The Voice of the World

The theoretical consecration of Gene Robinson. A sacrament is not a magic act, and cannot sanctify that which which has not been made holy.

Have you heard the voice of the World within the Church crying out; “Don’t you think that God should catch up with the times? After all, old ideas like the Ten Commandments are rather antique, a remnant of times long since passed. Why should humankind fear God? Why should the morality of the ancients apply today? After all, man is the measure of all things; and fair minded men can establish their own morality. Why, even now we are establishing laws that will tell the generations to come that old notions of gender, sexuality, and marriage all are passé.”

“He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord holds them in derision” [Psalm 2:4]. In rebuke the Lord asks, “A son honors his father, and a servant his master. If then I am a father, where is my honor? And if I am a master, where is my fear? says the LORD of hosts to you, O priests, who despise my name” [Malachi 1:6].

And you, child of God; you who hold God in honour: What does the Lord of Host have to say to you in the midst of all this turmoil? “The righteous shall live by faith” [Romans 1:17]. Hold firm to the things that you have been taught for this world is passing away, along with all the sham glory that belongs to it. In the meantime, “This is the will of God, your sanctification” [1 Thessalonians 4:3]. The Psalmist says, ‘But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear him, and his righteousness to children's children” [Psalm 103:17].

Under the Rainbow Bridge: A Family Tragedy

Late in 1941 three things came together: the new Mustang, the newly constructed Rainbow Bridge at Niagara Falls, and a young fly-boy named Nelson Perdue. The Mustang was a small fighter plane that out performed the Spitfire and was destined to take a major role in the war. The Rainbow Bridge had some strong romantic connections as the replacement for the Honeymoon Bridge, which collapsed due to an ice jam in the Niagara River. The new bridge had a marvelous view of Horseshoe Falls. Put those two tempting items together with the newly engaged Nelson Perdue and a sunny day in the fall of 1941 and you have the stuff of family legends. The tragedy is that Nelson was lost somewhere over Germany later in the war, leaving only the sparse legend surrounding his name. My aunt lost the most, and the event colored her life for some time to follow.  The rest of the family barely knew him. I never met him. Now sixty-five years later I know only the brief legend which was always told with joyful admiration, “Nelson flew under the Rainbow Bridge!”

What comes to mind is the admonition of a 8^th Century Saint, John of Damaskos, “All human affairs, all that does not exist after death is vanity. Riches vanish, glory leaves us… every man born of the earth troubles himself in vain… by the time we have gained the whole word we shall be in the grave, where king and pauper are one.”[1]

What is truly important? What is it that exists after death? Certainly if God is our one true Love, all other loves and relationships will exist in him. Here I want to raise a very important question for those of us in The Episcopal Church today.  Sixty-five years from now what will remain of the conflicts, vested interests, and personalities of the crisis within the church today? The simple answer is not much!

In 1771 conflict arouse in the Church of England.  250 clergy who were deeply affected by the spread of Unitarianism submitted a petition to parliament.  British Statesman Edmund Burke responded: "These gentlemen complain of hardships: let us examine a little what that hardship is. They want to be honored as clergymen of the Church of England … but their consciences will not allow them to conform to the doctrines and practices of that Church. That is, they want to be teachers in a Church to which they apparently no longer belong; and that is an odd sort of hardship. They want to be paid for teaching one set of doctrines, while they are teaching another."[2] Today’s conflict is only a variant of an ongoing debate between the orthodox and those who, like the second century heretic Marcion, refused the authority of Scripture and the Church wherever either disagreed with him. 

Marcion we know, because the theologian Tertullian named him, but who are the 250 clergy who petitioned Parliament in 1771? Their names are lost to posterity and they are only an obscure footnote in the history of the Church. At least my family remembers that it was Nelson Perdue who flew under the Rainbow Bridge.  Karl Barth said something to the effect that it is one of God’s miracles that the Church still exists. For twenty centuries, battered and bruised, the Church, the Bride of Christ rises from the ashes of conflict and opens the door to Salvation, Jesus Christ our Lord. 

From the perspective of history, there is nothing novel, or particularly earth shaking in the current attempts to deny the authority of Scripture in faith and practice.  Roseanne Roseannadanna was right, “it just goes to show you, it's always something! If it's not one thing, it's another!” Of course it is. St. Paul clearly warns us, “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.”[3] So what’s new?

Conflict within the Anglican Church is like waves crashing against the beach.  No matter how many times they come in, they always recede again. In the meantime, what are we to do? First, and it ought to be obvious, don’t build your house on the sand.  Build your house on the rock!  This is precisely where Jesus presents a stiff challenge to today’s Church.  What is the rock?  The One whom we call the Rock says, “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.”[4] 

The rock, very simply, is the self-revelation of God in Holy Scripture itself.  By definition, “In the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.”[5]  The poet John Donne said it very nicely, “The Scriptures are God’s Voice.  The Church is His Echo.”[6] I am well aware that not everybody wants that to be the solution for the painful stresses within the Church today, but I’m afraid that it is, and I don’t see away around the rock except by walking on the sand. Stability in times of distress is a matter of basic principles firmly held. I have always enjoyed the seashore, but for some reasons which should be obvious, I wouldn’t insist on building my house on the sand.

The second thing we are to do is follow the advice of Jesus who said “Fear not!”[7] and “Love one another!”[8] Instead of worrying over things that are out of your control, put your trust in Him who is our steadfast love[9] and do the amazing thing he told you to do, and “love one another.” That’s a whole lot better than pushing and shoving and saying uncharitable things.

The third thing we are supposed to do you already know.  Jesus said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."[10] He didn’t mean for you to do it only on mild sunny days, but in all kinds of weather, even when it’s stormy.  The secret of Church Growth is this: Go and make disciples!  That is as simple as inviting people to Church.  How do I know?  Because that is the way most of us came to faith in the first place; somebody invited us.

                                                                                                            

---

[1] John of Damaskos, quoted by St. Peter of Damaskos in “The Fifth Stage of Contemplation” in the Philokalia, Vol.3

[2] Alfred Plummer, The Church of England in the Eighteenth Century, (London: Methuen, 1910), edited in contemporary English, Rob Smith 2006, p. 168

[3] Acts 20:28-31 ESV

[4] Matthew 7:24

[5] The Articles of Religion, BCP, p. 868

[6] John Donne, Sermons VI. 5-7

[7] Many places in the gospels, but for a helpful verse look up Psalm 64:1b

[8] John 15:12 etc.

[9] Psalm 144:2

[10] Matthew 28:18-20

Fisticuffs

Sometimes good discussions on Facebook are like having a friendly game of boxing in a public park. Not everybody is going to understand what the match is all about. You may only be having a “gentleman’s match” following the Marquess of Queensberry Rules, not a wild slug fest that will end by biting someone else’s ear, but sooner or later a slugger will break in.

Recently one discussion became difficult when an unexpected person entered the ring and tried to deflect the conversation onto another subject. She opened her remarks by saying she hadn’t read the beginning of the discussion and then began raising issues about race and gender.

Like a boxer she came swarming out of her corner, but she was in the wrong ring and didn’t know what our discussion was really about. She told us that she was an atheist, and she was obviously proud of it; then she “took umbrage” because she misunderstood the moral basis of what we were saying.

We weren’t discussing race issues, nor were we saying that only Christians have morals as she implied, but it should be evident that Christians and the children of the world base their understanding of morality on different presuppositions. As a Christian I don’t assume that I am always moral, but I do understand that I am forgiven and expected to grow in love and morality.

She was already angry and spoiling for a fight, but she would be even angrier if she knew what I was thinking, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction" [Proverbs 1:7].  

As a side note, I’m sure that some people would be surprised that someone would attempt to have thoughtful discussion on a social media like Facebook, but it takes all kinds of people, even people like us.

The Sword of Justice

Tolerance, sweet words, and kindness will not solve the crisis created by Islamic terrorists today; neither will the mob response of the fearful. The key to solving the problem is in the proper exercise of authority by the governments of the world, yet those governments must be motivated by true justice, not by political gain, or prevented by timidity.

Hate blows a trumpet

And all the haters rally,

Muslim, Christian, Jew,

Atheist, and Agnostic;

The nut fringe of every crew.

Love cannot prevail

Without the sword of justice,

Protecting the world,

Eradicating evil,

That Holy Love might prevail.

#double haiku

There is a key to the current crisis with radical terrorism in the world. In the words of St. Paul, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer” [Romans 13:1-4].

This was something that George W. Bush understood, but that our current President, for his own reasons, apparently does not.  In our country the police and the military function as the sword of justice. The movie, American Sniper, is a fine example of wielding the sword of justice.  It is also quite clear that being the sword of justice is painful for good men and women called to that task. 

A cold winter has swept over the Church of the Western World because the children of the world have entered into the Church and called the things of the Church their own, disowning the notion of sin and the atoning death, and denying the resurrection of Jesus in the flesh. Instead they have replaced the saving love and works of Jesus with the millennium goals and think they have done a good thing, because they accept everybody with the exception of those who live by such foolishness.

What is the Church? It is not a mere pile of stone, mock gothic St. Matthew’s on the corner of Cranmer and Darwin Streets; nor is it an electric auditorium, replete with theater seating, dedicated to one hour entertainments hopefully spectacular; nor is the Church a religious assembly gathered only for teaching and the singing of songs old or contemporary.

The Church is an ecclesia, a gathering of the people of God, His visible Kingdom on earth; a people buried with Him in baptism and raised from spiritual death to share with Jesus His risen life; bound together in the shared mystery of His Body and Blood, living with Him His life in this world. The Church is not just those who think they know a lot of stuff about Jesus and prance around in fancy vestments. The Church is the gathering together in unity of those who have not only encountered Him at some time in the past, but those who live actively in His presence day by day. In that living together with Him in this holy present, they share in His love, reaching out to each other and caring for the poor, and bringing sinners into the arms of Jesus.

Whatever Happened to Authority in the Episcopal Church?

We have some naïve ideas about authority in The Episcopal Church.  I remember a bishop saying years ago, “The first thing I discovered when I became a bishop is that bishops don’t have any authority.”  I once repeated that to one of the old Anglo-Catholic prince bishops of the Church.  I shouldn’t have said that while he was eating lunch, he almost choked on his soup.  The truth is somewhere in between those two extremes.  That is part of the problem. 

Bishops do have authority, under the canons and constitutions of the Church. Rectors also have authority to protect themselves from bishops, but that has its own limits.  A congregation with a profligate or licentious priest may be almost ruined before authority can be brought to bear to rectify the problem.  On the other hand some Rectors need to be strongly defended against predatory and manipulative lay people.   On all sides people with authority problems abuse authority.  All too often the relationships can turn adversarial.  Part of the problem is that a local church is a congregation that may never become a communion of saints.  Do I sound too glum? Listen to the pain of the Church, and the pain of the Lord of the Church who weeps with his people.

It’s not enough to be converted to Christ unless one’s relationship to authority is also converted.  You know the baptismal questions as well as I do.  One asks, “Do you turn to Jesus Christ and accept him as your Saviour?”   That question was not meant to be separated from the question that asks, “Do you promise to follow and obey him as your Lord?”  Listen carefully.  We are saying that we shouldn’t expect to get our way, unless His way is our way.  Rather we should pray with Augustine, “Give what You command.  Command what you will.”

In current events in the Church there are people on both sides want their own way, and will go to great lengths to get it.  In the Church as a whole and in local parishes, many have been wounded by the stubborn selfishness of other Christians.  You know the old rubber about the Church eating its own wounded?  Did I get that right?  You know what I mean.

What is missing is true surrender to the actual authority of God as it is expressed in Holy Scripture.  Some would tell us that Scripture has no relevance today, and would rather follow the revolutionary principles of Saul Alinsky and force change on an unwilling Church.  Others in reaction would rather come out from amongst them and be clean.  In the middle we have Holy Scripture speaking about mishpat, justice in its old meaning of fair play, give and take, and giving a fair deal to all.  We have Holy Scripture speaking to us about personal integrity and truth in our actions.  We have Holy Scripture speaking about holiness and love in relationships, about such odd things as mercy and compassion.  On all sides we want our own way rather than the way of Love.  Love after all demands integrity.

That is after all what the fall was all about.  God said ‘don’t eat of the tree in the middle of the garden’, the serpent said, ‘eat, and you can be like God’, and Adam and Eve said, ‘that sounds right.’  Our first parents wanted their own way, and often, so do we.  It is time to call the fallen Church to repentance, starting with each one of us.

We need to begin to see things through God’s eyes.  “The Lord sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart” (I Samuel 16:7).  God is not fooled by the posturing of anyone within the Church, nor was Jesus ever abashed about speaking the truth about inappropriate attitudes or behavior.  Truth speaking must only be done in the context of love, for truth without love is just another form of falsehood.  If something is not right in the actions of the members of Church, regardless of the canonical rights of any party, it should be spoken to by those who can speak the truth in love.         

The Evangelical Hammer

            In a recent discussion on Facebook I witnessed the classic evangelical punch in the nose.  The discussion began with a post comparing current Islamic terrorism with the lamentable behavior of the Westboro Baptists. The contention being that we shouldn’t judge all of Islam by the behavior of Isis, just as we wouldn’t want to judge Christianity on the basis of the Westboro Baptists. By the way the underlying point has some validity, but I pointed out that it was a poor comparison. There are about 45 Westboro Baptists who protest with signs, and about 35,000 members of Isis that are glad to cut the heads of all infidels.

            Here a woman joined in the fray. After a little give and take she declared that she was an agnostic and wanted to live by love and by what seemed right to her. I remarked, “Do you believe that "Amor vincit omnia" (Love Conquers All)?” and adding, “it does, but only through Crucifixion.” She made it clear that she generally tried to listen and see if it made sense to her, and that didn’t make sense to her. She declared all the major religions were dangerous and that for her part she intended to live on the basis of love and her own experience. I pressed the point by remarking that I didn’t always think that I could judge things by my own experience.

            At this point the Evangelical Hammer leapt from the sidelines and entered the discussion and delivered an Evangelical punch in the nose by preaching some strong doctrine at her. His punch was doctrinally correct. The woman countered making it clear that she wasn’t interested in being saved. This was followed up by the Evangelical uppercut; more hard-nosed Christian doctrine. She weaved and ducked the punch and said in effect that she had better things to do. The Evangelical Pummeler couldn’t resist a parting shot, but the woman had already left the ring.

            I don’t mind a little enthusiastic debate, but I was saddened by the insensitivity of the Evangelical Hammer, who although “right,” effectively closed off the discussion. Being adamantly right is not good manners, and it is not always good evangelism. I am reminded of a quote from G. Campbell Morgan, an early 20^th Century British Evangelist, “There is a zeal for orthodoxy which is most unorthodox.” Hammering a point home without love leaves no room for further discussion.