conjectural navel gazing; jesus in lint form

home again

Hello all.

Trish and I arrived safely yesterday evening. I like traveling with her. That bodes well.

There is wondrous news at Domesticy Jane's. Everyone go and see. Now all I need to do is save a wee bit of cash and go to SF in August.

Other than that there is little else to share. I cannot blog from home for the time being. My former roomie finally removed all of his cable modem hardware from the apartment. Sigh. It is a sad thing, but there very well could be good news that comes from it. Can anyone say "wireless?" I think we may have to upgrade.

Yay!

In the mean time, I will eat Christmas candy, enjoy my new toys and look forward to my field ed placement starting on Monday. I will be at North Shore full time for a couple of months. It looks to be a good time.

Again...yay!

I preach Sunday. Here are the lectionary readings.

Jan 04, Epiphany of our Lord (Observed),
Is. 60:1-6.
Ps. 72:1-7,10-14.
Eph. 3:1-12.
Matt. 2:1-12.

(suggested colors)
Gold/White

This is a lot for a baptist preacher to get his head around. As it is communion Sunday and I have seen Return of The King twice now, this too is running through my head.

"Out of the darkness of my life, so much frustrated, I put before you the one great thing to love on earth: the Blessed Sacrament....There you will find romance, glory, honor, fidelity, and the true way of all your loves upon earth, and more than that: death: by the divine paradox, that which ends life, and demands the surrender of all, and yet by the taste (or foretaste) of which alone can what you seek in your earthly relationships (love, faithfulness, joy) be maintained, or take on that complexion of reality, of eternal endurance, that every man's heart desires," - J.R.R. Tolkien

Jeff has it on his site. I love this quote. I had a chance to speak with one of my cousins and Annie, my step-mother's sister about the films. They wanted to know the theology that is or is not apparent. I would never go so far to say that LOTR is a Christian allegory, but the above quote does gove a good sense as to what Tolkein was about. It explains the incredible drama that is in the films.

Do we think of Epiphany in this epic sense? How is our humanity brought to the table? Is it in the same way that the Three Wise Men approached the manger? Do we follow a star? Are we timid? Are we foolhardy? Perhaps brave?

There is a good sermon in here somewhere.

FAQ

1. What is your name? Tripp Hudgins.

2. Where do you live? Currently I live in Wilmette, IL. a northern suburb of Chicago. I grew up in Virginia and still think of it as home.

3. What do you do? That is an odd question. I do lots of things. But to follow the colloquial understanding, I am an ordained American Baptist Minister. I am a pastor at the Community Church of Wilmette and Church of Jesus Christ, Reconciler.

4. Explain why you call youself Anglo-Baptist, and what the Anglo part represents. Well this is worth a longer answer. I attended an Episcopal seminary where I learned the term "Anglo-Catholic." I had never encountered it before. At any rate, it typically refers to an Episcopalian (Anglican?) who understands the denomination to be a catholic tradition in line with the teachings of the Church throughout the centuries. It is not Protestant like the Baptist tradition is or the Presbyterian tradition is. There is also something about the "apostolic succession" in this as well. For more answers, ask AKMA.

The other typing that receives the "Anglo Catholic" label has to do with a preference for high liturgy. The smells and the bells matter. Liturgy, specifically high or elaborate liturgy, is a halmark to this tradition.

When I was in seminary, my fellow students found me a curiosity. A Baptist was enrolled at an Episcopal seminary? How odd! What was perhaps even more odd is that I was studying Liturgy. So, here I am a low-church protestant in an Episcopal seminary studying liturgy. And to top that off, I found myself more and more drawn to the higher church traditions within Anglicanism. I am a high-church Baptist. An Anglo-Baptist if you will. It became a nickname...and it stuck. So what the heck? I am a liturgical, high-church Baptist.

I see the Baptist tradition as stemming from the Anglican. It is not a far stretch to extend back in time and claim that heritage.

5. Married? Kids? Yes. My wife's name is Trish. She is an actor. No.

6. Pets? Yes, three cats named Mike, Lily and Sly.

7. You seem almost liberal. How come you are still Baptist? I find that a puzzle myself some days. I think that it can be simply stated that the Baptists claimed me as their own during my college days. I was baptized in an Episcopal (The plot thickens!) church as an infant but we never really attended. There are reasons for that, but a blog is public. Maybe I'll email you if you are nice. Then you can know the nitty gritty.

I was somewhat active with the Baptist Student Union during my undergrad years and picked up a BA in Religion. Afterward I went to Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond for about nine months. I was not ready for ministry. My Baptist minister step-grandfather had been a profound influence. He taught me how to love the tradition in spite of itself, but I had not yet made up my mind.

When I moved to Chicago in '97 I played around for a little but eventually found myself serving as the bass soloist for a local Baptist congregation. My first Sunday the woman who is the pastor there stood in the pulpit and preached from Nouwen's work Wounded Healer. Woman minister? Catholic writings? And yet...smells Baptist. Looks Baptist but it ain't actin' Baptist. My step-grandfather would be thrilled!

I joined within a couple of years. Incredible. I love that congregation still. They too love the Baptist tradition in spite of itself and because of itself.

8. Hold on...you sing? Yep. Professionally even! I also play guitar, mandolin and bouzouki. Sometimes I bang on the drum all day, too. I am in a band right now that rocks the stret corners of Chicago.

9. Hold on again! You were baptized as an infant?! Yes. And the congregation I joined claims one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins. If I confirm the one as an infant, they do not feel any need to dunk me. So confirmed, I joined the church. Anglo-Baptist, indeed.

10. Do you ever discuss anything other than religion? All the time. But the purpose of the blog is primarily religious. I love music, dogs, soccer...I used to ride my bike over long distances for many days (500 miles in six days), but those days are gone. I like movies and the theater as well. And there is more, but the blog is more about religion and the like. Every so often something will show up here, but it is increasingly rare...or perhaps increasingly integrated so that I can no longer speak about riding my bike 500 miles without speaking about Jesus. Who can say?

Ordination Essays: These are the essay questions I had to answer in partial fulfillment of my ordination process as an ABC minister.
1. Please share with us a concise statement of your faith.
2. What philosophical and theological systems underlie the cognitive side of your faith?
3. What is your understanding of the Trinity? How is it relevant to our faith today?
4. What is the nature and mission of the local church?
5. How do you understand the authority of the Bible? In what ways does the Bible function in your life?
6. How do you understand prayer in terms of your personal life and the corporate life of the church?
7. Discuss what you believe the task of the minister to be. How do you see yourself in relationship to various forms of ministry? What are your career goals?
8.As you assess your personal capacities for ministry at this time, what do you consider your strongest points and what do you feel to be the aspects most needing development?
9. What does ordination mean to you? Why have you elected to be ordained to the Gospel ministry or have your ordination recognized in the ABCUSA? What experiences led you to make this choice?
10. How do you see the ABCUSA in relation to the Church universal? What is your understanding of ABC polity and organization?
11. Given the historic Baptist principle of separation of church and state, how do you see the duty of the church toward society?

shhhh...

Merry Christmas!

St Nicholas was excellent to us this year. Wondrous.

My brother hooked up Mom's computer, internet and all, so I thought I'd post quickly. This dialup think is a drag, but it is good to know.

I hope all have a blessed season. We are off to see Return of the King today. That should be a good time. I cannot wait to see it again. Wahooo!

Peace!

do not open until christmas

Well, it is that time. Chuck and I leave tomorrow for DC. Then I am off to Huddleston, back to DC, then to Doswell and finally home on the 28th. Wah.

I will not have access to the internet, so this is Merry Christmas to everyone. Play well. Enjoy the holiday. Get something for an stranger. Get something for yourself...and remember why we celebrate.

more about the ordinations

Heather has some pictures available. This is my favourite.

This one is good, too.

She looks good in red.
veni sancte spiritus

ordinations

Heather is a deacon. She is.

In just a short while, Mark will be a priest. We will all have to call him "Father." For some, this is more significant than strange. For others of us, it will just be fun.

God bless them both in their ministries. At this time, when we await the incarnation, the child in the manger, we are blessed to witness the presence of the Christ child in these lives. May God shower grace on them both.

Me and Mark. He is not in vestments.
People say he is more baptist than I.
Perhaps this is the reason. Hmmm.

yes, shopping

C.G. and I went shopping. On the list was a gift for Carson, our 6 year old cousin. She was adopted by Aunt Annie. Carson Shungcho Watlington is from China. She loves to tell you that. "I'm not from here. I was born in China. I bet you don't know where that is!" She is cool. Anyway, we went to this toystore and there were these dolls that we were directed to called "Groovy Girls." They were indeed groovy. Who knew? We bought two. You can get a car if you like. They have various outfits. It was funny to stand there with my brother and look through all this stuff. The salesperson was laughing at us. She kept saying things like "They are more PC and wholesome than Barbie. I think that they are cooler than she is too."

That's nice. I am so glad I know that now. Why do I think that I will have to buy several of these before it is over?

Hmm...

shopping?

We are off...Trish gave me a list as well. Hmm...how did this happen?

ahem...

He's here. Safe and sound. Thanks the spirits of Southwest Airlines and all the saints of travel. He was on time and in posessions of his actual luggage.

Say hello to C.G.!

anticipation at advent

You know, my brother flies in from Utah today. I know I have not mentioned this before today. It has been a careless oversight on my part. I have been obsessed with all the papers and the like that have been on my plate. I am incredibly excited abouot his visit. I think this is the first time that he and I will have spent three days together in a long, long while if not ever. He is a great guy. I think we will have a blast.

In other news:

I have this old book that I think belonged to my grandmother, Let's Keep Christmas by Peter Marshall. I have been trying, unsuccessfully, to find the text online so everyone can read it. I love this sermon. It was published in the early 50's after Marshall had died. He was a renowned preacher who died young at the age of 49. Here is just a quote. It is nice to know that nothing is new under the sun.

The illustrator was Barbara Cooney. She died in '00. I posted two of her illustrations. I cannot find a site with the illustrations from Marshall's book. They are lovely as well. I have always admired her work.

Your Christmas is not commercialized unless you have commercialized it.

Let's not succumb to the sophistication that complains: "Christmas belongs only to the children." That shows that you have never understaood Christmas at all, for the older you get the more it means, if you know what it means. Christmas, though forever young, grows old along with us.

Have you been saying, "I just can't seem to feel the Christmas spirit this year"? That's too bad. As a confession of lack of faith, it is rather significant.

You are saying that you feel no joy that Jesus came into the world...
You are confessing that His presence in the world is not a reality to you...
Maybe you need all the more to read the Christmas story over again, need to sit down with the Gospel of Luke and think about it.

I'll leave you guys with that. I think a book of Peter Marshall's sermons needs to be on my Christmas list. He was outstanding.

My friend Sarah in San Francisco sent this.

I am off to run errands and stuff. I have an 11:00 meeting with Doug and Carol at the church...more seminarian/ordination process stuff I am certain. Y'all play well. I will try to post some tomorrow. My brother and I leave for VA on Sunday.

Peace.

why the @#$@! am i awake?

I saw the movie last night. It was great. A midnight show. Lots of people were just going to go out for breakfast and then straight to work. Three hours and twenty minutes makes for a long night. It was worth it. That is all I will say for now. Go see it and we can chat. If you need someone to go with you, I would be happy to attend. And, as a further review I give you this quote from the book.

Well, here at last, dear friends, on the shores of the Sea comes the end of our fellowship of Middle-earth. Go in peace! I will not say: do not weep; for not all tears are an evil.

Blessed Earth

Jeff has this posted on his blog. If you want to know more about Tolkein and his theology, I know that there are books out there. I am too sleep deprived to point you the way. I am sure someone else has that linked.

From Jeff's blog:

"Out of the darkness of my life, so much frustrated, I put before you the one great thing to love on earth: the Blessed Sacrament....There you will find romance, glory, honor, fidelity, and the true way of all your loves upon earth, and more than that: death: by the divine paradox, that which ends life, and demands the surrender of all, and yet by the taste (or foretaste) of which alone can what you seek in your earthly relationships (love, faithfulness, joy) be maintained, or take on that complexion of reality, of eternal endurance, that every man's heart desires," - J.R.R. Tolkien

You will also find all these things in his stories. Read them.

what do you mean "two?!"

Yes, two baptisms in Matthew. John and Jesus weren't up to the same thing.

Just read it.

Did I mention?

I AM DONE WITH ALL MY PAPERS!!!

The Two Baptisms of Matthew?s Gospel

In the Gospel of Matthew, John the Baptist proclaims "I baptize you with water for repentance, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire." In this moment, Matthew establishes a theological difference between the baptism of John and the baptism of Jesus. Furthermore, after his resurrection, Matthew's Jesus commands his disciples to "make disciple of all nations" through a baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to bring about obedience to Jesus' commands and teachings. Through this statement, Matthew further clarifies his understanding of baptism as Jesus taught it to be something different from what John proclaimed. Matthew redefines a familiar Jewish ritual in the light of his understanding of the Risen Christ. It is a radical theological shift within a Jewish framework. Jesus has given us is a new baptism. This is not the baptism of John.

In Matthew?s Gospel, John is a prophet who appears in the wilderness of Judea proclaiming repentance. When those who came to him confessed their sins, he would baptize them in water of the Jordan River. This baptism was ?for repentance.? It served no other function than that. This baptism is unremarkable except for one reason: John baptized Jesus.

According to Daniel Harrington, Matthew has to deal with the problem of the social ranking of John and Jesus. If Jesus was to be sinless, blameless, the Son of God, then his being baptized by John for repentance is an embarrassment and a theological impossibility. So, the question of who is the greater must be addressed. Matthew does so in 3:13-15.

This dialogue between John and Jesus very clearly states that in all ways Jesus exceeds John. Jesus? baptism by John is to ?fulfill all righteousness? and is not related to Jesus? state of sinfulness. This is not an act of repentance on Jesus? part. John at first challenges Jesus. John does not wish to baptize the one whom he has been proclaiming. He even suggests that their roles be reversed (3:14). Instead, Jesus insists and John obeys.

John?s initial denial and eventual obedience both serve to place Jesus above John. Not only does John recognize his own need of baptism in the presence of Christ, but he also obeys the will of Jesus by following his wishes. This is the proof of John?s recognition of Jesus? place in the story.

In verses 16 and 17, Matthew gives further clarification. The Spirit itself appears. The voice of God is heard from heaven. To remove all doubt, Jesus? identity is proclaimed by the One True Source. The place of Jesus is above John. John may precede Jesus. His proclamation of the present messiah, however, only shows that in a more profound way, he follows Jesus.

Including this narrative in the gospel of Matthew serves multiple purposes. It proclaims Jesus as the Christ. It does so in a dramatic and irrefutable way. It also serves to distinguish Jesus from John. Yes, their connection is a strong one, but in Matthew?s Gospel John proclaims Jesus as the Messiah. The ranking is clear. The narrative also serves to distinguish one baptism from another.

?I baptize you with water for repentance, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing-fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing-floor and will gather his wheat into the granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.?

Matthew?s John seems to go out of his way to tell us the differences between the two baptisms. In this effort to rank the two men appropriately, John tells us something of what Jesus? baptism is. It is not a watery baptism. It is not a baptism of repentance. Is it more? Is it something else entirely? Perhaps by setting the two in parallel, we can get a clearer picture of the distinctions between the two.

John baptizes in water. Jesus baptizes in the Holy Spirit and fire. John?s baptism is for repentance. John does not tell us what Jesus? baptism is for. It may be that it too is for repentance. One could extrapolate that conclusion from John?s omission. Matthew, however, may be telling us something else.

In this passage, we read a little more about the baptism of Jesus.

And Jesus came and said to them, ?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, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.?(28:18-20)

We are assured that God is present. Jesus has been granted all authority. This has echoes of 3:17. Jesus? position is assured. His son-ship is established and brought to fruition. We can also see that Jesus? baptism has the Trinitarian formula of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are not baptizing in the Spirit and the fire, but in the Father Son and Holy Spirit. Still it is uncertain what Jesus baptizes us into (repentance? Forgiveness of sins?) unless we can follow Matthew?s logic. There is a teaching component to the baptism. Jesus asks his current disciples to teach obedience to everything that Jesus taught them to his new disciples. Obedience to Jesus? teachings is the parallel for repentance for the new disciples.

Matthew believes that Jesus ?fulfills all righteousness.? In Jesus is the whole of the Law. He comes to fulfill it, not to replace it. He orders the Law for us, placing love of God and neighbor above all other commandments. This is his teaching. Jesus? baptism asks for obedience to this. This is discipleship.

He asks the same of the rich young man (19:16-22). Give up all you have. Come. Follow me. Bring the law to fruition. Jesus asks for the man, not just his wealth and possessions, nor for his repentance. In this example, following Christ, discipleship, means obedience.

The difficulty of this discipleship is the prevailing theme in Matthew?s gospel. ?You have heard it said that?? always leads to something more difficult, more profound . Following Jesus is a crucible. It is a baptism of its own. It is a fiery life. It leads to the cross. Jesus knew this. In 20:17-23, he spells this out to all who would follow him. It is a bitter cup. To serve Christ is to partake in all of his struggle. This is what loving God is like. This is what baptism in Christ leads to. These are the teachings to which the new disciple must be obedient.

This parallel suggests a rigor beyond the baptism of John. Matthew is suggesting something more profound. As Jesus stands above John in social order, so too does the baptism of Jesus stand above the baptism of John. This is John?s proclamation in Matthew 3.

What then of the Christian practice of baptism in water? Whatever Matthew?s Gospel may say about the theological import of Jesus? baptism, the form is still an issue for early and contemporary Christians alike. Did Matthew?s community practice a different baptism, one without water? No. It is most likely that Matthew?s community baptized in water. This is the clear practical paradigm of the time. Maxwell Johnson presents a strong argument to support this claim. To refute the claims that John?s baptism was either an Essene or ?prostelyte? baptism, he reveals a multiplicity of communities that practiced a baptism or washing of some variety or another. The community of John was hardly unique in its use of baptism as a ritual. By extrapolation, neither were the followers of Jesus. ?Ancient Jewish sources of at least the second century list a variety of groups who seem to be identified by their accent on repeated and central washings: the daily baptizers, the Masbotheans, the Sabaeans, the Banaim, the morning bathers.?

This is not to suggest that baptism was a first century, near eastern fad either. Baptism was simply a common cultural expression used by several communities to express unity, to initiate, or to demonstrate spiritual cleansing and purity. Maxwell thus suggests that it is impossible to locate John?s baptism within any one of these traditions. It is also unnecessary to do so. It is satisfactory to know that John?s community was in good company ritually. Thus, it is possible to suggest that Matthew would adopt the form if not the meaning. Why would he not? Jesus was baptized in the manner of John?s baptism. Does Matthew suggest that Jesus? disciples should be baptized in the same way?

About this, Johnson says the following:

To say that Jesus? baptism by John at the Jordan was an historical event is not to say that the Gospel accounts of this event constitute an objective record of what actually took place. Rather, the evangelists have painted here a rather biased theological portrait which reflects, of course, their own Easter faith in the identity of the crucified and risen Christ. It is from this faith perspective that the evangelists proclaim this identity of Christ, the beloved Son of God, as revealed now already at the Jordan and, hence, draw attention to the significance of this event for Christian faith, life and practice.

Johnson wants to pour all of Easter into the baptismal narrative in the third chapter of Matthew. This post-resurrection interpretation of the baptismal event leads right to practice. There is no other model necessary. Why do anything different from what Christ did?

Paul Bradshaw is not as willing to make this broad a claim.

Whether the Christian adoption of baptism began with Jesus himself or only in the church after his resurrection cannot easily be resolved. All three synoptic gospels record Jesus? own baptism by John but say nothing of him baptizing his own followers. Then Gospel of John, on the other hand, does not mention Jesus being baptized but does speak of him baptizing others (John 3:22, 26; 4:1; but cf. 4:2). Matt. 28:19-20 contains a command to baptize all nations, but there are difficulties in accepting this as an authentic saying of the risen Lord.

Bradshaw says that the source of Christian baptism is an irreconcilable issue, so know that communities baptized and move on. He is unconvinced that we can find the answer to this question within the Gospels themselves. This may be true. As Johnson states clearly, the gospels are not an historical narrative. They are not textbooks. They are ?portraits.? Johnson proclaims a single vision gleaned from a plurality of sources that leads to the adoption of a rite by the community. As insightful and helpful as both of these interpretations are, neither answers the question of whether or not Matthew?s community would engage in a re-defined Johanine baptismal practice from Matthew?s own narrative. They both simply suggest that the issue is a complicated one.

This suggests something true about the Gospel of Matthew. It is not a liturgical document. Other than Jesus? suggestions about how one should participate in Temple and synagogue worship, Matthew does not concern himself with liturgy. Johnson and Bradshaw are correct. This is not the best source for an answer to the questions about ritual. Matthew?s concern is discipleship.

Ulrich Luz speaks of ?patterning? when he explores Matthean discipleship. ?Discipleship means life in Christ?s pattern.? To be a follower of Christ was to follow in his very difficult footsteps.

Matthew tells the story of Jesus as a basic model of life. He is the obedient Son of God who fulfills all justice (3:15) and the Law of the Prophets (5:17). This obedient Son of God endured hostility and persecution and finally he suffered and died (27:43,54). The Matthean missionary discourse transfers the model of Jesus to the disciples.

It is in this light where we may find that Matthew was a liturgical theologian if not a liturgist. Again, the model of Jesus? life is what replaces John?s ?repentance? in Matthew?s redefining of baptism. This is obedience. This is discipleship. Matthew is concerned about the quality of discipleship in Christian community. He has a very specific vision of how this is to look.

The disciples are the light of the world, which shines in their works and for the sake of which people praise the heavenly Father (5:14-16). Not only what the disciples say but what they do and what they suffer ? what they are - has proclamatory character.

This is why a redefining of baptism within this community is necessary. Matthew is concerned with far more than simple repentance. In the first mission in Matthew?s gospel (Chapter 9), missionary discipleship is described in detail. Matthew implies this same discipleship in 28:19-20. In this second commissioning, Matthew includes baptism in his formula. Matthew has come to a new understanding of baptism. Baptism leads to discipleship, Matthew?s radical and difficult discipleship.

Does this liturgical theology lead to a change in liturgical praxis? Clearly, there is the very strong possibility that Christians adopted a form of baptism similar to that of John?s. It is possible that they adopted John?s baptism outright, redefining it to include Matthew?s baptismal theology. Perhaps, as Bradshaw suggests, this is a bit of a goose chase and not worth our time. In either case, it is clear that Matthew meant something far more by ?baptism? than what John was offering. Whether the Christian model is the same or similar to John?s model is unimportant to Matthew. It is the content, the radical change in life that matters to Matthew.

Bibliography

Bradshaw, Paul Early Christian Worship The Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN 1996

Harrington, Daniel J. The Gospel of Matthew The Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN 1991

Johnson, Maxwell, Rites of Christian Initiation, The Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN 1999

Luz, Ulrich Matthew in History. Fortress Press, Minneapolis, MN 1994

procrastination

I see blue people.

sjerslix: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mule/smurfgen.html?firstName=Amy&lastName=Jersild&smurfName=
sjerslix: Sorry
sjerslix: Greetings from Fictious Smurf
AngloBaptist: As-Seen-on-TV Smurf
AngloBaptist: Dear God.
sjerslix: HAH!
AngloBaptist: George gets Kung Pao Smurf
sjerslix: very nice
sjerslix: And Trish?
sjerslix: My sister Amy is Megatron Smurf
sjerslix: I'm jealous
AngloBaptist: As-Seen-On-TV Smurf, too
sjerslix: You really are meant for each other! :-)
AngloBaptist: Indeed.
AngloBaptist: It was written in the mushrooms by little blue people. Oh. that's good.
sjerslix: You may not want to tell your pastor that, but yeah, works for me
AngloBaptist: lol

baptist sacraments

Here it is. Be kind. My brain hurts. Only one more paper left to write.

Reinventing Sunday: How Baptists Are Talking About the Sacraments

Agnus dei qui tollis peccata mundi meserere nobis.

As Baptists, we have spent much theological energy proclaiming how we are not a sacramental tradition, in the process granting our congregations complete autonomy in creating and responding to theological ideas. We term it, ?responding to the Spirit.? The irony is by actively disagreeing with sacramental traditions we have lost an articulate sense of the Holy Spirit in our worship.

In the worse case, our rituals are meaningless, empty liturgies with too great a focus upon those gathered and not enough upon God. More common is a perfunctory liturgy surrounding a sermon. No matter what may be preached, no matter how inspired, we still misunderstand the point of gathering in the first place. We have not gathered to hear the preached word only. We have gathered to stand in the midst of the Word Who Died and Is Risen, the paschal mystery. This is a mystery whose language is love. This is a Mystery who desires our whole selves. What we Baptists must renew is our theology of the Holy Spirit, a Trinitarian theology of worship, in order to reclaim our worship lives.

Brad Berglund and Molly Marshall have both spoken to this particular shortcoming in Baptist theological and liturgical life. In his book, Reinventing Sunday, Berglund proposes a model of worship that highlights an incarnational theology, renewing not simply worship practices, but theological understandings of worship as well.

Molly T. Marshall in, Joining the Dance, has fashioned responses to Baptist misconceptions of the role of the Holy Spirit as an academic and pastor. Her notions cannot remain within the seminary classroom. They are pastoral in focus, continuing the reformation that began for Baptists in England centuries ago. She reminds us that it is possible to reclaim what it right and true in our theological heritage without denying our current ecclesial identity as Baptists.

Water and the Spirit

Too often, baptism is interpreted in terms of imitation rather than incorporation. Because Jesus was baptized, we should be also, following his example?It would be helpful for us to remember the comprehensive character of his baptism, especially since we hope to link our baptism with his through the Spirit?Jesus? baptism is his whole existence in the form of a servant, all that is included in his being present among humanity ?not to be served but to be serve? (Mark 10:45).

Marshall?s understanding of the Spirit?s role in baptism is profound, especially within a Baptist context. Through the Spirit, we are not simply mimicking the actions of Jesus. We are instead participating in the same baptism in the Jordan. This is an anamnetical interpretation of the rite. ?The Spirit draws believers into the paschal rhythms of Christ.? This is a full embrace of the mystery. Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again. Through this interpretation, the paschal mystery then becomes our own reality as members in a corporate body. ?Organically, there is no relationship to the church apart from relationship to Christ through the Spirit.?

Here, Marshall?s use of the term ?organically? may be a good entry point for contemporary seekers and Christian apologists. We have to discover a way to speak of this union to contemporary communities. Terms like ?ontological? may have lost their value for many Baptists. ?Organically? underscores the depth of the transformation of the individual and the new humanity that is born within the community of faithful. This is a life-giving connection. This is a place to grow. This is a place of purity where one may flourish. Though not necessarily the most safe or the prettiest of places, it is nonetheless, the most true place for the ?new humanity.? Perhaps this is taking too much liberty with Marshall?s vocabulary, yet it is an interesting line of thought to explore in this day of organic diets, farms, wineries and grocery stores.

Marshall also brings to light possible criticisms of Baptist theologies. Where baptism is supposed to be the moment of unification in the church, it has become a place of schism. She specifically calls Baptists to be aware of our own place in this.

While Baptists prize their heritage of dissent, a lingering shadow falls across the tradition of the ?believers? church? ? the separatist trajectory. In recent years, scholars have become concerned that the legacies of the Enlightenment?s stress on the primacy of the individual and of the Baptist voluntary principle have conspired to truncate a robust theology of community in Christ. Baptists have seen themselves joined to a local congregation more than to Christ?s body, the new humanity.

These words have tremendous ramifications to understanding and living into Baptist ecclesial polity. It is unclear if Marshall is necessarily suggesting a return to more traditional hierarchical structure. As she is renowned for her feminist interpretations, it is doubtful that she would wish for any full return to such practices. Yet, where she leads us with her pneumatology is deeply challenging. Indeed, how can we perceive ourselves as members of one Body, a new humanity united in Christ unless we our institutional structures reflect this in some way? ?Reclaiming the Spirit?s incorporating work in baptism promises a more holistic, organic understanding of the Spirit?s embodiment in the church, whose head is Christ.? Marshall, by working through her understanding of the Holy Spirit?s place within the rite of baptism, demonstrates a sacramental understanding. This is no mere symbol. This is no simple pantomime Jesus. Rather, she has asked us to believe something entirely different.

Berglund on the other hand, is firmly entrenched in the traditional Baptist mode of believer?s baptism. He has a Pauline understanding that baptism ?symbolizes? death and new life in Christ. Berglund perceives baptismal meaning to reside primarily in our emulation of Christ in his participation in the baptism of John.

He takes the stance that Christian baptism is a modified Jewish mikveh, a ritual cleansing symbolizing purification and an intention to live life differently. This is all well and good, and certainly not wrong. It is simply incomplete. Though his book is not a theological treatise, it would be helpful to read more of Berglund?s thinking on this.

Is it possible that, though our liturgical practice parallels the mikveh, our immersion into the Body of Christ is a sacramental action where the Holy Spirit is active in transforming the individual and the congregation through each new baptism? It is not simply a proclamation of faith. It is also beings about unity with the Body. Perhaps Berglund does entertain these notions. For example, he says, ?Celebrating [the] incarnate reality is a significant part of worship.? Yet, he does not seem to engage the fundamental necessity of incorporation into the Body of Christ through the Spirit that Marshall proclaims. I wonder if he understands the baptism of Jesus in the gospels is more than a rewriting or an incorporation of John?s ritual cleansing. In some way, we must be led to a life of discipleship through the transforming act of baptism. This is not the same thing that John did. This is more than repentance.

Liturgy of the Table

Professor Marshall?s understanding of the eucharist flows freely from her understanding of baptism. Questions arise about the role of the Spirit in the table liturgy because, on some level, we have to answer the question of how present the Spirit is in us after baptism and if participating in the table increases that presence or renews it in some way. For her, it is once again a place where the unity of the new humanity is brought to the foreground. This is the principle liturgical act of the church. It is an expression of unity.

The church is an organic corporate being. It must be fed. It needs sustaining. What better spiritual food can there be but the Body and Blood? Thus, the rite cannot be a simple observance of a past event. Instead, Marshall suggests we must renew our understanding of remembrance. Anamnesis is more than simple recollection. It is a repeating of the same meal, the meal in the upper room. We are present at that table. The twelve are present with us around the table. Jesus serves us. This way of remembering transforms the community. For Marshall, this is not necessarily a transformation of the elements of bread and wine.

As the issue of transubstantiation is the typical sticking point for Baptists, Marshall suggests that Baptists can engage this transforming Spirit in the eucharist in this way. We are transformed. It is we who are renewed by the work of the Holy Spirit through who we brings us to the same table that was in the upper room. We are in the presence of Christ for that reason. This is a free grace from God. There is no right or wrong liturgical structure proposed here, only a very specific interpretation of the role of the Spirit.

Marshall does, remind us, however, of the place of the epiclesis. This prayer is traditionally made to ask the Spirit to transform the bread and wine. She suggests that Baptists can appropriate this prayer by making its focus the gathered community and not the elements of wine and bread. Though, this may sound too humanist in its implications for some, it is perhaps the only way that Baptists can incorporate this theology. Perhaps when we reach Marshall?s understanding, then we Baptists can make the next necessary faith step that realizes we can be taken to Christ?s side. Is it not possible that Christ is made manifest in our midst through the elements and, perhaps, even our gathering? Certainly this is not a question for Marshall, but Baptist congregations may find ?transforming a congregation? a more palatable theology at first.

Berglund, too, has a very sacramental notion of the liturgy of the table. He states that

The Lord?s Supper, no matter how often we celebrate it, is the act of communing with Christ. As we gather around the broken body of Jesus, the risen Christ is in our midst. It is our unity with Christ that makes the Lord?s Supper more than a memorial meal. More than bringing to mind and honoring the events of the past, Communion provides an opportunity for mystery in worship. Christ, the bread of life, in a way that is beyond our reasoning, becomes our nourishment. Christ?s birth, death, and resurrection ? and ours ? come together in this act of faith.

This is hardly a Baptist sentiment, to proclaim a mystery such as this, but proclaim it he does. Berglund?s book is a manual for enlivening worship, yet his theology is summarized in the above statement. Berglund is supremely aware of the paschal mystery, that somehow, someway the Holy Spirit engages us when we gather, when we proclaim the Christ. In some way ?that is beyond our reasoning,? there is transformation in the making of eucharist. Both the gathered faithful and the elements are transformed through the work of the Spirit. Though Berglund does not overtly engage a pneumatology within his writing of the Lord?s Supper, one does not need to look very far to perceive he has a strong understanding of the role of the Spirit.

Berglund also offers an understanding of ?symbol? that is uncommon among Baptists. ?Symbols are real, present, in front of us. But they also evoke something beyond the reality in front of us; they evoke something unique in each of us.? Though he does not go as far as proclaiming a real presence of the Risen Lord in the elements, he does go much further in his understanding than suggesting that the elements are ?mere symbol.? This seems to be a step away from his previous statement. He is not yet willing to make the great leap to real presence, but he has come beyond a common Baptist perception and has suggested a way of thinking of the real presence that may be helpful.

In the act of Communion, there is nothing we do to make Christ more present that Christ already is. But through the symbols of bread and wine, we can open our lives in new ways to that presence. That is the gift of faith we bring to the Lord?s table.

In his suggestions for worship reform, he further explores a theology of the Table. He suggests reverence for the elements. One should pray, as did the priests in the Temple, as one prepares for worship. Baking bread, filling the cups, dressing the table are all opportunities for prayer. This is a eucharistic discipline, a discipline of thanksgiving. The prayers of those preparing the meal set the tenor for all who follow to the table.

He also suggests movement. He suggests a deliberate approach to the table. Though there are some who would cry out that this liturgical motion would be ?too Catholic,? he is right in that it can express our willingness to believe, to come before God and be transformed.

He suggests feasting together at the table. He suggests varying the types of bread, even bringing grapes to the table. This is a Baptist pastor writing this book. We will not yet see wine on the table, but he does well to remind us of the generosity of the Lord?s Table.

Finally, he encourages all believers to celebrate the supper at their common family meals. This practice would be difficult for other traditions to embrace as easily as some Baptists might. Nevertheless, what is most compelling is that the Liturgy of the Table is no longer a ?once a month? observance. Instead, it becomes central to our common lives together. For a Baptist, this explodes the symbol. This facilitates bringing worship into our everyday lives. And, as he says so well, ?this type of on-going celebration of Christ?s presence enriches our experience of Communion in worship by making corporate remembrance and table fellowship part of everyday life.?

Knowing Jesus

?Knowing Jesus? can be understood in two ways. It can be understood in a way that asks us to think of how we know Jesus the Christ as one knows another person. It can also be a title, the Knowing Jesus. We are known by Christ. The prologue to John?s gospel speaks of the whole of creation being created through the Word. We were created through the Word. Christ knew us before we were knit in our mothers? wombs. If we make our beds in Sheol, Christ is there. As compelling as these poetic attempts are, they are but shadows of the reality, Jesus knows us in ways too profound and complete for words.

Knowing Christ is the subject of all schism in Christianity. For Baptists this is especially true. We say that we are to know Christ, to have faith, to simply ask him into our hearts and we often think of creeds and theologies as intellectual precepts and worth only what passion we care to place in them. A pastor once said, ?Theology and faith are not the same thing.? There is for us a disconnect between our heads and our hearts. We Baptists often devalue the place of theology in our faith-lives. Yet, theological thinking is faith thinking. We must entertain such a possibility.

It is ironic. We do not ascribe to creeds because we do not wish to dictate another?s thinking. Nevertheless, our thinking (our faith) is what so often leads to schism within our denomination. We are, whether we like it or not, identified by our theologies. They are our faith. Baptists do assent to something, even if it is a creed of an individual fashioning. We are already thinking about faith, creating theologies. We assent to new and old ideas daily.

So, how do we then encourage assent to these sacramental thoughts presented by two Baptist voices? Should we? Perhaps we need another way to think about knowledge and assent.

When we speak of knowing Jesus, we have to engage the person of Jesus. He is not an esoteric subject to be studied like quantum physics. He is to be known as a person. Jesus the Christ has not lost his humanity because of the Resurrection. Quite the opposite, he retains his humanity. The incarnation is a current reality.

Therefore, the first question is can one assent to a person. ?I assent that you are Mike.? is not our way of thinking of relationship, and a relationship with Christ is what we are speaking of. Jesus does not need our assent; instead, Jesus desires us. This is divine love. Through a Trinitarian theology of God, we can come to this understanding of relationship with Christ. As Marshall and Berglund both suggest, it is the work of the Spirit that makes this possible. Like Jesus, the Spirit is a person who is in relationship with us. She is the Comforter. She is the Advocate. She is met through the act of baptism. We encounter her at the Table. Like God the Father, and the Son, She is Love.
Hans Urs von Balthazar summarizes his thinking in this way:

Do we know Jesus? Only if we recognize in him the presence and the logic of absolute divine love. This love can refine whatever in us does not oppose the flame of love, but whatever refuses to bring forth love?s fruit will be let wither (Mk. 11:20 ff.), dug up and burned (Jn 15:6).

This notion takes a large step in completing a sacramental understanding for Baptists. John 3:16 is Baptist ?bread and butter.? We have an understanding of God?s love and sacrifice for our sakes. Love?s sacrifice brings reconciliation. Baptism is a proclamation of God?s love. The Last Supper is a proclamation of God?s love. So too is Pentecost. The arrival of the Spirit to the community gathered in Acts was and is the ongoing action of God?s love for the world.

The Spirit is how we know one another as the new humanity. The Spirit is how we recognize the incarnation. The Spirit is how we recognize the presence of Christ in one another. The language of love, of the Trinity, is a language Baptists can and do speak, though some would suggest otherwise.

Marshall and Berglund remind us that worship is one place where we have forgotten this native tongue. We keep trying to make the language of worship proclaim something other than the mystery of the love of God, the paschal mystery. However, divine love is the vocabulary of the language of worship. Only by reclaiming the place of the Holy Spirit in our worship, the place of sacrament, can we reenter this conversation.

Bibliography

Berglund, Brad, Reinventing Sunday Judson Press, Valley Forge, PA 2001

Marshall, Molly T., Joining the Dance: A Theology of the Spirit Judson Press, Valley Forge, PA 2003

von Balthazar, Hans Urs, Does Jesus Know Us? Do We Know Him? Ignatius Press, San Francisco, CA 1983

Hey there. To begin, to

Hey there.

To begin, to get the full impact of what I am about to tell you, you need to go here. God has a word to the nations. It seems to have bearing on my brother's work with intellectual property ethics.

Vatican City - God did not rule out smiting as a final measure against those who share his most famous work, the Bible, on the Internet. This marks the first time a deity has spoken on IT-related questions since Steve Jobs was temporarily Enlightened when touching the One True iMac some years ago.

Kudos to The Corner for calling my attention to this very important news report.

In other news, Trish is better. We took her to the doctor. She has taken THE BIGGEST PILLS EVER. She is feeling better. She is still not going to work today, so my role as nursemaid is assured. I enjoy the job security. She has also said that she will call my professors to let them know why my papers are late this week.

Jane Ellen edited my paper for my class at Northern. She also has some great advice on home repairs this morning. Tune in.

And, the creme de la creme, Fiendish Plot and I are going to see The Movie tonight at a midnight showing. This demonstrates many things. First, that old friendships are cool. I have great hopes here. Second, that Trish is indeed She Who Is Most Wondrous. I promised to see the film with her. I assume I will see it a few times.

So, Evanston. Midnight show. Come and get your LOTR groove on.

ah, indeed

This is what the Disseminary is up to of late.

groceries: reminded of mennonites

Trish is feeling better. The doctor gave her drugs.

And we did a little grocery shopping.

This and caffeine free Coke were among the items purchased.

waiting and the like

Trish is ill. I am waiting for the doctor to call and give us an appointment. I left a voice mail. Sigh. I will call again in about 15 minutes.

Jane Ellen has my paper for Northern. She's going to take a gander and let me know what she thinks. I am having trouble getting the pieces all togther.

Ah! The phone!

*later*

1 pm appointment. Yay!

ill

Not me. Trish.

She's ill. Thus, I got four hous of sleep. I am not complaining to much here. That would be unseemly. I am not the one with the fever. She's had it for over 24 hours along with the nastiest cough I have heard in a long time. It is time to call the doctor. Ugly.

Oh, I was up until 1 a.m. writing a paper on Baptist understandings of the sacraments. I'll post it later. Be ye warned!

take note

I have to say that taking a step back from the caffeine intake this morning was a poor choice. I lost my place in the midst of the congregational prayer. I am told that everything seemed well enough from the outside. All I know is that when I closed my eyes to pray, I almost fell asleep.

On the 6,987,453,978 day, God gave someone the fine idea to make coffee. It was good. No, I mean really, really good. Now, where is my coffee?

really?

This is an interesting press release about the HIV/AIDS crisis in the world and the response by the US. I would not go as far as they did in criticising Pres. Bush, but I would say we as a nation often at meeting global crises that do not impact us economically.

Africa has nothing to offer. It is a money pit. Who cares if the average person cannot afford to buy condoms? I know this is harsh on my part. We do give.

Some would say that "we cannot save everyone," and yet we have this cultural bias against those who are weakest. We often say "these things happen" or "the world is hard" or worse..."they are lazy," "they are mooching off of our efforts." We do not want to help other countries. This, I think, may be the wrong attitude entirely.

It is not a question of want. It may be a question of duty. But it is a question of national vocation. We have to help because we are called to do so, to do less would be to be less ourselves. No one person is responsible, though the one can carry the blame. We are all culpable. I am culpable.

There are over 10,000 homeless youth in Chicago. There are 100 beds allocated to serve them each night. This is my fault. This is my problem. This is our failing as many and as one.

serendipity and other morning musings

Yesterday was interesting.

I turned in one of two papers due. I will have to be late with the other for the class at Northern Baptist. This is fine.

I also worked from 9:30 - midnight:30. Urf. Catering is a good way to switch gears in my head so's I can get work done. I compose in my head about 40 different papers before I write the final one. AKMA realizes this I am sure.

The serendipitus moments were cool. In sharing a love for music with a co-worker, all the musicians came out of the wood work. Now I have this guy who wants to get together and play. He is looking for studio musicians and folk who can sit in as a guest musician in the shows he produces here and in New York city. Hmmm...interesting.

The other cook, John, knows Mike Budde. We had a great conversation about post-modern thinking and the Emerging Church movement. Very cool. John is ex-Catholic.

Another thing, there is this guy I work with from time to tome who manages a local HIV/AIDS service organization. They are looking for a volunteer recruitment guy for their annual bike ride. He thought of me. He was also thinking of me when he found out that the person who runs their spirituality group for some of the clients may be moving on. They will need a replacement.

Wow.

All this while making stuffed shrimp.

st anthony makes guest appearance

The Disseminary Home and News has trading cards! You need to see them to believe them.

von balthazar

Well, here goes another round of von Balthazar quotes.

All the profound mysteries of Christian prayer revolve around this indwelling of the Spirit of God in the soul; so that, once again, we see that the very possibility of Christian contemplation is founded entirely upon the doctrine of the Trinity.

and here is another for your enjoyment.

The images of the world which in former times spoke of God have become obscure ciphers and riddles, the words of scripture have been whittled away by rationalistic skeptics, human hearts have been so crushed and trampled on in this age of the robot that they are no longer sure that contemplation is possible.

Interesting stuff to write about. Cool.

the perfect paragraph revisited

AKMA asks his Early Church History class to write a perfect paragraph. It is an exercise in writing a good thesis statement. I like it. He has asked for a similar literary beast in the seminar that Jeff and I are participating in. Oh boy. I have been struggling all term to nail down a thesis for this class. I have to be honest, Matthew and I are still at odds on some level. I cannot really go into that now, nevertheless I have been working up a paragraph.

Before you read it, read this quote from Paul Bradshaw.

Whether the Christian adoption of baptism began with Jesus himself or only in the Church after his resurrection cannot easily be resolved. All three synoptic gospels record Jesus' own baptism by John but say nothing of him baptizing his followers. The Gospel of John, on the other hand, does not mention Jesus being baptized but does speak of him baptizing others (John 3:22, 26; 4:1; but cf. 4:2). Matt. 28:19-20 contains a command to baptize all nations, but there are difficulties in accepting this as an authentic saying of the risen Lord.

So, here is the so-called "perfect paragraph."

Matt. 3:11-17
Matt. 21:23-27
Matt: 28:19-20

In the Gospel of Matthew, John the baptist proclaims "I baptise you with water for repentance, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire." In this moment, Matthew establishes a theological difference between the baptism of John and the baptism of Jesus. Also, after his resurrection, Matthew's Jesus commands his disciples to "make disciple of all nations" through a baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to bring about obedience to Jesus' commands and teachings. Through this statement, Matthew further clarifies his understanding of baptism as Jesus taught it as something different from what John proclaimed. Once again Matthew redefines a familiar Jewish ritual in the light of his understanding of the Risen Christ. It is a radical theological shift within a Jewish framework. Jesus has given us is a new baptism. This is not the baptism of John.

great intentions

I intended to finish my von Balthazar book last night.

I intended to write an assignment for another class last night.

I intended to write an outline for a paper last night.

Instead I was asleep at 8:30. Up at 9:00. Back in bed and under the covers at 9:30. I think I am discovering my limits. Now, if someone would kindly tell me how to ignore them, I would be grateful.

Oh, I arose this morning at 6:00am, finished von Balthazar (God love 'im.), cought up on some other stuff, made hot cocoa and actually read some Matthew. Now, we write! Huzzah!

So, now I am a wee punchy.

bonhoeffer and the paschal mystery

Here is the paper, folks. Read at your leisure. I will miss this class.

Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again. This is the paschal mystery. According to liturgical theologians from Dix to Berglund, this is the shape of the liturgy. In all things, it must speak to paschal mystery. Bonhoeffer is no exception. The atonement and resurrection of Christ are essential to Bonhoeffer�s anthropology and his theology. For Bonhoeffer, this is The Question and the Truth of faith. Without the cross, humanity cannot exist; individuals and communities are rendered unreal. Bonhoeffer resides in this claim in his understanding of worship as well. Worship is to be centered in Christ, in his atoning death and the salvation of his resurrection.

What is curious is that Bonhoeffer is again living in dialectics. There is to be no religiosity, no prescriptive ethic yet, there are liturgical practices, and pieties that are particular to Bonhoeffer�s understanding of Christian identity and action. In Life Together, Bonhoeffer outlines and dictates a regula for the Christian community that establishes a liturgical catechesis for Christian worship highlighting his own Christ-centered theology. By doing so, he succumbs to a pietistic religiosity that is prescriptive and not just doctrinal.

Firstly, let us establish Bonhoeffer�s liturgical structure. It would be correct to say that Bonhoeffer perceives a cruciform or Christ-centered aspect to all pieces of liturgy. Psalm, scripture, song and prayer all receive the same treatment. How they inform community in the midst of worship and how the community responds to them is related primarily to Christ and his concrete presence in the same community. Bonhoeffer�s structure is as follows: psalms, a hymn, scripture, a hymn, corporate prayer and finally the table.

ΑΩ

The Psalms, for Bonhoeffer, are the very prayers of Christ. He states �the One who is here protesting his innocence, who is invoking God�s judgment, who has come to such infinite depths of suffering, is none other than Jesus Christ himself. He it is who is praying here, and not only here but in the whole Psalter.� The scriptures are the Word of the Lord. This is a true statement for Bonhoeffer and not a simple �faith claim.� The Psalms are the prayers of Christ.

Thus, it is not for us to understand them from our own experience. Our experience fails us except where we suffer with Christ. We must pray the Psalter because Jesus did. We must enter into Christ if we are to pray these words. There is no historical context to comprehend, no colloquialism to master. When we pray the Psalms, we �encounter the praying Christ.�

For Bonhoeffer, this becomes an education in prayer. Through the Psalms, Christ teaches us to pray. We learn what prayer means. We learn that we should pray. We learn that we pray as a fellowship. It is the last that is most connected with Bonhoeffer�s other work. This is where the Body of Christ is the individual who is Christ. If Bonhoeffer�s claims stand true, that we enter into Christ through praying the Psalms because they are Christ�s prayers and not our own, then as a fellowship the same is also true. We are the Body of Christ. Praying the Psalms is a sacramental action. It is something we must do because it is who we are. We do this because Christ is praying with us. The prayer is the same. Christ�s prayers are to be ours as His suffering is to be ours.

ΑΩ

�The prayer of the psalms, concluded with a hymn by the family fellowship, should be followed by a scripture reading.� Bonhoeffer has a great love for Scripture and desires that others, too, perceive its holiness as a single unit and not merely a collection of edifying spiritualisms. �Holy scripture is more than a watchword. It is also more than �light for today.� It is God�s revealed Word for all men, for all times. Holy Scripture does not consist of individual passages; it is a unit and is intended to be used as such.�

Here Bonhoeffer is very prescriptive in the use of scripture for community and personal devotion. �A Christian family fellowship should surely be able to read and listen to a chapter of the Old Testament and at least half a chapter of the New Testament every morning and evening.� He is frustrated by the perceived neglect of scripture by Christians. He believes that we are, as a whole, lazy when it comes to reading scripture, underestimating our own ability to listen at length and to comprehend what is read. If scripture is a whole, we need to ritualize its reading in longer passages to reinforce this notion. We cannot hear scripture when we only hear snippets in worship or private devotion.

As with the Psalms, there is a sacramental engagement with scripture. In reading the scripture, �we become a part of what took place for our salvation.� We are �listeners and participants in God�s action.� From here, we begin to see Bonhoeffer�s biblical conservativism, or at least his traditionalism. When we enter into scripture as he prescribes, our own experience falls flat. It lessens in importance when contrasted with the work of salvation. Our own concerns fall to the background and we concern ourselves only with the saving work of God. His suffering becomes our suffering. We can see the same dynamic in Letters and Papers from Prison. Our suffering matters not at all, except that it is Christ�s suffering.

From this understanding, Bonhoeffer suggests specific performance practices when it comes to reading scripture in worship. �Performance� would be an incorrect way to explain what Bonhoeffer is expressing. He wants the reading of scripture to be as non-performative as possible. Our selves, our egos, our personal experiences with scripture should not enter into the reading in any way. The reader should direct attention to the word and not themselves.

ΑΩ

The prayers of the psalms and the reading of the Scriptures should be followed by the singing together of a hymn, this being the voice of the Church, praising, thanking, and praying.

Bonhoeffer was a great lover of music. His treatment of hymn singing in the Church reflects this. Interestingly, it also reflects his tastes and less his usual focus upon the suffering of Christ and the sacramental function of the various parts of the liturgy though he does venture that direction as well. This may actually be appropriate given his understanding.

We must sing in unity. It is a �spiritual matter� and not a musical one. �Only where everybody in the group is disposed to an attitude of worship and discipline can unison singing, even though it may lack much musically, give us the joy which is peculiar to it alone.� He suggests specific hymnody to support this practice. In addition, he suggests that singing be a common and constant practice of the people. Times of worship are not the only time when the people of God should sing the Church�s hymns.

Only at the end of his discourse on singing does Bonhoeffer affirm his usual sacramental and Christ-centered focus. The Body of Christ, the Church, is singing, not we.

It is not you that sings, it is the Church that is singing, and you, as a member of the Church, may share in its song. Thus all singing together that is right must serve to widen our horizon, make us see our little company as a member of the great Christian Church on earth, and help us willingly and gladly to join in our singing, be it feeble or good, to the song of the Church.

Once again, the individual is consumed in the midst of the Body of Christ. It is interesting to note again that singing has the least sacramental quality thus far. Most likely this is because it is our voice, the Church�s voice that is heard and not God�s. One could stretch this to make it fit the same sacramental quality as scripture reading and the praying of the Psalter. However, it is probably in appropriate to do so since Bonhoeffer did not.

Somehow, however, this seems inconsistent. Bonhoeffer�s clarity about the Christ-centered nature of worship seems diminished. It would have made more sense if he had referred to Christ and the disciples singing a hymn at the Last Supper. Then hymnody is given a sacramental context consistent with the rest of Bonhoeffer�s liturgical theology. Our own Lord did this the eve of his crusifixion. What could be a better faith claim? It is as though Bonhoeffer is struggling to remind himself of what he wrote in Sanctorum Communio about the nature of community. His notions of unity are critical to his understanding of the Body of Christ. It simply is odd that he chose hymn singing to be the liturgical locus for this idea. As we will see, he does allow the Table to carry this burden. It may have been better to allow that to be the only locus for his theology of unity.

ΑΩ

We have heard God�s word, and we have been permitted to join the hymn of the Church; but now we are to pray to God as a fellowship, and this prayer must really be our word, our prayer for this day, for our work, for our fellowship, for the particular needs and sins that oppress us in common, for the persons committed to our care.

Bonhoeffer�s prescription here is threefold, though founded upon scriptural mandate : one �brother� praying for all, the use of formal prayers, and special prayers of the fellowship. Bonhoeffer here enters his theological anthropology. Sin and need are expressed. This is where Bonhoeffer�s faith thinking becomes concretized. All that precedes in worship, the scriptures, the singing, are all embodied within this sinful people in need of prayer and the transformation afforded by it.

Firstly, when a person prays on behalf of the congregation, the gathered family, that person, ideally the head of the family, may only do so as far as the community intercedes on their behalf. All criticism must cease. All differences must be set aside so that the community may pray. This person �must know the cares, the needs, the joys and thanksgivings, the petitions and hopes of the others.� This is a great responsibility and it would behoove the community to do all in their power to support this person in this ministry. The prayer should be orderly. The prayer is to be a discipline for all involved. Prayer is not based on whims or �spiritual moods.�

It is precisely when a person, who is borne down by inner emptiness and weariness or a sense of personal unworthiness, feels that he would like to withdraw from his task, that he should learn what it means to have a duty to perform in the fellowship, and the brethren should support him in his weakness, in his inability to pray�Everything depends on the fellowship�s understanding and supporting and praying the brother�s prayer with him as its prayer.

Secondly, formal prayers have their place, but they should never stand in the stead of earnest and sincere free prayer of the people. The people are never to be led away from their own prayer. This attitude underscores the same servant ministry as mentioned before when the individual prays on behalf of the whole. Eloquence is not a prerequisite to prayer. Authenticity is the prerequisite.

Thirdly, there are opportunities for special prayers that extend beyond the regular disciplines of daily prayers or private devotions. Here Bonhoeffer suggests but one rule: �that such meetings should be held only where there is a common desire for them and where it is certain that there will be common participation in definite hours of prayer.� It is here that it becomes most clear that Bonhoeffer is addressing the seminary community at Finkenwalde specifically, and yet this is a word of warning to all the Church. If there is to be a common prayer life, common community, then no other discipline may conflict with that common prayer life. Otherwise, there would be a fracturing of community, and this is the demise of the Church. All of this is to be free and not coerced. �Let nothing be done by force; let everything be done in freedom and love.�

ΑΩ

We have been following the course of Christian community�s morning worship. God�s Word, the hymn of the Church, and the prayer of the fellowship stand at the threshold of the day. Not until the fellowship has been nourished and strengthened with the bread of eternal life does it come together to receive from God the earthly bread for this temporal life�To know Jesus Christ in the presence of these gifts � what does this mean?

To know Christ in this way is threefold for Bonhoeffer. First, we must know Christ as the giver of all things, as the creator of the universe �with the Father and the Holy Spirit.� Secondly, �all earthly gifts are given to [the congregation] only for Christ�s sake.� Thirdly, in the epiclesis the congregation �confesses the gracious omnipresence of Jesus Christ.� Bonhoeffer�s Christ-centered theology is its most clear in this understanding. We are created in the image of God as is all of the world. All we have is for the sake of Christ, these things, these gifts, are Christ�s. Christ himself is present in all of these gifts, in all of life. As community, we are to confess this; we are to proclaim this truth thus confessing the truth of our own humanity. All of these foci are held in tension proclaiming the centrality of Christ.

For this reason our salvation is afforded. Thusly, we should be glad when we partake of the Lord�s Supper. We are refreshed through Table Fellowship. The constant presence of Christ dictates that we should be glad in this knowledge. If Christ is present, we cannot be anxious. Instead, we are to be glad.

In his explanation of the rite, he is consistent with the place of our own finitude and sin in his theology. You cannot separate the incredible grace of Christ�s presence with the human condition. The one needs the other to be real, to be concrete.

The fellowship of the table teaches Christians that here they still eat the perishable bread of the earthly pilgrimage. But if they share this bread with one another, they shall also one day receive the imperishable bread together in their Father�s house.

For Bonhoeffer, worship culminates in the Lord�s Supper, the pinnacle event of Christian worship. This one liturgical moment contains all of his theology.

The day of the Lord�s Supper is an occasion of joy for the Christian community. Reconciled in their hearts with God and the brethren, the congregation receives the gift of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and receiving that, it receives forgiveness, new life, and salvation. It is given new fellowship with God and men. The fellowship of the Lord�s Supper is the superlative fulfillment of Christian fellowship. As the members are united in body and blood at the table of the Lord so will they be together in eternity. Here the community has reached its goal. Here joy in Christ and his community is complete. The life of Christians together under the Word has reached its perfection in the sacrament.

ΑΩ

Two more components of Bonhoeffer�s liturgy are in need of attention. The first component is the preaching moment. What is interesting is that he gives the preaching moment very little attention in Life Together. It has a perfunctory role and is addressed on only two occasions. One is in the section on personal meditation on scripture. He suggests that his understanding of meditating on scripture may be useful for the preacher as the preacher�s own agenda and education can be laid aside so that scripture itself may speak through them to the congregation gathered. The other is in the negative in a section on �The Ministry of Proclaiming.� Bonhoeffer specifically says that this section is not addressed to ordained leaders whose ministry of proclamation is time and location specific. Instead, it is addressed to the remainder of the community.

Why this is the case is uncertain. Why he would seemingly ignore the preaching moment and not explicitly include it within his morning liturgy is unknown. We can only speculate. Perhaps he considered it unessential to worship. Perhaps he felt that the existing theology surrounding the preaching moment (which is doctrinal) was sufficient and needed no further explanation. We cannot be certain.

The second remaining component to liturgy cannot be overstated.

Though it is true that confession is an act in the name of Christ that is complete in itself and is exercised in the fellowship as frequently as there is desire for it, it serves the Christian community especially as a preparation for the common reception of the holy Communion�It is the command of Jesus that none should come to the altar with a heart that is unreconciled to his brother. If this command applies to every service of worship, indeed to every prayer we utter, then it most certainly applies to the Lord�s Supper.

Reconciliation is the prerequisite to the worship life of the Christian community. It demands that �rigorous honesty� that Bonhoeffer so loves. It demands constant attention and clearly discourages fragmentation of the Body. This attitude underscores our need for Christ, for salvation, and the constant presence of sin within the community. As odd as it seems, it underscores the community�s need of sin. Sin allows for reconciliation. The presence of Adam�s sin demands the Atoning Cross. The presence of the Second Adam and the resurrection of humanity speak to the presence of sin in the world. This is incarnation. This is the chaotic nature of the Church.

All of Bonhoeffer�s theology appears to focus on this one act, the reconciling act between members of the Church, between God and the world. As we die and are reborn every day, we reconcile ourselves to God and one another. This happens only through Christ and his suffering on the cross. �Reconciliation� may very well be the one word that is the summation of all of Bonhoeffer�s thinking.

ΑΩ

Life Together is a wonderful regula for Christian community as Bonhoeffer perceives it. It suggests a clear liturgical form, and in other sections, suggests personal guidelines for devotion and spiritual growth. It is a dear book. Yet, its very existence is problematic. Bonhoeffer wants to concretize the faith within ritual. To do so may actually be going against his own theology. Yet, he may have no choice. As he concretizes his thinking, there must be guidelines and specific attitudes and practices that center around worship. Life Together demonstrates how Bonhoeffer is facing increasing pressure from within the Church and from outside as his ministry at Finkenwalde continues. His work at Finkenwalde and his thinking in Life Together speak to this pressure and the strength of his own convictions.

Nevertheless, in the clarity of his prescriptions he may very well refute his own claims. It is unclear whether this is another dialectic, an absence of religiosity and piety on one hand and a very clear didactic treatise on �How to Be Christian� on the other hand. Yet, Bonhoeffer, in his idealism, never can escape this reality. There are realities, pastoral concerns at work. He only seems to fall prey to them. Is this the danger of Cost of Discipleship that he speaks of in Letters and Papers from Prison? For Bonhoeffer, there a danger in stating things so succinctly that they become fodder for the very thing he is trying to avoid: false religion.

Bibliography

Bethge, Eberhard ed. Letters and Papers from Prison Simon & Schuster, New York, NY USA 1997

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich Life Together Harper and Row Publishers, San Francisco, CA USA � 1954

a taste

I am still working, but here is a taste.

We have heard God�s word, and we have been permitted to join the hymn of the Church; but now we are to pray to God as a fellowship, and this prayer must really be our word, our prayer for this day, for our work, for our fellowship, for the particular needs and sins that oppress us in common, for the persons committed to our care.

Bonhoeffer�s prescription here is threefold, though founded upon scriptural mandate : one �brother� praying for all, the use of formal prayers, special prayers of the fellowship. Bonhoeffer here enters his theological anthropology. Sin and need are expressed. This is where Bonhoeffer�s faith thinking becomes concretized. All that precedes in worship, the scriptures, the singing, are all embodied within this sinful people in need of prayer and the transformation afforded by it.
Firstly, when a person prays on behalf of the congregation, the gathered family, that person, ideally the head of the family, may only do so as far as the community intercedes on their behalf. All criticism must cease. All differences must be set aside so that the community may pray. This person �must know the cares, the needs, the joys and thanksgivings, the petitions and hopes of the others.� This is a great responsibility and it would behoove the community to do all in their power to support this person in this ministry. The prayer should be orderly. The prayer is to be a discipline for all involved. Prayer is not based on whims or �spiritual moods.�

It is precisely when a person, who is borne down by inner emptiness and weariness or a sense of personal unworthiness, feels that he would like to withdraw from his task, that he should learn what it means to have a duty to perform in the fellowship, and the brethren should support him in his weakness, in his inability to pray�Everything depends on the fellowship�s understanding and supporting and praying the brother�s prayer with him as its prayer.

Secondly, formal prayers have their place, but they should never stand in the stead of earnest and sincere free prayer of the people. The people are never to be led away from their own prayer. This attitude underscores the same servant ministry as mentioned before when the individual prays on behalf of the whole. Eloquence is not a prerequisite to prayer. Authenticity is the prerequisite.
Thirdly, there are opportunities for special prayers that extend beyond the regular disciplines of daily prayers or private devotions. Here Bonhoeffer suggests but one rule: �that such meetings should be held only where there is a common desire for them and where it is certain that there will be common participation in definite hours of prayer.� It is here that it becomes most clear that Bonhoeffer is addressing the seminary community at Finkenwalde specifically, and yet this is a word of warning to all the Church. If there is to be a common prayer life, common community, then no other discipline may conflict with that common prayer life. Otherwise, there would be a fracturing of community, and this is the demise of the Church. All of this is to be free and not coerced. �Let nothing be done by force; let everything be done in freedom and love.�

free at last! you, my readers, are free at last!

This is the last of my Bonhoeffer papers. I have to say that I am sad to even begin the thing. I have loved every moment of this class...even when the quasi-Mormon pushed me around or when I discovered that I was the Bible-thumping conservative in the group. That is a distinction I never expected.

So, if you are curious what it is that I have been up to, please feel free to read on. It is a 12-15 page paper, so you may just want to do something else. But let's just say that Bonhoeffer has some strong opinions about worship.

The fellowship of the Lord's Supper is the superlative fulfillment of Christian fellowship. As the members of the congregation are united in body and blood at the table of the Lord so will it they be together in eternity. Here the community has reached its goal. Here joy in Christ and joy in his community is complete. The life of Christians together under the word has reached its perfection in the sacrament.

UNDER CONSTRUCTION

gory details

Go here.

So, do you think that this will make a difference in a positive way or cause an even greater split in the Democratic party? I bet Leiberman is less than thrilled, no? There will have to be some reconciliation made between those two camps before any real good can come from this endorsement. Now, back to are regularly scheduled mayhem: Bonhoeffer!

bonhoeffer: letters and papers from prison, part deux

This is the last of my small reflection papers for this class. I have one LARGE paper to write...not long, just LARGE. I think I will get some poster board for it. That should be large enough, don't you think?

The following will be edited for spelling and grammar before I send it in.

I discovered later, and I'm still discovering right up to this moment, that it is only by living completely in this world that one learns to have faith (p. 369).

In our class, one of the frustrations continually voiced is that Bonhoeffer, no matter how hard he may have tried, is no less a phenomenologist than his forbears in German academia. He is an idealist in the midst of his arguments of concretizing faith. I think, after reading the above quote, that it may be possible that Bonhoeffer knew of his own weakness.

By this-worldliness, I mean living unreservedly in life's duties, problems, successes and failures, experiences and perplexities. In so doing, we throw ourselves completely into the arms of God, taking seriously, not our own sufferings, but those of God in the world - watching with Christ in Gethsemane. That I think is faith; that is metanoia; and that is how one becomes a [person] and a Christian (cf. Jer. 45!). How can success make us arrogant, or failure lead us astray, when we share in God's sufferings through a life of this kind (p. 369-70)?

Even here he walks that tightrope between phenomenology and a concrete philosophy. Act and being merge and part ways. His struggle is clear, even in prison. What he is experiencing is indeed mystical and thus phenomenological. It cannot be proclaimed in great clarity simply because it is founded upon mystery. Or is this so? Bonhoeffer's dialectic seems more founded now upon his experience and the results of his actions than a philospohical notion about "sociality" he espoused when only twenty-one years of age. He is in jail. He suffers from anxiety surrounding his own uncertain fate. He misses family and friends. Yet he finds solace in his intellectual pursuits. He still writes. He has also taken to writing poetry in prison. His own suffering must be expressed. This is where he meets God again and again.

Whether the human deed is a matter of faith or not depends on whether we understand our own suffering as an extension of our action and a completionn of freedom. I think that is very important and very comforting (p. 375).

If we read this as pastoral theologians, then we may be led to see how God is present with Bonhoeffer in his suffering and doubts. Bonhoeffer never says it clearly. Perhaps he does not believe it since his understanding even of Christ is utterly other-focused. Nevertheless, I perceive that he knows God is present with him in this suffering as God is present with all who suffer. His poetry leads me to draw this conclusion even if his theo-philosophical wrestling does not. Bonhoeffer finds solidarity with God in his own suffering.

Perhaps I am reading something into Bonhoeffer that does not exist, but his poetry has the same feel as earlier mystics. There is unity with God in suffering. The cross ceases to be idea or "mere symbol." In stead there is a cross that is for each of us. There we will suffer and die only to be reborn. There we are continuously transformed. This is how I read Bonhoeffer's "learning to have faith."

Bonhoeffer's expressions also illuminnate for me the trouble with my own quasi-liberal theological notions. As much as Bonhoeffer is aware of the atomizing quality of German Idealism, I too am aware of the same tendancy within more contemporary pragmatic theologies. We are too aware of "action" and not enough aware of being. Even acts of charity can be empty ritual. Bonhoeffer's challenge to us is a good one.

There exisits a dialectic in this. It is action and being, not one without the other, that is reality for the Christian. We can feed the poor, and clothe the naked. These are all admirable. Yet these practices alone do not make us Christian as laudable as they are. Instead it is the cross that makes us Christian. It is God's suffering in Christ on the cross that makes us Christian, restoring us as complete persons created in God's image. Our continued realization of this truth and our standing with Christ at the cross is our growth in faith.

This phenomenology is only true in the midst of the world where all mannner of salvation and damnation are met in action. Bonhoeffer had chosen a rough row to hoe. He has bequeathed it to us. I am very interested to see where this might take me.

oh, what a change

This hymn by Ada R. Habershon is fun. She also wrote "Will the Circle." I found it in a hymnal entitled Songs of Hope. It is one of those turn of the century Protestant hymnals that were so common. Christian publishers could not crank these things out quickly enough. The copywrite is 1905 by Charles M. Alexander. There is no title page in the volume I have, so this is as close as I can come to a publishing date for this hymnal.

Advent is a time for waiting for the Christ child...and a reminder of the eschatological hope. The Kingdom breaks through. We wait and are fed all in one moment of praise.

Soon will our Savior from Heaven appear;
Sweet is the hope and its power to cheer;
All will be changed by a glimpse of His face
This is the goal at the end of our race!

Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see His wonderful face!
Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see his face!

Lonliness changed to reunion complete,
Absense exchanged for a place at his feet,
Sleeping ones raised in a moment of time,
Living ones changed to his image sublime!

Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see His wonderful face!
Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see his face!

Sunrise will chase all the darkness away,
Night will be changed to the brightness of day,
Tempest will chage to ineffable calm,
Weeping will change to a jubilant psalm!

Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see His wonderful face!
Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see his face!

Weakness will change to magnificent strength,
Failure will change to perfection at length,
Sorrow will change to unending delight,
Walking by faith to walking by sight!

Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see His wonderful face!
Oh, what a change,
Oh, what a change,
When I shall see his face!
Amen.

bonhoeffer: letters and papers from prison

This is the next to last reflection paper for the quarter. Read on if you wish.

listening bar:

The Christian, unlike the devotees of the redemption myths, has no last line of escape from earthly tasks and difficulties into the eternal, but, like Christ himself (My God, why hast thou forsaken me?), he must drink the earthly cup to the dregs, and only in his doing so is the crucified and risen Lord with him, and he crusified and risen with Christ.(p. 337)

This theology of Bonhoeffer's is what is so very compelling in my reading of him. This is where he moves me and throughout the rest of our readings, I have had a difficult time getting it onto the page. Instead I have frequently brought up "salvation" and the place of sin in Bonhoeffer's anthropology from Sanctorum Communio. The Church, like the rest of our human existence, is a messy and difficult place. It's members are sinners called to lives of suffering with Christ. The church is no escape from the world. Like it's savior, it is firmly entrenched within it. It sups, laughs, heals, suffers at its hands and dies in its embrace only to rise again.

The temptation here, again, is to deliniate sever appropriate Christian responses, ethis, that reflect this entrenchment. There rises this list of do's and don't's that a Christian must embrace to be Christian. But this is not what Bonhoeffer would have us think either if his Ethics is any guide for us. Ethics, for the Christian, cannot be a prescribed set of absolutes. In fact, there are no "ethics" at all. There is only being which leads us to action. This is Bonhoeffer's attempt to escape the high idealism of his time. It is also of supreme importance to rememebr that he wrote this in prison. Brother Dietrich was in the trenches.

Where I have been wrestling is trying to discover where Bonhoeffer deliniates between those who are in the Church and those who are not. Clearly he does, yet he too seems to have struggled through out his writings. The established German Church had failed so miserably in any semblance of Christian performance that Bonhoeffer goes through a period of disillusionment. In this volume, however, he seems to have come to grips with a great deal of his struggles.

Christians and Pagans

Men go to God when they are sore bestead,
Pray to him for succor, for his peace, for bread,
For mercy for them sick, sinning or dead;
All men do so, Christian and unbelieving.

Men go to God when he is sore bestead,
Find him poor and scorned, without shelter or bread,
Whelmed under the weight of the wicked, the weak, the dead;
Christians stand by God in his hour of grieving.

God goes to every man when sore bestead,
Feeds body, and spirit with his bread;
For Christians, pagans alike he hangs dead,
And both alike forgiving (p. 348-9).

Bonhoeffer is constantly trying to avoid "religiosity." He is not interested in religions, but instead faithful action which is founded upon the love of God that leads all to the cross. For Bonhoeffer, humanity's very identity is founded upon the cross. This is the love of God for humanity and the love God requires of humanity.

I must admit I am torn about this on some level. Firstly, my Baptist heart wants to cheer. Let's get rid of the trappings and get to the heart of faith which is obedience. Yet, I am a liturgist and I want to also say that "religion" or even "religiosity" can lead us to what Bonhoeffer is after if catechesis is central.

This is exactly the problem. Christian identity in Bonhoeffer's Germany had shifted to an empty religiosity devoid of sound doctrine. There was no teaching worthy of the suffering of the cross, at least not to Bonhoeffer. If I could, I might challenge Brother Dietrich to recall the above poem whenever faced with his frustration and disappointment.

The Church is populated with nothing but pagans. It is a rare being whi can stand the cross. Peter will not. Only a small handful dare to have that courage. Instead, we all, to one degree or another, subscribe to some religiosity that actually feeds us, comforts us and allows for Bohoeffer's �cantus firmus (p. 303)� to exist. Without it, the incredible challenges that Bonhoeffer demands of us would have no legs, would have no cross on which to stand. He needs to embrace his own dialectic. We need both our sinfulness and our "fullness" to function as Christians. How else is reconciliation afforded?

I am looking forward to seeing this worked out in Life Together. In that volume, he clearly has expectations and disciplines for the Church�s worship and communal life. Even he seems unable to escape the trap of a community needing to look and act in some way that distinguishes it from all others.

anglican pacifists

The Disseminary Home and News has finally released its first publication. This is a good thing.

lunch

Trish came home for lunch. The church is just a couple of blocks away. It makes me glad to have that little time with her.

This is what was for lunch. Mmm. Yummy.

These guys started the whole thing. Somehow this makes me happy. The Fearnow Bros.!

a little strung out or just sentimental?

I've been thinking a lot lately. Sadly, it is not the type of thinking that AKMA wound necessarily ask of me in class. Ruminating may be a better word.

If you have not noticed, here in the States people have been celelbrating Christmas since before Halloween...well, decorating at the very least. I have been trying not to participate in the habit myself. Trish and I did put up the tree over the last several days. I hope that is not too great a sin. :-)

What I've been working through is a little different than all that Christianity Contrary to Capitalism stuff...

When I first started going to church on my own, it was to sing. In college, I participated in three choirs that had responsibilities to the University Chapel. Standing there in the midst of other stressed out and/or hungover college kids was actually a profound experience. Bach, Byrd, Erb, Copland, Tallis, di Lasso, Handel, Schutz and countless others allowed us to lend our voices to allow their's to be heard. This is what brought me to church.

When I graduated college I went to seminary. It did not take that first time. A long-standing relationship ended badly. Things were at loose ends. But there was this one constant...music. I was singing with the Richmond Symphony Chorus. Beethoven's 9th, Mahler's 2nd...the stage reverberates when a Symphony plays...your sternum has a reciprocal vibration. Your whole being is engaged in this type of music.

That ministry and witness blossomed when I lived in community for four years at Richmond Hill. I have written about that place before. It is truly where my catechesis took place...in the midst of prayer, eucharist and ecumenism. Catholics and Mennonites, Moravians and Baptists, the World Council of Churches, African-Americans, Anglo-Americans, rich, poor...the gospel was the same for everyone:

God will change you. As God issues forth this transforming word, the world itself will be changed. Peace will be the language of nations. Justice will reign. We have a baptism that speaks to the truth and our responsibility for this unfolding Kingdom of God. All of this takes place in relationships, in communities, towns, cities, nations and churches. It is called reconciliation and it is the will of God.

For me, all of this was given voice, creedence, in music. I sang with the Symphony Chorus for only a season or two, but other opportunities came forward. Impromptu is a small chamber group. There was my time at First Presbyterian, Richmond. I sang with a couple of other churches from time to time...then there was The Church of the Holy Comforter and the Easter Vigil.

Emmy Lou Harris had just released a cd with "Bright Morning Stars" on it. I sang with the choir at this parish as the lights came up at midnight. I sang in that church for two years...taking eucharist, serving with the kids, making music and friendships. Music and the Holy Spirit afforded these opportunities and experiences for me.

When I came to Chicago, this continued. I sang at the Catholic Cathedral for the funeral of one cardinal and the installation of another. I have sung for the Franciscans, the Greek, Russian and Romanian Orthodox, the Episcopalians, Methodosts and , of course, my Baptists. The music is often the same where ever I go...B