of fasting was called. It is a call to humility reminding us that from the dust of the earth we come, and that we are no greater than God, who created us from that dust. The general practice on Ash Wednesday in the West is to burn the ashes from the palms of the Palm Sunday from the previous year (it forms a continuity with the previous Paschal season), after which the priest mixes them with holy water. As the priest prays over the faithful who humbly kneel at the altar, he paraphrases a passage of Scripture to them from Genesis 3:19, which in the traditional Anglo-Catholic service is read "Remember O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." (see The People's Anglican Missal, p. A60) The reason I wanted to mention this is that contrary to what some Protestant Fundamentalists allege, the distribution of ashes has a strong Scriptural base, and a deep meaning to those who receive this dispensation. I have heard some of the most ridiculous allegations about Ash Wednesday from these people, including this one from a person who is actually a friend - "Wearing ashes on your forehead (“for they disfigure their faces that they may appear unto men to fast”) is for show. And public proclamations of fasting or denying yourself a pleasure that is not sinful such as chocolate is unbiblical. It is for show. It is a man-made tradition. Besides, Christ commands us to fast in secret." To be honest, this is a ridiculous and stupid charge (no offense to my friend intended) and is so ridiculous that it bears no real need to respond to it. This unfortunately stems back to the whole idea of what justification is about - some Fundamentalists think - as Dr. Regis Martin, my theology professor, succinctly pointed out - that sin is like a cowpie and Jesus just covers it with snow and that is that. However, the more correct and Scriptural way of seeing justification is that Jesus, by His incarnation, enters into our sinful beings and transforms us from within, thus the stench of the manure of sin is transformed into the beautiful garden of salvation. In order for that to happen though, it is important to understand that salvation is not just a one-time event, but it is a lifelong thing. Baptism cleanses us from original sin, but we are still subject to propensities to sin, and therefore we have to be careful to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to conquer those propensities (called "the passions" by the Church Fathers) and overcome them by growing in our walk with Christ (Theosis). The Lenten season is one way to remind us that we need to do this, although it shouldn't stop with Lent, but actually should be a practice for the entire year. Which leads us to another aspect of this whole discussion - fasting and abstinence.
Fasting and abstinence can be practiced together, or they can be practiced separately, but they are two different things. Fasting is quantitative in that it has to do with how much we do or don't consume. Fasting takes several forms - it can be skipping a meal and eating smaller portions, or it can go all the way by not consuming anything for a period of time, as Jesus did in the 40-day sojourn He undertook in the Wilderness, which is also what Lent reminds us of in the Church year, as it deals with life events of our Lord. There is not a prescribed regimen for fasting, as the Church has always taught that one should do so as he or she is able - in other words, if you have medical issues that would make fasting difficult, you can do something else instead or fast in a more manageable way that will not endanger your health. Abstinence on the other hand has to do with quality, and what kind of food, etc., we consume. As far as I know, there are no health issues with abstinence, as anything can be abstained from that maybe is considered an indulgent pleasure. Keep in mind too that abstinence is not limited to food - you can also abstain from different types of television (or all TV!), hobbies, movies, favorite types of music, etc. Also, it is important to note that couples are also encouraged to abstain from sexual relations at this time (I Corinthians 7:50). But, Lent is not just about what you give up, but also about what you can do to enrich your spiritual life, which is where we go next.
With the distractions of life's pleasures tempered through the disciplines of fasting and abstinence, we are encouraged by the Church to engage in other spiritual activities and exercises to help us grow in our faith. For instance, you may have had that desire to read through a Biblical book, so this is a good time to do that. Also, that money you save by abstinence can be invested in the work of the Church or toward things that bless and help others - give more to the missions program of your church, or donate to a specific ministry, for example. It is also a prime occasion to channel the time you now have possibly from abstinence from entertainments to do something more constructive - visit a nursing home, assist your pastor with hospital visitations, or even volunteer time at the local animal shelter (abandoned pets are God's creatures too, after all). The reason for all this is a simple one - it is putting Christ back at the center of one's life and focus, and by ministering to others in practical ways you share Christ with them, rather than feeding the flesh and gratifying self. Which now leads me to some concluding observations.
The late Cardinal Henri de Lubac, in his classic 1956 text The Splendor of the Church, made an important point about what mystery is - I define mystery as a truth that you know is true but are unable to explain, but de Lubac takes it one step further. He says that a mystery is that which is "fitfully believed in obscurity." However, aside from the concept of "mystery," de Lubac notes that one particular mystery - the Church herself - is the one mystery that every other mystery (Trinity, the deity of Christ, the role of grace, etc.) revolves around (Henri de Lubac, The Splendor of the Church {New York: Sheed and Ward, 1956} p. 24). However, the Church is not the total end, as she reflects something else - the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Dr. Regis Martin, my Theology professor at Franciscan University of Steubenville, notes that one of the most perfect metaphors used by many to describe the Church over the centuries is the moon - in the moon, we see death and rebirth (those who make up the Church die to original sin through the holy mystery of Baptism, and we are "born again" in Christ), and also the fact that the moon imparts the light of the sun to the earth - the moon does not illuminate itself, in other words. Likewise, the Church imparts the light of the Gospel from the SON, Jesus, and she is the visible presence of Christ to the world. The Church does not exist for herself, but rather for the Savior who is her Spouse. In short, our devotion during Lent and at other times of the Christian year is not about us - the Lenten practices of fasting and abstinence are not a sanctified Atkins program, and as good as the health benefits are, they are not the sole purpose. That being said, it's time to preach a little.
I have been seeing some very disturbing trends among Evangelical Protestants in recent years that disturb me. In the logic of supposedly "becoming all things to all people," many of these people have discarded some very strong convictions about keeping Christ at the center of our lives in order to serve man - the culture is the new "god" of Evangelicalism, all in the name of "change." Again, this is a loss of focus from Christ to other things - numbers, respectability, etc. Just today as I write this as a matter of fact, a leading Evangelical relief ministry, World Vision, has decided that homosexuals who are "married" are all of a sudden Christians and can work with their "ministry." This is similar to so many others in recent years who have apostatized - Rob "No Hell" Bell, the Exodus International ministry, and not a few of my professors at my former university. I find it interesting, for instance, that many of my former professors put causes and pet projects above their professed call to equip future ministers in their denominations, but the double-standard they display betrays their real motive. I find it curious that these professors at supposedly Christian universities will soapbox about migrant workers, the "plight of the poor," etc., while at the same time they drive their expensive cars, live in their $300K homes, and get ridiculously large salaries from the tuition (which as worthless as some of it is, it is a ripoff to the poor students and their benefactors who supplied the funds to pay for it!). Yet, surprisingly, when one hears these professors soapbox about their pet causes, it is always to lay burdens on others that they themselves fall short bearing. This goes back to something that Primitive Catholic (now Anabaptist) writer David Bercot said in his 1989 book Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up? (Tyler, TX: Scroll Publishing, 1989) when he notes that Christianity will not improve until the Church returns to simple holiness, genuine love, and the crossbearing attitudes of early Christians (p. 158). Otherwise, this individualistic "Jesus and me and no room for thee" mentality of the majority of American Evangelicals (especially the professors in their theological schools teaching them this crap!) will lead to a secularization of their beings that will say, based on the fallacy of sola Scriptura, that because the individual interprets a situation thus, then it must be "the Lord." That is one reason so many so-called theological academics are quick to canonize Nietzsche and Marx while demonizing the real people in their own churches who believe the truth. And, that is also why people like the administration of World Vision now think it's "OK to be gay as long as you're married." Some writers have pointed out this pragmatism with Evangelicals before - in centuries past, divorce was considered a grave sin unless either adultery or life-endangering violence was the cause, but nowadays I have personally heard "Christians" saying they are divorcing their spouses because they "just don't feel compatible." Bullcockle!!! They need to be reminded of the Scripture perhaps that says "What God has brought together let no man tear asunder" (Matthew 19:6). Divorce opened the floodgates to a lot of crazy stuff among professing Christians in recent years, and it is of no surprise to me that some of these same people are baptizing homosexuality as "acceptable" now. Archbishop Haverland notes that this mindset among Christians will produce the same secularization that has plagued "mainline" churches like the Episcopalians, and it all comes back to too much individualistic, misguided, pseudo-pietist Scripture hermeneutics that de-emphasize the place of the Church in our understanding of our faith. Secularism is a real danger, and Fr. Alexander Schmemann defined it as "the absence of man as a worshipping being" in his book For The Life of the World on page 109. Hence, the need for a true Lenten season of repentance is a message to the whole Church to return devotion to Him whom it properly belongs, Jesus Christ.
In fastings, abstinence, and various spiritual exercises you may undertake this Lenten season, please remember to "do them unto the Lord." Lent is about putting Christ back in the center of our lives and giving our churches that luminous reflection of His love to witness to this world. And, in doing so, we must uphold that which the Church has taught - there is no compromise, "change," or innovation in that regard warranted, as what we have received IS the truth in its fullness; it doesn't need further development, but must be humbly and joyfully received and accepted. Until we do that, we cannot know the fullness of our life in Christ. So, this Lent, I challenge you - make Christ your center, and work to magnify Him in your daily lives. He is not asking you to be perfect, but to strive toward what He called you to be. God bless.
I want to begin with a discussion about Ash Wednesday, which marks the start of Western Lent (in the East, it begins on that preceding Monday). According to The Catholic Encyclopedia (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1987) on page 55, Ash Wednesday was instituted by Pope Gregory the Great in the 7th century, but it has roots in a much older practice that goes back to Old Testament times. Throughout Scripture, ashes have always symbolized mourning, penance, and sorrow, and this is evident in such Scripture passages as Jonah 3:6, Job 2:8 and 30:19 in the Old Testament as well as Matthew 11:21 and Luke 10:13 in the New. The Middle Eastern custom was generally to dress oneself in sackcloth, and sit in an ash bed when a penitential season of fasting was called. It is a call to humility reminding us that from the dust of the earth we come, and that we are no greater than God, who created us from that dust. The general practice on Ash Wednesday in the West is to burn the ashes from the palms of the Palm Sunday from the previous year (it forms a continuity with the previous Paschal season), after which the priest mixes them with holy water. As the priest prays over the faithful who humbly kneel at the altar, he paraphrases a passage of Scripture to them from Genesis 3:19, which in the traditional Anglo-Catholic service is read "Remember O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." (see The People's Anglican Missal, p. A60) The reason I wanted to mention this is that contrary to what some Protestant Fundamentalists allege, the distribution of ashes has a strong Scriptural base, and a deep meaning to those who receive this dispensation. I have heard some of the most ridiculous allegations about Ash Wednesday from these people, including this one from a person who is actually a friend - "Wearing ashes on your forehead (“for they disfigure their faces that they may appear unto men to fast”) is for show. And public proclamations of fasting or denying yourself a pleasure that is not sinful such as chocolate is unbiblical. It is for show. It is a man-made tradition. Besides, Christ commands us to fast in secret." To be honest, this is a ridiculous and stupid charge (no offense to my friend intended) and is so ridiculous that it bears no real need to respond to it. This unfortunately stems back to the whole idea of what justification is about - some Fundamentalists think - as Dr. Regis Martin, my theology professor, succinctly pointed out - that sin is like a cowpie and Jesus just covers it with snow and that is that. However, the more correct and Scriptural way of seeing justification is that Jesus, by His incarnation, enters into our sinful beings and transforms us from within, thus the stench of the manure of sin is transformed into the beautiful garden of salvation. In order for that to happen though, it is important to understand that salvation is not just a one-time event, but it is a lifelong thing. Baptism cleanses us from original sin, but we are still subject to propensities to sin, and therefore we have to be careful to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to conquer those propensities (called "the passions" by the Church Fathers) and overcome them by growing in our walk with Christ (Theosis). The Lenten season is one way to remind us that we need to do this, although it shouldn't stop with Lent, but actually should be a practice for the entire year. Which leads us to another aspect of this whole discussion - fasting and abstinence.
Fasting and abstinence can be practiced together, or they can be practiced separately, but they are two different things. Fasting is quantitative in that it has to do with how much we do or don't consume. Fasting takes several forms - it can be skipping a meal and eating smaller portions, or it can go all the way by not consuming anything for a period of time, as Jesus did in the 40-day sojourn He undertook in the Wilderness, which is also what Lent reminds us of in the Church year, as it deals with life events of our Lord. There is not a prescribed regimen for fasting, as the Church has always taught that one should do so as he or she is able - in other words, if you have medical issues that would make fasting difficult, you can do something else instead or fast in a more manageable way that will not endanger your health. Abstinence on the other hand has to do with quality, and what kind of food, etc., we consume. As far as I know, there are no health issues with abstinence, as anything can be abstained from that maybe is considered an indulgent pleasure. Keep in mind too that abstinence is not limited to food - you can also abstain from different types of television (or all TV!), hobbies, movies, favorite types of music, etc. Also, it is important to note that couples are also encouraged to abstain from sexual relations at this time (I Corinthians 7:50). But, Lent is not just about what you give up, but also about what you can do to enrich your spiritual life, which is where we go next.
With the distractions of life's pleasures tempered through the disciplines of fasting and abstinence, we are encouraged by the Church to engage in other spiritual activities and exercises to help us grow in our faith. For instance, you may have had that desire to read through a Biblical book, so this is a good time to do that. Also, that money you save by abstinence can be invested in the work of the Church or toward things that bless and help others - give more to the missions program of your church, or donate to a specific ministry, for example. It is also a prime occasion to channel the time you now have possibly from abstinence from entertainments to do something more constructive - visit a nursing home, assist your pastor with hospital visitations, or even volunteer time at the local animal shelter (abandoned pets are God's creatures too, after all). The reason for all this is a simple one - it is putting Christ back at the center of one's life and focus, and by ministering to others in practical ways you share Christ with them, rather than feeding the flesh and gratifying self. Which now leads me to some concluding observations.
The late Cardinal Henri de Lubac, in his classic 1956 text The Splendor of the Church, made an important point about what mystery is - I define mystery as a truth that you know is true but are unable to explain, but de Lubac takes it one step further. He says that a mystery is that which is "fitfully believed in obscurity." However, aside from the concept of "mystery," de Lubac notes that one particular mystery - the Church herself - is the one mystery that every other mystery (Trinity, the deity of Christ, the role of grace, etc.) revolves around (Henri de Lubac, The Splendor of the Church {New York: Sheed and Ward, 1956} p. 24). However, the Church is not the total end, as she reflects something else - the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Dr. Regis Martin, my Theology professor at Franciscan University of Steubenville, notes that one of the most perfect metaphors used by many to describe the Church over the centuries is the moon - in the moon, we see death and rebirth (those who make up the Church die to original sin through the holy mystery of Baptism, and we are "born again" in Christ), and also the fact that the moon imparts the light of the sun to the earth - the moon does not illuminate itself, in other words. Likewise, the Church imparts the light of the Gospel from the SON, Jesus, and she is the visible presence of Christ to the world. The Church does not exist for herself, but rather for the Savior who is her Spouse. In short, our devotion during Lent and at other times of the Christian year is not about us - the Lenten practices of fasting and abstinence are not a sanctified Atkins program, and as good as the health benefits are, they are not the sole purpose. That being said, it's time to preach a little.
I have been seeing some very disturbing trends among Evangelical Protestants in recent years that disturb me. In the logic of supposedly "becoming all things to all people," many of these people have discarded some very strong convictions about keeping Christ at the center of our lives in order to serve man - the culture is the new "god" of Evangelicalism, all in the name of "change." Again, this is a loss of focus from Christ to other things - numbers, respectability, etc. Just today as I write this as a matter of fact, a leading Evangelical relief ministry, World Vision, has decided that homosexuals who are "married" are all of a sudden Christians and can work with their "ministry." This is similar to so many others in recent years who have apostatized - Rob "No Hell" Bell, the Exodus International ministry, and not a few of my professors at my former university. I find it interesting, for instance, that many of my former professors put causes and pet projects above their professed call to equip future ministers in their denominations, but the double-standard they display betrays their real motive. I find it curious that these professors at supposedly Christian universities will soapbox about migrant workers, the "plight of the poor," etc., while at the same time they drive their expensive cars, live in their $300K homes, and get ridiculously large salaries from the tuition (which as worthless as some of it is, it is a ripoff to the poor students and their benefactors who supplied the funds to pay for it!). Yet, surprisingly, when one hears these professors soapbox about their pet causes, it is always to lay burdens on others that they themselves fall short bearing. This goes back to something that Primitive Catholic (now Anabaptist) writer David Bercot said in his 1989 book Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up? (Tyler, TX: Scroll Publishing, 1989) when he notes that Christianity will not improve until the Church returns to simple holiness, genuine love, and the crossbearing attitudes of early Christians (p. 158). Otherwise, this individualistic "Jesus and me and no room for thee" mentality of the majority of American Evangelicals (especially the professors in their theological schools teaching them this crap!) will lead to a secularization of their beings that will say, based on the fallacy of sola Scriptura, that because the individual interprets a situation thus, then it must be "the Lord." That is one reason so many so-called theological academics are quick to canonize Nietzsche and Marx while demonizing the real people in their own churches who believe the truth. And, that is also why people like the administration of World Vision now think it's "OK to be gay as long as you're married." Some writers have pointed out this pragmatism with Evangelicals before - in centuries past, divorce was considered a grave sin unless either adultery or life-endangering violence was the cause, but nowadays I have personally heard "Christians" saying they are divorcing their spouses because they "just don't feel compatible." Bullcockle!!! They need to be reminded of the Scripture perhaps that says "What God has brought together let no man tear asunder" (Matthew 19:6). Divorce opened the floodgates to a lot of crazy stuff among professing Christians in recent years, and it is of no surprise to me that some of these same people are baptizing homosexuality as "acceptable" now. Archbishop Haverland notes that this mindset among Christians will produce the same secularization that has plagued "mainline" churches like the Episcopalians, and it all comes back to too much individualistic, misguided, pseudo-pietist Scripture hermeneutics that de-emphasize the place of the Church in our understanding of our faith. Secularism is a real danger, and Fr. Alexander Schmemann defined it as "the absence of man as a worshipping being" in his book For The Life of the World on page 109. Hence, the need for a true Lenten season of repentance is a message to the whole Church to return devotion to Him whom it properly belongs, Jesus Christ.
In fastings, abstinence, and various spiritual exercises you may undertake this Lenten season, please remember to "do them unto the Lord." Lent is about putting Christ back in the center of our lives and giving our churches that luminous reflection of His love to witness to this world. And, in doing so, we must uphold that which the Church has taught - there is no compromise, "change," or innovation in that regard warranted, as what we have received IS the truth in its fullness; it doesn't need further development, but must be humbly and joyfully received and accepted. Until we do that, we cannot know the fullness of our life in Christ. So, this Lent, I challenge you - make Christ your center, and work to magnify Him in your daily lives. He is not asking you to be perfect, but to strive toward what He called you to be. God bless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Now that we have examined the story of Noah in-depth, what we begin to see as we launch into Genesis 10 is that the population begins to inc... -
Introduction I was actually not planning on doing a sixth article in the series, but so much information necessitated its creation. The g... -
For many years I have followed the ministry of Perry Stone, who at one time was an up-and-coming televangelist who in recent years has m...