postures (1)

I think I will meander a bit in a sort of a reoccurring blog series called “postures” in which I will view different postures people assume in their everyday lives. To start off, I want to view the posture of one’s hands during prayer.

I wonder why when I was a child I was taught to fold my hands. I suppose it was so that I would not be distracted by objects with which to fiddle. On the one hand, this is a good thing as ought to teach children to focus on what they are doing, i.e. praying to God, not wondering what toys are near by or who is sitting next to me or even what sort of noise might come out if I pull the hair of the person next to me. We fold our hands so remain undistracted and focused.

But is this sort of a negative approach to what we are doing when we pray? Can we really remain focused when we are concerned with what not to do? It’s like telling someone standing in line not to think about the time. I wonder if a better practice might be to open our hands in a posture more symbolic of receiving and offering, which seems to be more specific to we are doing when we pray anyways. Can a posture of open hands help with the distractions as well as have a more positive formation on our lives?

I think so. At this point I might refer you to the quote in my profile as well as the name of my blog: Two Empty Hands. Torrance reminds us that our act of worship is not to first offer but to first receive. We must first receive the gift of Christ and His worship to the Father so that we might be found in Christ by the Holy Spirit and worship in the same faithfulness. Cyril of Alexandria often views the atonement as the Son’s offering the perfect human worship to the Father.

It might be time that we move away from “close your eyes and cross your hands” to something more intentionally formational.

Peace,
Scott

Evan Almighty

Okay … I hate to do it. I really hate to do it! In fact … No! I won’t want to. But I have to. I have to be “that guy,” whoever he is. I know, okay! I know. Even Almighty, while displaying bits and pieces of truth, is merely a humanistic/Protestant liberal/social gospel interpretation of the biblical story of Noah, which ultimately distorts its interpretation at the most fundamental levels.

Okay … phew! Glad that’s done … But it is true.

Some thoughts:

[spoiler alert!! I might give some things away]

1. God: God is a completely transcendent, non-Trinitarian being, although He show’s up looking like a human every now and then.
2. Teleology: God seems to make it up as he goes. He comes across as a guy who has it all figured out but there really is no end in sight. He seems providential, but for what? This has huge effects on the movies anthropology.
3. Anthropology: Three words: “Random Acts of Kindness,” or, ARK. That’s all God wants from His children. Oh, and more personal time with one’s family. We all have it in us to be a little bit better, although there is no standard or formation required to be better. It’s as if everyone just knows what it means to be kind.
4. Sin: I am not quite sure what sin is in this world. While it seems that no one is really outside God’s saving grace, there is still some sort of evil reality. In this movie, John Goodman’s character personifies evil. I suppose this fits right along with a standardless understanding of what is good. Since we don’t know what is good we are free to decide on our own what is bad. But, doesn’t that make everyone wrong and everyone right?
5. Christology: Ironic in all this is that God’s chosen pick for Noah is a politician who ran on the campaign slogan “change the world.” This blatantly undermines any understanding that the world changed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Lest I dwell solely in the realm of deconstruction, I offer these bits and pieces of truth that the movie rips from more secure theological foundations. Thus, here are some well-intentioned themes the movie offers:

1. Who are God’s people? Everyone! God has over 6 billion kids.
2. ARK, or Random Acts of Kindness implies a very watered down and more vague notion of the historic understanding of the works of mercy. In other words, love one other. Be “charitable” to one another.
3. God laughs and enjoys His creation. We see this in a scene where God shows up to see an old friend, which is a tree. Of course the implication of this is that God was for not with this tree, which is just not true. This is not to say that God communes with trees like he does with people, but at least the God of Even Almighty is not Pantheistic!
4. More importantly, God wants to dance with us and enjoy our enjoyment of Him.

Why say all this? Because a short while ago the world picked up on the fact that it can make money off Christians. Over the next umpteen years we are going to see more surges in movies displaying obvious Christian themes. I am concerned that the Church might be to ignorant (please know that I say that as kind I possibly can) to call out those who make films like Even Almighty and offer critique on where they far and where they are near. Refer to my previous blog post and the play between analogy and parody.

Peace,
Scott

humbled and baffled

I came to this conclusion today as I skimmed through a book review on Graham Wards, Cultural Transformation and Religious Practice by Randi Rashkover. The review appears in the latest issue of Modern Theology.

Rashkover comments,

“Both Cities of God and Ward's more recent Cultural Transformation and Religious Practice, offer a Christian apologetics in which Christianity is both part of contemporary culture, committed to reading the signs of the times, and also outside that culture, committed to reading those signs through the lens of its own calculus of desire. Ward's apologetics arises from Augustine's analysis of the relationship between the city of man and the city of God. The encounter between the two cities is governed by two different logics, that of analogy and that of parody. On the one hand, the two cities share the same language and can provide occasions for mutual interpretation. On the other hand, the city of man is a parody of the city of God and can be read as a perverted imitation that is therefore subject to Christian critique. For the city of God, as the representative of eschatological reality, contextualizes and corrects the meaning and use of the city of man and its language; indeed, the intelligibility of the city of man is inextricable from its need for correction through the city of God.”

Talk about walking the line! Or maybe it’s not about walking the line. There is a crafty weaving of the wheat and the tares that somehow the Church must embrace. I am humbled by our task and confess my utter ignorance.

Peace,
Scott

Anti-Gang czar for L.A. is chosen

"Jeff Carr, a minister with a liberal evangelical group, will oversee Villaraigosa's strategy of targeting eight zones across the city.

By Duke Helfand, Times Staff Writer
June 20, 2007

An ordained minister who has spent much of his career developing social service and youth programs in some of Los Angeles' poorest neighborhoods will be named today as the city's new gang czar, officials said.

Jeff Carr, chief operating officer for Sojourners/Call to Renewal, a liberal evangelical group based in Washington, D.C., will work directly for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa as director of gang reduction and youth development programs.

Carr will coordinate an anti-gang strategy that Villaraigosa unveiled in April. The approach calls for police and social service agencies to target eight "gang reduction zones" in South Los Angeles, the Eastside, the northeast San Fernando Valley and other areas.



The new director of anti-gang efforts will oversee an evaluation of the city's existing 23 gang prevention and intervention programs and recommend which should continue.

Villaraigosa's office said the mayor picked Carr because of his ability to develop successful youth programs and his expertise at running nonprofit organizations. Officials said they thought his work in the faith-based sector would be an asset in his new public role, which will carry the title of deputy mayor.

"Jeff Carr has the perfect blend of organizational, financial and community-based experience to successfully quarterback the mayor's gang-reduction strategy," said Matt Szabo, a mayoral spokesman.

Villaraigosa has scheduled a news conference for this morning to introduce Carr at the California Endowment near downtown.

While at Sojourners/Call to Renewal during the last two years, Carr oversaw finances, personnel and marketing functions.

Before that, he spent 17 years at the Bresee Foundation, a faith-based Los Angeles organization whose programs provide more than 3,000 people annually with access to healthcare, education, technology, job skills and recreation activities.

Bresee focuses its programs in Koreatown, South Los Angeles and the Pico-Union and Westlake districts.

As the foundation's executive director, Carr oversaw overall development and direction. He established a pediatric medical clinic — negotiating a contract with a community healthcare provider for services for young people up to age 18, according to the mayor's office.

Carr also developed a first-time offender program to provide assistance to juvenile offenders, and he was responsible for development of the Bresee Youth Program, which serves people ages 11 to 21 with recreation activities, tutoring, job training, college scholarships and spiritual development.

Carr could not be reached for comment, but a Sojourners/Call to Renewal representative said he would be missed.

"Our loss is a real gain for the citizens of Los Angeles," said Jack Pannell, a spokesman for the group, which describes itself as a Christian ministry dedicated to social justice issues on national and international levels.

"Jeff is a creative visionary when it comes to real programs that affect people and communities."

Carr was raised in the Church of the Nazarene and followed his father by becoming an ordained minister in the church. He is married, with two young children."

Thoughts on Aesthetics

So, I finally order a copy of David Bently Hart's, The Beauty of the Infinite. Even after the first fifteeen pages I am beginning to understand why it is so praised. I found these thoughts to be particularly interesting

"What Christian thought offer's the world is not a set of 'rational' arguments that (supressing certain of their premises) force assent from others by leavening them, like the interlocturs of Socrates, as a loss for words; rather, it stands before the world principally with the story it tells concerning God and creation, the form of Christ, the lovliness of the practice of Christian charity - and the rhetorical richness of its idiom. Making its appeal first to the eye and heart, as the only way it many 'command' assent, the church cannot separate truth from rhetoric, or from beauty" (4).

They shall know we are Christians by our love? Interesting.

Paedophilia, the unforgivable sin

When is caution taken too far? I have asked myself this question on many occasions since, oh, I guess it would have to be September 11, 2001 when as a rather ignorant and naïve college student I was forced to start paying attention. In recent years immigration has brought this question to mind, particularly in a post-9/11 world where safety and security by means of national defense is a way of life. But always lurking in the back of my mind is the Christian response to paedophilia.

A Guardian Unlimited article this week talks about “chemical castration” as means of control over sexual predators. In some cases they are talking about using satellites in order to monitor these people. I am convinced, as most everyone else is (hopefully), that “There are very few crimes more horrific than sex offences against children.” My concerns today, however, lie in what a Christian response might be.

I am not sure that I have any answers. But David Wilson's comments are interesting. He writes, “So too have I worked with those who have been chemically castrated - metaphorically had "their balls cut off" - but who still harbour desires to do awful things to children, because ultimately what motivates them has much more to do with psychology than physiology, and therefore what they can't achieve physically they can none the less achieve with …” Well, you can use your imagination as to what might be used.

This is an issue of privacy and information. I think the intentions of law’s like Megan’s law or Sarah’s law are attempting to do something good. But what are the implications? What are the implications of forcing someone out into the public without giving them a place to go? The problem lies deeper than physics, deeper than law. It is a moral issue that the current culture is not equipped to handle. I am convinced that this problem will increase if the Church does not create space in their communities for these people.

Of course the next question is one of space-making.

Wisdom from a master

"For, though it is not an easy thing for a soul under the influence of error to repent, yet, on the other hand, it is not altogether impossible to escape from error when the truth is brought alongside it" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, III.2.iii).

everyday people

I have worked as a bellman/valet at a hotel here in Overland Park, KS for the past two years. Although I am not the one to get star struck" I have always thought it pretty cool when famous people stay at our hotel. Until today I hadn't thought about all the people I have encountered. So, here are a few singled out folks.

1. Buzz Aldrin – He gave me an autograph picture as a tip.

2. Madalyn Albright – I thought it pretty exhilarating that after I helped her up to her room I got to say, "is there anything else I can help you with, madam secretary?" Who gets to say that?!

3. Artis "the A-train" Gilmore – Gilmore is a former ABA and NBA player. I talked to him today. He was actually brought to the wrong hotel (poor efforts by the limo driver). He is 7'2" and still looks like he can dominate in the paint. Check him out here. For an update on the A-trains recent activities try here.

4. Dennis Prager – He probably means nothing to anyone not from the West coast. He has an AM radio talk show mostly dealing with interfaith dialogue. You can check him out online here.

5. Al Roker – "Here's what's happening in your neck of the woods." Or, Al's neck.

6. Dr. Oz - This one makes the list because of my wife Katie. But, I did get to store his luggage for a few hours in the morning. As far as I could tell, no one noticed it was him in the lobby.

Anyways … working at a hotel has its more interesting days.

Telling God's Story

I just ordered a copy of John Wright's Telling God's Story: Narrative Preaching for Christian Formation. A must read for any and all preachers of the Word! Here is a brief, get-to-the-point, summary. Wright's goal in this book is to promote a way of preaching able to call people into an alternative way of living, i.e. out of the world into the church. At the heart of his argument for narrative preaching is hermeneutics. Wright offers a very helpful survey of the landscape of hermeneutical developments in the last 200 years (Schleiermacher, Heidegger, and Gadamer). In the end, preaching and interpretation (homiletics and hermeneutics) are intricately related when it comes to scripture, the church, and the world. The scriptures are always read in local, concrete communities, with certain presuppositions about the way things are that need to be recognized and corrected. In other words, the goal of preaching is that we might find our lives in God’s life, our stories in God’s story. Through the lens of preaching, Wright offer’s a critical analysis and survey of North American Christianity arguing that the church has diverged from such an understanding of preaching and interpretation resulting in the eclipse of the biblical narrative (47). When the biblical narrative is eclipsed, the interpretive and rhetoric(al) framework of North American Christianity becomes individualism, nationalism, and capitalism (the market), a world quite alternative the world of the bible. Promoting a rhetoric of turning, Wright offer’s practical instruction as to how preachers might weave the story of God. Turning involves repenting from one world into another. Turning involves what Wright as a tragedy as opposed to a comedy. The goal of comedic preaching, essentially, is to affirm one’s convictions about the way things are. Tragedy, on the other hands, helps one see that our world is indeed false and needs to be merged into God’s. Through preaching the preacher must interpret the ways in which the church is being malformed in order to call the church to faithful living. Here's a sample:

“Human beings live habitually. Cultural convictions are deeply embedded in the bodies of a gathered congregation – everything is the culture around them works to make such convictions seem ‘natural.’ To allow the congregation to be formed as a peculiar people, to allow the biblical narrative ‘to replace the naïve understanding, student [congregants] must reveal the latter [their previous understanding] and have the opportunity to see where it falls short.’ We must embrace this tragic moment of difference if repentance is to occur.

Our post-Christian environment provides a challenge and opportunity for the preacher. This setting allows the preacher to present the genuine difference between the biblical narrative and the narratives of the failure for a congregation to heart. Rather than coasting on the narrative presuppositions of the reigning culture, the preacher may engage the congregation and then turn them to form the church as peculiar people, living within the biblical narrative as a sign of God’s redemptive intent for all creation” (91).

On speaking truthfully and Jerry Falwell

The death of Jerry Falwell (1933-2007) has got me thinking. How should the church mourn/celebrate in death the life of those with whom they have fundamental theological differences? Interestingly, within this question I am proposing some aspect of ecclesial unity (which might not be the case). This is an interesting question when one considers the characteristics that mark a saint in the church. What are these marks? How do I speak faithfully and truthfully about one such as Rev. Falwell with who I disagree on many theological levels?

On a deeper theological level, does sainthood imply both unity and diversity? What are the common characteristics that mark a saint? In what way are characteristics of a saint allowed to be unique to the person? To add balance to the question, consider the person of Robert Weber (1933-2007) who, ironically, shared the same life span and Falwell. How do I, who perhaps share more in common with Weber than Falwell, speak about Falwell in a way that is faithful and true but not to the detriment of Christian unity?

I guess in a way I am asking if Falwell ought to be one of whom we teach our children to consider as an example of faithful Christian living. If not, then how do we speak in love about those that have gone before with whom we disagree? Consider Origen, who got shafted by the church just for thinking outside the box during a time when it was perhaps most permitted to be as creative in his thinking as he was. Only recently has his thought been reconsidered as faithful. Might we think the same about Falwell? Should we consider his views heretical if we disagree with them? If so, on what grounds? Is the church too divided to make such statements? Does the reality of such unique ecclesial diversity in our time permit us to be more critical (always in faith, hope, and above all love) of Falwell’s understand of what it means to be a Christian?

MADtv - iRack (including blooper)

A question on Barth ... Please help!

I came across these sentences in Barth's Epistle to the Romans and I have a question. He says:

"...we men, living in time, perceive the Futurum resurrectionis [future resurrection], which is our true and positive conformity to Jesus. This is wholly distinct from such moral and actual experiences or dispositions of character as many accompany the perception" (197).

He's commenting on Romans 6:5

Is Barth recognizing that in there is a true conformity the begins in the Christian life? Or is he just Lutheran enough to place all real subjective change in the end (glorification)?

I'll leave this vague. Hopefully the conversation will lead to clarity.

Thanks Barthians!

Amen Brother

Weird!

...Gregory, preaching, being moved, Panera...

I often wonder why I post reflectionless quotes on my blog. I think perhaps the answer might be that in some strange way I just want to be heard. That perhaps as I sit here in Panera, reading Gregory the Great's Pastoral Rule, and utterly moved by the following passage, I hope that some might share in my own experience, my own emotions, my own story. Anyways, at the risk of being ignored, I hope you preachers who frequent my blog (any maybe others) might be moved with me by these ancient words.

"Let them hear what is said to the preacher through Solomon, Drink water out of your own cistern, and running waters of your own well. Let your fountains be dispersed abroad, and divide your waters in the streets. Have them to yourself alone, and let not strangers be partakers with you (Prov. v. 15-17). For indeed the preacher drinks out of his own cistern, when, returning to his own heart, he first listens himself to what he has to say. He drinks the running waters of his own well, if he is watered by his own word. And in the same place it is well added, Let your fountains be dispersed abroad, and divide your waters in the streets. For indeed it is right that he should himself drink first, and then flow upon others in preaching. For to disperse fountains abroad is to pour outwardly on others the power of preaching. Moreover, to divide waters in the streets is to dispense divine utterances among a great multitude of hearers according to the quality of each. And, because for the most part the desire of vain glory creeps in when the Word of God has free course unto the knowledge of many, after it has been said, Divide your waters in the streets, it is rightly added, Have them to yourself alone, and let not strangers be partakers with you. He here calls malignant spirits strangers, concerning whom it is said through the prophet in the words of one that is tempted, Strangers are risen up against me, and strong ones have sought after my soul (Ps. liii. 5). He says therefore, Both divide your waters in the streets, and yet have them to yourself alone; as if he had said more plainly, It is necessary for you so to serve outwardly in preaching as not to join yourself through elation to unclean spirits, lest in the ministry of the divine word you admit your enemies to be partakers with you. Thus we divide our waters in the streets, and yet alone possess them, when we both pour out preaching outwardly far and wide, and yet in no wise court human praises through it." (Gregory the Great, Pastoral Rule, 3.24)

A Lenten Reflection

I just discovered this poem on Christ's passion. While you want to avoid some of the Gnostic influences, it is a thoughtful encounter with the suffering that Christ endured (the writer writes from Christ's perspective). There are many aspects of atonement that would later be severed from each other that are represented here. I recommend reading it slow. Allow it to be sort of a drama unfolding as it is that one is called to reflect on Christ's passion within the context of worship as one approaches the middle of the temple. Reflections are always appreciated here.

What changes your worldview?

Last night in our Ash Wednesday service we showed two movie clips as a part of the Liturgy. They appear at two separate times and pertained to particular Scriptures of Lent. They fit the moment very well.

Scene One, Schindler’s List: This was the scene where a large group of Jewish people were outside shoveling snow when a Nazi guard pulled one man and shot him in the head. The blood stained the ground as it ran down from his head to the tip of his fingers.

Scene Two, Crash: In this scene the Persian shop owners walks up to Daniel, the Latino locksmith who he thinks has destroyed his shop. There is yelling back and forth as Daniel keeps point at his daughter for her to stay inside the house. Scared, the daughter runs out to her dad with the mom right behind. (spoiler alert). As she gets to her dad the gun goes off right in the daughters back. The father let’s a cry from the bottom of his heart. The mom breaks down. We come to find out that the daughter has not been shot. The parents are thankful. The Persian man is confused.

Did I mention that we watched these scenes without audio?!? Amazing! Powerful! I could hear the cry of the father when he thought his daughter was shot ring in my head from when I watched the movie the first time. I heard it so clear.

Why I am saying this?

I say this because I am curious to know what movies, books, songs, poems, etc, whatever, become those resources that help move us, that help us live faithfully. What helps change our worldview to the kind of worldview formed by the liturgy? What helps us live out our baptisms Eucharistically? These are the questions with which I am curious? These kinds of things do not have to be “Christian” in the manner that we have “Christian music” and “non-Christian music.” U2 for example is a good example of “non-Christian” music. Crash then, in this sense, becomes a Lenten reality for us. I have been considering the Iron and Wine On Your Wings song as particularly Lentful (did I make up that word?).

God, there is gold hidden deep in the ground
God, there's a hangman that wants to come around
How we rise when we're born like the ravens in the corn
on their wings, on our knees crawling careless from the sea

God, give us love in the time that we have

God, there are guns growing out of our bones
God, every road takes us farther from home
All these men that you made how we wither in the shade
of your trees, on your wings we are carried to the sea

God, give us love in the time that we have

So, help me out. Help me think through this.

"Herein lies the novelty of the Gospel, which changes the world without making noise."

On the Revolution of Love

It "Changes the World Without Making Noise" VATICAN CITY, FEB. 18, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of the address Benedict XVI delivered today before reciting the midday Angelus with several thousand people gathered in St. Peter's Square.

"Dear Brothers and Sisters!

This Sunday's Gospel has one of the most typical, yet most difficult, teachings of Jesus: Love your enemies (Luke 6:27).

It is taken from the Gospel of Luke, but it is also found in Matthew's Gospel (5:44), in the context of the programmatic discourse that begins with the famous Beatitudes. Jesus delivered this address in Galilee, at the beginning of his public ministry: It was something of a "manifesto" presented to everyone, which Christ asked his disciples to accept, thus proposing to them in radical terms a model for their lives.

But what is the meaning of his teaching? Why does Jesus ask us to love our very enemies, that is, ask a love that exceeds human capacities? What is certain is that Christ's proposal is realistic, because it takes into account that in the world there is too much violence, too much injustice, and that this situation cannot be overcome without positing more love, more kindness. This "more" comes from God: It is his mercy that has become flesh in Jesus and that alone can redress the balance of the world from evil to good, beginning from that small and decisive "world" which is man's heart.

This page of the Gospel is rightly considered the "magna carta" of Christian nonviolence; it does not consist in surrendering to evil -- as claims a false interpretation of "turn the other cheek" (Luke 6:29) -- but in responding to evil with good. (Romans 12:17-21), and thus breaking the chain of injustice. It is thus understood that nonviolence, for Christians, is not mere tactical behavior but a person's way of being, the attitude of one who is convinced of God's love and power, who is not afraid to confront evil with the weapons of love and truth alone. Loving the enemy is the nucleus of the "Christian revolution," a revolution not based on strategies of economic, political or media power. The revolution of love, a love that does not base itself definitively in human resources, but in the gift of God, that is obtained only and unreservedly in his merciful goodness. Herein lies the novelty of the Gospel, which changes the world without making noise. Herein lies the heroism of the "little ones," who believe in the love of God and spread it even at the cost of life.

Dear brothers and sisters: Lent, which begins this Wednesday, with the rite of the distribution of ashes, is the favorable time in which all Christians are invited to convert ever more deeply to the love of Christ.

Let us ask the Virgin Mary, the docile disciple of the Redeemer, to help us to allow ourselves to be conquered without reservations by that love, to learn to love as he loved us, to be merciful as our heavenly Father is merciful (Luke 6:36)."

Benedict XVI

"They shall look upon Him whom they have pierced'

A worthy Lenten theme indeed!

I am thankful for Pope Benedict XVI’s Lent message. (Search February 13, 2007).

The Pope calls for the faithful to direct our gaze upon the cross where God's love was fully revealed. We are reminded to consider God's love as agape and Eros. Eros? That seems a bit odd. The Pope reminds us, however, that while God looks exclusively for our own good, He desires to possess our "yes;" and so Mary becomes important for us this season as we seek to follow her first yes with our own. God is Eros. "On the cross, it is God Himself who begs the love of His creature: He is thirsty for the love of everyone of us." And so, let us look upon the one whom we have pierced, drawn to the glory of the God in the face of Christ on the cross and let us confess by the Spirit our sins and receive mercy. Let us receive that Eucharistic grace that we might more fully manifest the reality of our Baptisms. Drawn out of ourselves in Baptism let us spread the love of God as we learn it in the Eucharist.

Your help, please

A pastor that I know is working to help his Church embrace some of the deeper implications of the Eucharist and he asked me to list what books I had read regarding this. I figured that I could provide a few good books but thought that maybe you all who read this blog might suggest some of your own as well. So bring on the books lists! Here are a few of my own suggestions to get us going.

Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the World
William Cavanaugh, Torture and Eucharist (chapters 5 and 6)
T. F. Torrance, Theology in Reconciliation (chapter 3)
Lawrence Welch, Christology and Eucharist in the Early Thought of Cyril of Alexandria

p.s. Articles are welcome as well.

"Kate, dammit, run!"

LOST is back, YAY!

Confession and Counseling

I am currently in the middle of a class called Pastoral Care and Counseling. The question of confidentiality and disclosure recently came up in one of our sessions. Someone mentioned that the pastor should always keep confidentiality with the parishioner unless mandated by State and Federal law. I questioned that assumption based on a Catholic understanding of the confessional. I have a few questions for consideration.

ONE: How different is the confessional space form a counseling session?

TWO: Is the confessional exempt from State and Federally mandate laws? e.g. Do you turn in a person who is confessing his/her struggles of child molestation, that is, he/she is actually doing the acts?

THREE: What is the significance of confessional space?

My Theological Meme

Charlie has tagged me to put my own theological meme. First, the rules of the game:

1) You do not talk about fight ... Oh, sorry. Wrong game.

Here we go. Rule number one (and there are one and a half rules).

1/2) You do not meme until memed upon (actually I made that one up).
1) Name three (or more) theological works from the last 25 years (1981-2006) that you consider important and worthy to be included on a list of the most important works of theology of that last 25 years (in no particular order).

So, without further ado.

1) T. F. Torrance, The Trinitarian Faith, 1995.
2) G. Simon Harak, Virtuous Passions, 2001
3) John Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 2002

Schmemann’s For the Life of the World did not make the cut because it was written in 1973. That would be my alternative fourth if the time frame ever changed. Or maybe Hauerwas’, The Peaceable Kingdom … Or even Cavanaugh’s Torture and Eucharist.

Tag, you’re it: Brian Postlewait, Matt Alexander, and J.R. Caines.

The incautious importunity of loquacity

"Rulers ought also to guard with anxious thought not only against saying in any way what is wrong, but against uttering even what is right overmuch and inordinately; since the good effect of things spoken is often lost, when enfeebled to the hearts of hearers by the incautious importunity of loquacity: and this same loquacity, which knows not how to serve for the profit of the hearers, also defiles the speaker."

Gregory the Great

The city does not need Jesus

Over the past few weeks I was able to take c class through NTS called Urban Immersion: Los Angeles. The goal of the class is just that, to immerse one in many of the facets of the city. We were able to gain perspective on the social, political, and economic situation of Los Angeles through a lens of urban ministry.

Some of the highlights included a half-day walk through the downtown area. We spent a great deal of time in Skid Row, a shocking environment after one has toured “Bunker Hill”, which if you know anything about this area the most significant point might be made that it sits on artificially raised structures that serve to restrict unwanted visitors. The local security proves this point. The way the downtown area has founded itself structured provides a scene of hopelessness for those trapped in the plight of the city. I witnessed first hand the sweatshops located just above the shops that sell the products. Products marked too high that serve to pay workers at ridiculous wages. [If the U.S wants to rid the country of illegal immigrants then the best way is to stop buying the products made or the food grown by “illegal hands” … but that might leave the poor without a cloak or tunic, naked and helpless for all the world to see. Perhaps that might leave the powers naked and helpless for all the world to see.]

The city does not need Jesus, the world need only recognize His presence already there.

"And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all [people] to myself."

Anyways…just some thoughts.

Smith, Derrida, and the Church

Despite the dire effects of procrastinating, I am forgoing some of my reading for school to post a few comments on James Smith’s, Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism. For a more exhaustive dialogue you can visit The Church and Postmodern Culture: Conversation and find a chapter-by-chapter discussion of the book beginning in July archives.

Smith’s book is the first in a book series that will draw on the “culture of postmodernity as an opportunity for rethinking the shape of our churches” (9). “Opportunity” indicates that the realm of postmodern culture and theory can be utilized by the Church to help it recover a better ecclesiology, which Smith suggests is both ancient and liturgical. To utilize postmodern culture and theory is to neither shun it nor baptize it, an important point to be kept in mind! For the Church Smith is encouraging a “creative recovery of ancient themes and figures” (25), as opposed suggesting a paleo-orthodox route.

As this is not meant to be a blog post exhaustive of Smith’s book, there are a few highlights I would like to make.

On Presuppositional Apologetics: Presuppostional apologetics means exactly that, a person’s worldview has inherent presuppositions that give is shape. There is no neutral rational playing field where everything means the same thing. One’s experience has and is determining what is true and false. For the Church this means that we have to recognize and embrace people will different worldviews. We cannot expect people to understand what we mean when we say, the “Word became flesh”, or “Christ’s blood is the blood of the new covenant.” Smith suggests that the primary responsibility of the Church is proclamation (kerygma). The church is not a system of truth dictate by neutral reason but a story that requires eyes to see and ears to hear (28). Revelation is the key to this kerygmatic proclamation.

On Derrida’s claim, “there is nothing outside the text”: Essentially, there is nothing outside of context (52). There is no neutral rational playing field. Interpretation is always context sensitive. Simply put, we cannot escape our own skin. Everything must be interpreted in order to be experienced (38). To experience something is to interpret it. However, Derrida goes on to say that an interpretation is good or bad based on the guidelines of one’s context, or community.

There is a lot that can be said further, especially as one gets into some of the finer nuances of “deconstruction”. For now I just want to highlight what Smith has to say about a deconstructive church.

On a deconstructive church: A deconstructive church embraces the entire biblical text in the form of the lectionary, converses with ancient voices in the form of creeds and preaching, and listens through prayer to global voices of today’s Church, especially those marginalized voices for the gospel, which is largely “foolishness” is to be spoken from the sidelines (58). A deconstructive Church is a prophetic Church because it does not count on people simply seeing that Christianity is true it proclaims the truth of the gospel and trusts the Spirit to illuminate that truth. Worship in a deconstructive church shapes our worldview to be able to call out the false realities of the world that claim they are the truth. In worship we give ourselves to be formed after the image of God so that we can interpret the world according to the gospel.

Now, why the short summary of a few chapters of a book?

I guess when I read something like this I find many of faith gaps of my life being filled with a certain level of assurance of my being a follower of Christ. Proclamation makes more sense, if you will, than demonstration (according to Smith). How can I ever prove the gospel according to a neutral rational playing field? Now, I am not suggesting that the church proclaim a certain level of ignorance. Proclamation assumes language and practice. That said, the Church is to prove the gospel through its communal witness as it exists in space and time. This kind of “prove” is a demonstration not according to common sense but faithful witness. We will prove the things of God by our lives and always by the Holy Spirit.

I guess I’ll end my comments for now.

Peace,
Scott

You have got to be kidding me!

I actually saw this today at Target. Wow!

For if Christ is God, as indeed He is, but took not human nature upon Him, we are strangers to salvation

Some good stuff from Cyril of Jerusalem for Christmas.

"Nurslings of purity and disciples of chastity, raise we our hymn to the Virgin-born God with lips full of purity. Deemed worthy to partake of the flesh of the Spiritual Lamb, let us take the head together with the feet, the Deity being understood as the head, and the Manhood taken as the feet. Hearers of the Holy Gospels, let us listen to John the Divine. For he who said, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, went on to say, and the Word was made flesh. For neither is it holy to worship the mere man, nor religious to say that He is God only without the Manhood. For if Christ is God, as indeed He is, but took not human nature upon Him, we are strangers to salvation. Let us then worship Him as God, but believe that He also was made Man. For neither is there any profit in calling Him man without Godhead nor any salvation in refusing to confess the Manhood together with the Godhead. Let us confess the presence of Him who is both King and Physician. For Jesus the King when about to become our Physician, girded Himself with the linen of humanity, and healed that which was sick. The perfect Teacher of babes became a babe among babes, that He might give wisdom to the foolish. The Bread of heaven came down on earth that He might feed the hungry."

The Beginning is Near (part 2)

The Beginning is Near (part 1)

Thanks to Wil and Charlie for helping us worship this advent with this video.

The Drama Persists!

A very profound insight on preaching from Willimon.

"Therefore, I think the best preaching from the Bible is that preaching that is evocative, suggestive, and thick, rather than that preaching which, in wooden fashion, merely lays out principles and precepts, abstractions and rules. We pastors are those who are called, in great part, to open up the imagination of our congregations to what is possible and probable now that a creative God is determined to get back what belongs to God. Too often we preachers think that our job is to take a biblical text and narrow the possibilities of that text, force it to speak univocally, and reduce it to the one authoritative, right interpretation. More creative, and perhaps more faithful, biblical interpretation and exhortation seeks to multiply the possibilities, to open up new perspectives, and to help us see something that we would not have seen without the imaginative stimulation of Scripture."

I particularly was interested in his saying that preaching should be evocative, suggestive, and thick, that it should open up the imagination of the congregation. Perhaps we ought to start preaching “fictionally”. Not in a sense that what we have to say is all make-believe but rather that through the words we are drawn to what is beyond the words, letting the biblical narrative breath its ancient wisdom drawing us forever into the fullness of God’s reality through Christ and by the Spirit.

Willimon also said something that interested me as well in regards to how the Church speaks about the time between the times, that is in a "post" biblical context. He notes that too often Christians believe that "the dramatic parts of the Christian story are over; except for some commotion at the end on which it’s best not to dwell." I found this helpful especially as I think about my own denomination as it finds its place in a divided Church, as I wonder about its purpose for existing. We Nazarenes are not a people wandering aimlessly, merely waiting for the end to occur, passing the time by promoting the life of holiness as sort of a hobby. That makes no sense. If we believe we have something to offer the Church catholic (Rome, Orthodox, and Protestant) in regards to holy and faithful living then we need to find ourselves within the tradition, not in a sense that it is their tradition in which we seek to return but in fact that it is our tradition in which we seek to find ourselves faithful. There is hope as the Church seeks to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic that the dramatic parts of the biblical story do indeed continue today because we people of who the Book gives witness, and witnesses ourselves who give stature to the Book. The Church truly is the living end of God’s work of creation and redemption. The end is here, now, and charging at us in God’s Spirit. The drama persists!

Christology, Peace, and Advent

Malachi 3:1-4
Psalm 126
Philippians 1:1-11
Luke 1:68-70; 3:1-6

I was particularly drawn to Sunday’s advent Scripture readings. I am not sure, if it has to do with the upcoming finale of the fall semester in which I am more inclined to be thinking about beginnings and endings, or rather if it is because it is advent and I am forced to think about beginnings and endings and seemingly never ending “middles” of time. Probably both.

These readings compel me to wonder about the purpose and mission of the Church as it relates to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ who is to come again to fulfill what He has already accomplished in Himself in our redemption. The Psalm teaches us to sing of our freedom from captivity and our return to Zion by the mighty works of God and yet Paul is painting a picture of the ever-approaching fullness of our freedom in Christ when he comes again. I am drawn to the gospel of Luke and Zechariah’s prophecy of the gospel of peace, a peace accomplished by the Lord God of Israel and our ever increasing knowledge of this mighty reality as, to mix metaphors, the love of God unfolds like a blanket on the earth, shinning down until all darkness is destroyed.

Peace is inextricably wrapped up in the incarnation of the Word of God. It would be a shame to for us to miss how important it is that the Church be a community after the Shalom of God for it is that very reality that has been made known to us in Christ who stands, even now, as the first true worshipper of God, for his perfect obedience unto death was that right and proper worship that humanity abandoned so long ago. O how peace has to do with worshipping in Spirit and in truth. Let us this advent be the peace of God even now amidst a violent world as a witness to the peace of Christ we know only by Hs life, death, and resurrection.

Sorry (maybe not) for the blog sermon. The tension between the times is sometimes too overwhelming!

Consider this the next time you watch a commercial on TV

“It is the intent of this study to tell … how ordinary folk came to distrust leaders of genius and talent and to defend the right of common people to shape their own faith and submit to leaders of their own choosing. This story also provides new insight into how America became a liberal, competitive, and market-driven society … In this way, religious movements eager to preserve the supernatural in everyday life had the ironic effect of accelerating the break-up of tradition society and the advent of a social order of competition, self-expression, and free enterprise. In this moment of democratic aspirations, religious leaders could not foresee that their assault upon mediating structures could produce society in which grasping entrepreneurs could erect new forms of tyranny in religious, political, and economic institutions.”

Pastor Athanasius

"For as a kind teacher who cares for His disciples, if some of them cannot profit by higher subjects, comes down to their level, and teaches them at any rate by simpler courses; so also did the Word of God. As Paul also says: 'For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God, it was God's good pleasure through the foolishness of the word preached to save them that believe'. For seeing that men, having rejected the contemplation of God, and with their eyes downward, as though sunk in the deep, were seeking about for God in nature and in the world of sense, feigning gods for themselves of mortal men and demons; to this end the loving and general Saviour of all, the Word of God, takes to Himself a body, and as Man walks among men and meets the senses of all men half-way, to the end, I say, that they who think that God is corporeal may from what the Lord effects by His body perceive the truth, and through Him recognize the Father. So, men as they were, and human in all their thoughts, on whatever objects they fixed their senses, there they saw themselves met half way, and taught the truth from every side. For if they looked with awe upon the Creation, yet they saw how she confessed Christ as Lord; or if their mind was swayed toward men, so as to think them gods, yet from the Saviour's works, supposing they compared them, the Saviour alone among men appeared Son of God; for there were no such works done among the rest as have been done by the Word of God. Or if they were biassed toward evil spirits, even, yet seeing them cast out by the Word, they were to know that He alone, the Word of God, was God, and that the spirits were none. Or if their mind had already sunk even to the dead, so as to worship heroes, and the gods spoken of in the poets, yet, seeing the Saviour's resurrection, they were to confess them to be false gods, and that the Lord alone is true, the Word of the Father, that was Lord even of death. For this cause He was both born and appeared as Man, and died, and rose again, dulling and casting into the shade the works of all former men by His own, that in whatever direction the bias of men might be, from thence He might recall them, and teach them of His own true Father, as He Himself says: 'I came to save and to find that which was lost'."

St. Athanasius

The Vicarious Humanity of Christ

"The vicarious humanity of Christ thus became integral to the doctrine of the ‘atoning exchange’ effected by him and in him between God and man. Hence the Gospel of the reconciliation of man with God has to be understood not just in terms of God’s mighty acts of salvation upon our humanity, but in terms of its actualization within the depths of our human existence in the perfecting and presenting in and through Jesus of our response of faith and obedience, in love and worship, to God the Father. For us to share in the worship of the Father through, with and in Jesus Christ belongs to the essence of our reconciliation to God, and is over the very substance of the Gospel.”

It's back!

Season six of Scrubs kicked off last week with a great first episode. In case you missed it because you're in the middle of watching the first five seasons, you can purpose this first episode on itunes. For now, enjoy the inner world that is "Turk and J.D."

"But the bible says..." as a hermeneutical strategy

This gave a me good chuckle.

"...Any Christian using New Testament words could fend off the most brilliant theological argumentwith the simple retort that one was using God's word against human opinion. All the weight of Church history could not being to tip the scale against the simple declaration that the New Testament did not contain such phrases as total depravity and communion of the saints. For every republic's gentlement theologians, this ingenius argument was both perverse and frustrating."

I chuckled at the huge dichotomy placed between the "educated" and the "non-educated" in post-revolutionary America. There were some (Methodists) who provided a good balance between the two but never in a manner befitting a proper catechism. The book continues, however, to describe the importance of the invention of music in the vernacular and sounds of the common person. It is here that John and Charles Wesley shine. Perhaps through music the "educate" and the "non-educated" could find a common theological languge. Perhaps the dischotomy is false to begin with and the Church needs to realize that in the Eucharist she receives a truer knowledge than even music can give. Either way, hopefully we are moving beyond prooftexting and entering into communities who read the Holy text together and for purpose of faithful living.

On Preaching

With all your assumptions included, what do you think of this quote from John Leland?

"Preaching is now a science and a trade," Leland wrote in a satirical poem on the professionalization of the ministry, "And by it many grand estates are made."

Willimon is blogging

Just thought I would post a note saying that Bishop Willimon is blogging again. I was hoping he would come back after his previous blog had been hijacked by an outside voice.

Suggested blog post titles (pick your favorite): “Wah, that’s my sermon!” or “Are you ignorant or just lazy?”

I came across an article in the Wednesday, November 15, 2006 edition of the Wall Street Journal. The title of the article: Preachers Use Sermons From the Web. I have to say that I was taken aback, first of all, that this article appeared at the very top of the front page. This article has do with the excessive rise of pastors adopting some pretty unorthodox hermeneutics, i.e. the buying and preaching of someone else’s sermon. Most of the article has to do with ethics. It is a question of whether or not the pastor is plagiarizing when he/she preaches from the internet.

My frustration comes not from the sharing of sermons through the Web. I, in fact, carry around a copy of John Chrysostom’s famous Easter homily in my bible … just in case. I am frustrated when I read things like:

“Truth is, there’s no sense reinventing the wheel.”

“If you’ve got something that’s a good product, why go out and beat your head against the
wall and try to come up with it yourself?”

“Don’t be original be effective.”

“We need to get over the idea that we have to be completely original with our messages,
each and every week.”

Has the sermon really entered an “age of re-runs”? Is today’s pastor really this ignorant and lazy? More importantly, I guess, is are we okay with this.

Now, this seems a bit harsh as far as typical a blog post go for me. Usually I am much more sensitive to the misinterpretation and harsh discourse that runs rampant in the blogosphere. In this case, however, I find it absolutely disturbing that pastors are more concerned about being cleared of plagiarism than they are about preaching the goodnews of Jesus Christ.

Our hero in the article, Thomas Long, says, “every minister owes his [or her] congregation a fresh act of interpretation … to play easy with the truth, to be deceptive about where the ideas come from, is a lie.” These pastors are more concerned about the theatrics of “Church” and being motivational speaks (mentioned in the article) than they are about telling the story of God that leads the Church to our true worship of thanksgiving. Long mentions the need for clergy man to be ‘sizzlingly entertaining.’” Seriously? One pastor claimed that in an age where so much information is at our finger tips pastors are at an advantage because better sermons can be preached and distribute. If the same pastor had said I can't write a sermon because I am overloaded with information and am not sure how to sift through it all I might have bought it.

What next? Partaking of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist by watching the food network?

The pastor has been called and gifted by God to receive a particular role in the gathering community. This role, however, is distorted when it becomes centered on the task of preaching. When the Church does not gather to receive the Eucharist and give thanks to God a great many things get distorted on down the line. One of the great things about a word and table service is that we are given the opportunity to expound on a mystery (sermon) in which we can only participate (Eucharist).

Shalomite

I recently stumbled across someone's (also here) invention of a word to describe those committed to Christian non-violence. Some say that the word "pacifist" sounds just too passive and rightfully so. Christian non-violence is in fact a non-violent resistence because of the kind of life we are called to live as follower's of Jesus ... anything BUT passive and non-active. And, shalom gets at the heart of what is really going on when Christians say they are non-violent. To live out God's shalom as we have received it in Jesus Christ is so much more than non-violence. That said, I am a Shalomite.

Also, for your interest and enjoyment, check Charlie's site for a recently stimulation converstation on Just War and Christian pacifism.

Peace,
Scott

Cyril of Alexandria

So I am taking a class at school called The Theology of the Major Eastern Church Fathers. I will be writting a paper on Cyril of Alexandria's Christology as a theology of worship. I came across this quote that placed the Eucharist right at the heart of worship and Cyril's Christology. There are two things I want to point out that are happening in this quote. For Cyril, Christ must have His own flesh. It was not good enough for salvation to come in one who possessed a power like that of the prophets, for example. God Himself must save. Also, notice the importace of the flesh of Christ for the life of the world. Oh man, how this is forgotten in the ever expanding Protestant rebellion! Let us learn Christ at His table. Enjoy the quote.

So we approach the mystical gifts and are sanctified, becoming partakers of the holy flesh and the honourable blood of Christ the Saviour of us all, not receiving it as ordinary flesh - God forbid - nor as that of a man sanctified and conjoined to the Word by a unity of honor, or as one who had received a divine dwelling, but as truly life-giving and the Word's own flesh. For being by nature, as God, life, when he had become one with his own flesh, he made it life-giving.

Pope, Parish life, and the Eucharist

I wanted to post this article from the September 22, 2006 Zenit daily email. Good stuff!

Pope: Early Christians a Model for Parish Life
Tells of Need for Encounter With Christ

CASTEL GANDOLFO, Italy, SEPT. 22, 2006 ( Zenit.org).- The renewal of a parish does not depend on beautiful pastoral plans, but on its members' encounter with Christ, especially in the Eucharist, says Benedict XVI.

The Pope presented to modern-day parishes the model of the early Christian communities, when he received participants of the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Council for the Laity. He met them today at the papal summer residence of Castel Gandolfo.

Cardinals, bishops, priests and numerous lay people attended the council's plenary assembly. It was presided over by the council's president, Archbishop Stanislaw Rylko, and it reflected on the theme: "To Rediscover the Parish: Paths of Renewal."

As the Holy Father explained in his address in Italian, the desired renewal of the parish "cannot come only from suitable pastoral initiatives, regardless of how useful they are, or from blackboard plans."

The book of the Acts of the Apostles, he continued, "describes the first community of Jerusalem persevering in listening to the teaching of the apostles, in fraternal union, in the breaking of bread and in prayer, a welcoming and solidaristic community to the point that everything was held in common."

Inspired by this model, "the parish 'rediscovers itself' in the encounter with Christ, especially in the Eucharist," said Benedict XVI.

"Nourished by the Eucharistic bread, it grows in Catholic communion, walks in full fidelity to the magisterium and is always ready to receive and discern the different charisms that the Lord inspires in the People of God," affirmed the Holy Father.

"From constant union with Christ," he assured, " the parish draws vigor to commit itself ceaselessly in the service of brothers, particularly the poor, for whom it is in fact the first point of reference."

Proper 17B

Psalm 15
Deuteronomy 4:1-9
Ephesians 6:10-20
Mark 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23

“O Lord, who may abide in Your tent? Who may dwell on Your holy hill? He who walks with integrity, and works righteousness, and speaks truth in his heart.” Lord God, with Psalmist we have to confess this day that this does not describe us. No, we prefer to dichotomize the inner and the outer, creating disconnect this is unbearable and divisive. We confess our sins in this and we are sorry. This “whole armor” thing that Paul talks about seems to be what you have given us so that we can recognize what you have done in Your Son, who is actually one who can abide in your tent and on Your holy hill. This we confess today, Lord God we have our wholeness in Your Son who obeys Your commands so that the nations might know you and see You mercy and justice in love. Lord God, let us be the same mercy and justice, let us be love, so that as the world sees your church they might come to know that it is by Your good intentions that You draw all people to Yourself. Let us learn Christ today as we gather around Your table singing your praise, lifting up our hearts in prayer, and handling the body and blood of Your Son. AMEN.

Proper 16B

Psalm 16
Joshua 24:1-2, 14-25
Ephesians 5:21-33
John 6:60-69

God of the WORDS OF ETERNAL LIFE, where, indeed, shall we go? Today's many desires threaten your stabiity, for we are always bombarded with forgetfulness. We make you complex and a burden when all you have done is come and smiled upon us in your justice and mercy. And yet, somehow even we, your people, leave Jerusalem to frequently visit Egypt, to drink from beyond the river of life, where nothingness is given a place. Train us through the gifts of your body and blood to confess again, "You are my Lord, I have not good besides You (Ps. 16:2)." AMEN.

The Love of the Beautiful

So, as my last post indicates, I picked up the Philokalia again this morning. I put it down a few months ago so that I could finish some reading for the Fall semester and I got a little sidetracked. Plus, I was in the middle of a section that I had left and come back to many times and it was getting difficult to push through to the end. I’ll have to revisit it because I know that I didn’t read it well.

But, I did make it to the next section where I was pleasantly surprised with Mr. Diadochos of Photiki. You can call him St. Diadochos if you prefer. Amazing! The section is titled On Spiritual Knowledge and Discrimination: One Hundred Texts. Here are a few to consider:

7. “Spiritual discourse fully satisfies our intellectual perception, because it comes from God through the energy of love. It is on account of this that the intellect continues undisturbed in its concentration on theology. It does not suffer then from the emptiness which produces a state of anxiety, since in its contemplation it is filled to the degree that the energy of love desires. So it is right always to wait, with a faith energized by love, for the illumination which will enable us to speak. For nothing is so destitute as a mind philosophizing about God when it is without Him.”

21. “He who loves God both believes truly and performs the works of faith reverently. But he who only believes and does not love, lacks even the faith he thinks he has; for he believes merely with a certain superficiality of intellect and is not energized by the full force of love’s glory. The chief part of virtue, then, if faith energized by love.”

66. God is not prepared to grant the gift of theology to anyone who has not first prepared himself by giving away all his possessions for the glory of the gospel; then in godly poverty he can proclaim the riches of the divine kingdom. This is made clear in the Psalm, for after the words ‘O Lord, in Thy love Thou hast provided for the poor’, it continues, ‘The Lord shall give speech to those who proclaim the gospel with great power (Ps. 68:10-11. LXX).”

90. “[…] for no one can acquire the perfection of love while still in the flesh except those saints who suffer to the point of martyrdom, and confess their faith despite all persecution. Whoever has reached this state is completely transformed, and does not feel desire even for material sustenance. For what desire will someone nourished by divine love feel for such things? It is for this real that St. Paul proclaims to us that future joy of the saints when he says: ‘For the kingdom of God is not food and drink, but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (Rom. 14:17), which are the fruits of perfect love. Those who have advanced to perfection are able to taste this love continually, but no one can experience it completely until ‘what is mortal in us is swallowed up by life’ (2 Cor. 5:4)”

This is some good stuff for us Wesleyans to chew on plus, it’s interesting to read the body/soul dualism so prevalent in his 100 texts. For example, he says, “everything longs for what is akin to itself: the soul, since it is bodiless, desires heavenly goods (text 24). Ouch, what was the purpose of the incarnation then? Couldn’t God find a better way than entering this filth we call the flesh? – That’s sarcasm for those missed it – But Diadochos goes on to say, “the joy which then fills both soul and body is a true recalling of the life without corruption (text 25). He does not correct the dualism but he is much more positive towards the body, even including it in heavenly things! Yea! What a huge resource for us today. Fearful of any social gospel naïve enough to think that the world is “getting better” and that it is the task of the Church to help it get better, we can approach the goodness of creation with an eye towards the end as the Spirit ushers in the kingdom. I would ask an open-ended (not a rhetorical) question: What is the task of the Church if we are not to make the world a better place?

"All I wanted was a simple kind of life"

So... you need to read the Philokalia. I know, I don't care. You need to read it!

"We should remain, then, within the limits imposed by our basic needs and strive with all our power not to exceed them. For once we are carried a little beyond these limits in our desire for the pleasure of this life, there is then no criterion by which to check our onward movement, since no bounds can be set to that which exceeds the necessary. Pointless effort and endless labour wasted on what is unnecessary only serve to increase out longing for it, adding more fuel to the flames. Once a man has passed beyond the limits of his natural needs, as he grows more materialistic he wants to put jam on his bread; and to water he adds to first modicum of wine required for his health, and then the most expensive vintages. He does not rest content with essential clothing, but starts to purchase clothes made from brightly-coloured wool of the very best quality; next he demands clothes made from a mixture of linen and wool; next he searches for silken clothes – at first just for plain silk, and then for silk embroidered with scenes of battles and hunting and the like. He acquires vessels of silver and hold, not just for banqueting but for animals to feed from and for use as chamber-pots. What need is there to say more about such absurd ostentation, extending as it does to the basest needs, so that even chamber-pots must be made of nothing less than silver? Such is the nature of sensual pleasure: it embraces even the lowliest things and leads us to invest the meanest of functions with material luxury.”

St. Neilos The Ascetic

P.S. This affirms as well my thinking that we have lost the ancient art of theological name calling. I mean who today do we refer to as "the ascetic?" Think of the greats. Thomas Aquinas was referred to as "the dumb ox" because he was quiet as a student (and huge!). But guess what happened when the Summa hit the scene. Boo yaa. And Athanasius, my favorite, was called "the black dwarf." Awesome!

Nephews!!

Because they're awesome, this is Carson and Kaden.

Proper 15B

Psalm 34:9-14
Proverbs 8:1-6
Ephesians 5:15-20
John 6:53-59

GOD OF WISDOM, what is wisdom? Everyone has the answer and product that is the end-all to all we have ever hoped and dreamed. What is wisdom? Oh, how it is that we are to know your wisdom at the table, for you are GOD OF THE EUCHARIST. All those who seek truth and wisdom are to find it at your table. It is at the table the we learn to see you in each other for it is at the table that we learn that our adoration of your wonders and glory that so fill our minds and the outer reaches of all we can imagine has no other place to go but in our love for one another. You are the God that that did not teach us things of another world but rather taught in our synagogues in the city of Capernaum. Very real, very local, and very material is the call of faithfulness to be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. God, we have nothing to offer but two empty hands that we may receive Christ hoping that Your Spirit makes us Christ. AMEN.

Board of General Superintendants Call for Prayer and Peace

Note this statement by the General Superintendants:

"The Board of General Superintendents joins all people who are deeply disturbed by the violence and bloodshed in our world. The number of militaristic hot spots has grown to include millions of our planet's citizens. We deplore the loss of human life, the destruction of property, and the enormous toll in human suffering exacted by the intransigence of warring parties.

With specific regard to the conflict between Hezbollah and Israeli military, we wish to express our concerns as well as our grief over the suffering resulting from both the events leading up to the conflagration and the current conflict. We wish to commend the community of nations for its efforts in working toward a God-honoring peace. The issues must be addressed in ways that ensure basic human rights, which all individuals and nations deserve.

We offer our prayers for peace and encourage Nazarenes around the world to intercede for world peace. We continue to affirm the message of Jesus, the Hope. Our prayer remains steadfast that all will come to know the Christ who is our Peace."

Sacred Space (Part Two)

Our worship service at Trinity (warning, this site has not been updated recently) is broken down into four movements: God calls, we gather; God speaks, we listen; God acts, we give thanks; God sends, we go.

God Calls, We Gather

We begin with a song. This song is usually according to the time of the season, but we are very flexible. If it is lent, we might begin with a little more contemplative song or a maybe a song about suffering. The band will usually begin the song as the congregation is gathering and still talking. This indicates that we are beginning the worship service.

The invocation follows the first song. The pastor will walk out to the space just in front of the table with their arms wide open saying, “Welcome in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” This is very purposeful and intentional time. Usually the pastor will have a brief word for us, may something that we had talked about in the class time before or maybe the Psalm designated for that Sunday. The pastor then leads us in an opening prayer.

We end this first movement by singing two more songs.

God Speaks, We Listen

After the two songs following the invocation we move into the reading of the Word. We always read the Old Testament and the Epistle readings back to back. Upon finishing the reader will say, “The Word of the Lord” to which the congregation responds, “thanks be to God.”

Following this we sing another song. It has been our custom at this point of the service to sing something from the Taize community but that is not set in stone. It’s usually a verse we sing three or four times in a little more focused and contemplative attitude.

Following this verse we read the Gospel reading. The same reader as before will, say “please stand for our gospel reading” or “please stand for the reading of the gospel,” something like that. However, instead of returning to the podium, the Gospel is read from amidst the congregation. This is symbolic for us as we are reminded that the Logos (Jesus) is among us. Following this reading the reader will say, “the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” to which we will respond, “Praise to you, Lord Christ.” Following the gospel reading is the sermon.

After the sermon, someone will come up and lead us in the prayers of the people. This is a time when we pray aloud together. Following a spoken prayer that one will say, “Lord, this is my prayer” to which the congregation will embrace that prayer as if it was their own, “Lord, here our prayer.” At an appropriate time, the one leading the prayers of the people will end by leading us all in the Lords prayer.

God Acts, we Give Thanks

After the prayers of the people the pastor will walk to the front of the table, initiating the passing of the peace, and say, “the peace of Christ be with you.” The congregation then responds, “and also with you.” The pastor will then say, “great one another in Christ’s peace.”

After this time we will be gathered again by a song which will move us towards the time of the Eucharist. The pastor will approach the table and prepare it with the words of institution. The Church of the Nazarene has a ritual for the table but it is nothing like more high church traditions (Orthodox, Catholic, Lutheren, etc.) Our church has been very flexible in sticking to the exact words (I will develop this thought more in a later post). Once the table has been prepared the congregation approaches to take a piece of bread and dip it in the cup. Following this we sing another song.

God Sends, We Go

This is time for any announcements to be said. Following the announcements we sing a song. The pastor will move to the back of the room in preparation for our sending (the benediction). When we have finished the song the pastor will raise their hands saying, “brothers and sisters, go forth into the world to love and serve the Lord.” We are to respond by turning hands so that our palms face upward, as if we are literally receiving the benediction, and saying, “thanks be to God, Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia.” The pastor will then say, “go in peace.”

Thus ends the summary of a pretty normal Sunday gathering. In my next post I want to draw out some of these implications particularly as they pertain to non-liturgical churches. If you are reading and you are from a high church tradition you will find many things absent or different. But, if you are part of a standard evangelical mainline kind of church then you might find Trinity’s contemporary liturgy to be intriguing. It is my goal in drawing on some of these implications to raise questions concerning spiritual formation (discipleship, catechism, etc.).

Sorry this post was longer than usual.

Weekly Bresee Article

My dad has raised here one of the longest standing issues in the existence of the church which is the question of our (humanities) knowledge of God after the fall. Many people have taken the reigns to provide an answer between the dichotomy of nature and grace. I don't have anything more to say on that right now because I don't have time. But, I did find helpful his asking what Christians mean when we say we "believe" in God. For more on the kinds of things I think about when I ask this question check out this conversation on Radical [Financial] Trust and Obedience going on at Charlie's blog. Otherise click read more and enjoy the post.

From My Heart
Rick Savage

Believing in God seems to be a natural condition for mankind. Except for a few people who call themselves atheists, most people believe in God. They may not believe in God the same way, and may not ever worship God as God. They may not believe God is personal or involved in the human situation. They may not believe God is making claims upon their lives. They may not even once in their lifetime work their way through their thoughts and feelings about God. However, most people are content with the premise that behind everything there is a God, a Supreme Being.

All this leads me to ask what we Christians mean when we say we believe in God. I am prompted in my question by an intriguing little verse in James (2:19) that reminds us believing in God is not a big spiritual issue. The Biblical writer indicates that even demons believe in God. So what do we mean when we Christians say we believe in God?

Do we not mean by it that we are responding to Him with the "Yes" of our obedience? Does it not mean that we are committed to His claims, yielded to His purposes, open to His involvement in our lives and in our world? Does it not mean we are acknowledging history was no accident of chance but that the world exists by design and that man reflects the creative capacities of God? Does it not mean we are committed to the premise that God is good, that love is best defined by what we see when we see Him, that justice is a universal standard and that in Jesus the Good News of God, the love of God and the justice of God are fleshed out before our eyes leading us to see that God is so involved in the human situation that He bleeds?

Based on what I see in the Bible I must contend that real belief means we embrace God with all it means for us to be who we are, and call Him "Lord of all."

Sacred Space

I have been thinking about this since the first time I participated in worship with Trinity Church of the Nazarene. I really love the space we have created in which to worship. I hope to draw on some of the implications of our setting as it pertains to our contemporary liturgy in later posts.

Walking through the doors of the sanctuary one might not feel like they are in a setting much different from most mainline Protestant Evangelical worship services. On the furthest wall from the door sits the band and above them on either corner are screens to help us sing. The room itself is not a “sanctuary” per say. However, immediately one is drawn to what is different about this gathering. The congregation sits around the four walls of the room. We found that it was good to give the band a wall so that they could have room to set up and play their instruments with creativity and talent and help us all sing. They sit on the wall farthest from the doors entering the sanctuary. On the two walls to left and right of the entry doors hangs artwork according to the season of the Church calendar to help draw us into God’s presence. On each of these walls sits a candle on a stand symbolizing and reminding us of the Holy Spirit’s presence. On the wall behind the band hangs a large wood design of the Trinity. Out of the Trinity flows a creative movement of hundreds of paper dove’s that go out to the center of the room intertwining with the cross that hangs down 7 inches, parallel with the ceiling. Below the cross sits the pastor’s podium and in the front of the podium, in the center of the room, is the table upon which another candle sits in the middle and the bread and the cup await preparation.

I laughed out loud today

I laughed out loud today. That actually isn’t very unusual, I enjoy laughing. The occasion of my laughter, however, is what intrigues me. I laughed while reading Pelikan’s second volume of The Christian Tradition. I know, hilarious right. What made me laugh was a particular paragraph in his section on the filioque. In this section he is talking about the Trinity and how the West was saying that the procession of the Spirit is a matter of the divine essence (ousia) and not of the persons (hypostases). Please read the paragraphy:

"Yet when they came to the procession of the Holy Spirit, many Western theologians, arguing that the actions of the trinity ‘to the outside’ were undivided, insisted that the procession was a matter of the divine nature as a whole, hence of the ousia not of the hypostases. And so, ‘when the Holy Spirit is said to proceed from the Father, it is necessary that he proceed also from the Son, because Father and Son are undoubtedly of the same ousia.’ In an effort to circumvent the problem, some attempted to locate the procession ‘neither in the ousia, which is common {to all three persons}, nor in the person, which is spoken of in itself, but in the relation {between persons},’ which really did not clarify the issue or meet the basic Greek objection.”

Can you see the humor yet? Probably not. It just made me laugh. I sort of stopped taking myself so seriously. Studying theology is kind of like a game of Jenga with a few new rules. The Scripture is like the pieces stacked neatly and we are given the task to build upon it. So, we pull pieces and attempt a great task. Inevitably, the tower will fall because are aren’t that good at it. But, the more we do it the better we get and so we learn different way’s to stack pieces that are helpful and avoid those that are not. But still, we take ourselves too seriously. Sometimes, though, I think it’s good to just knock the building down, like most kids tend to do because then the game never ends. We always have the Scripture and we always have the task. Perhaps it is better (thanks Chuck) to maintain our catholicity in playing Jenga as opposed to unenjoyably clinging to our orthodoxy. Perhaps it is a both/and situation. We strive for catholicity in our quest for orthodoxy. I personally love knocking down the tower and rebuilding it in order to play the game again. It's fun and it makes me laugh.

Peace,
Scott

Please!?

I can’t pretend to be an expert on the fighting going on in the Middle East. My ignorance and silence is too telling. However, I do believe that the bombing of woman and children needs to stop. With the U.S. losing allies daily the Church must be concerned that more 9/11 like events could be brewing in the near future both here and around the world. We should not long for the death of any human being let alone those trapped in the middle of a conflict out of their control. I pray for those who suffer in the Middle East from the poor foreign policies of outside nations and inability of the locals to find a relative “peace” in their struggles to share what is only a gift from God, the earth. I have no solutions.

For a better assessment of the situation see Juan Cole’s sight. If you agree with me then consider this.

For a better take on how I feel see the urban monks post tears from heaven (July 31, 2006).

Peace,

Scott

Faith is both the dreaming and the crying

There will always be some who say that such faith is only a dream, and God knows there is none who can say it more devastatingly than we sometimes say it to ourselves, but if so, I think of it as like the dream that Caliban dreamed […]

“Be not affeard, the Isle is full of noyes,
Sounds, and sweet aires, that give delight and hurt not;
Sometimes a thousand twangling Instruments
Will hum about mine eares; and sometimes voices,
That if I then had wak’d after long sleep,
Will make me sleep again, and the in dreaming,
The clouds methought would open and shew riches
Ready to drop upon me, that when I wak’d
I cried to dream again.”

[…] Faith is like the dream in which the clouds open to show such riches ready to drop upon us that when we wake into the reality of nothing ore than common sense, we cry to dream again because dreaming seems truer than the waking does to the fullness of reality not as we have seen it, to be sure, but as by faith we trust it to be without seeing. Faith is both the dreaming and the crying. Faith is the assurance that the best and holiest dream is true after all. Faith in something – if only in the proposition that life is better than death – is what makes our journeys through time bearable. When faith ends, the journey ends – ends either in a death like my Father’s (suicide) or in the living death of those who believe themselves to be without hope.

Frederick Buechner

There is nothing so capacious as a fugue

Robert Jenson has emerged as one of the few American Systematic Theologians of which we all should pay attention. Hopefully I will be posting a little more on The Triune God (I know, it's ridiculous how much this costs. Shop around, you can find better). For now, enjoy an excerpt from the last few pages.

"One transcendental remains: God is beauty; to be God is to be enjoyable. In that the triune conversation is righteousness, it is the perfect harmony of the triune communal life. And the harmony of discourse taken for itself is its beauty; more precisely, its music.

The necessary doctrine here is analogous to that about God’s truth and goodness and need not be developed at length; God’s beauty also is not a dispositional property, waiting for our action, in this instance for our enjoyment. God’s beauty is the actual living exchange between Father, Son, and Spirit, as this exchange is perfect simply as exchange, as it sings. The harmony of the Father, son, and Spirit, the triune perichoiresis, transcends its character as goodness because it has no purpose beyond itself, being itself God. And the harmony of a discourse thus taken for itself and for the sake of itself, is its beauty, its aesthetic entity.

Correspondingly, our enjoyment of God is that we are taken into the triune singing. Perhaps we may say we are allowed to double the parts. And here too we must insist on concreteness. That the proclamation and prayer of the church regularly bursts into beauty, indeed seems to insist on music and choreography and setting, is not an adventitious hankering to decorate. A congregation singing a hymn of praise to the Father is doubling the Son’s praise, and the surge of rhythm and melody is the surge of the Spirit’s glorification of the Father and the Son […]

[…] All such beauty of the creation, now or in the Kingdom, is constituted by ‘sweet mutual consents’ with the persons of the Trinity, the supreme Harmony of all. Thus the holiness of god himself is a ‘sweet conjunction’ of greatness and mercy, with nothing in it but what is ‘ravishingly lovely’ […]

[…] To conclude, we may invoke Thomas’ maxim a last time: the discourse that is God is not other than its sheer occurrence as the divine perichoresis. Therefore the discourse that is God may be thought of not only as singing but even as ‘pure’ music. It is the peculiarity of the aesthetic that in apprehending beauty we abstract from the content of discourse without becoming abstract in our understanding. God, we may thus say, is a melody. And as there are three singers who take each their part, as further specification suggests itself: the melody is fugued.

We must note what has just happened. The apprehension of God as beauty, in its concrete abstraction, has led us to another proposition of the same character as those in the preceding chapter, in which we sad that God is an event, a person, a decision, and a conversation. The phrase ‘the one God’ directs us finally to the sheer perichoresis of the Father, Son, and Spirit, and that is to their communal music. We close the doctrine of God with this evocation of God’s being, beyond which there is no more to say: God is a great fugue. There is nothing so capacious as a fugue."

Robert W. Jenson

Just because it's awesome

Enjoy this video!

"There is a difference between knowing the path and walking the path" -Morpheus

Matt. 21: 23- 32 (NRSV)

23 When he entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him as he was teaching, and said, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" 24 Jesus said to them, "I will also ask you one question; if you tell me the answer, then I will also tell you by what authority I do these things. 25 Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin?" And they argued with one another, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will say to us, 'Why then did you not believe him?' 26 But if we say, 'Of human origin,' we are afraid of the crowd; for all regard John as a prophet." 27 So they answered Jesus, "We do not know." And he said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things. 28 "What do you think? A man had two sons; he went to the first and said, 'Son, go and work in the vineyard today.' 29 He answered, 'I will not'; but later he changed his mind and went. 30 The father Ý went to the second and said the same; and he answered, 'I go, sir'; but he did not go. 31 Which of the two did the will of his father?" They said, "The first." Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you. 32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him.

The Word of the Lord.

Thanks be to God.