conjectural navel gazing; jesus in lint form

confession

I stood Geoff up yesterday.

Yes. I did (see comments here). Don't ask why. I have no good reasons. It seems I am still learning how to use a callendar. I had the appointment down in the little box. But equating the box with the number "30" in it with the actual 24-hour period I was in the midst of was apparently too challenging for me.

Sorry, Geoff. Sigh. Now, Thomas, again, no tickling of the foot coming out of my forehead.

vows of obedience and service

Singing at Andrea's deaconal ordination was indeed a gift.
Here is a brief snippet from the liturgy.

The Examination

All are seated except the ordinand, who stands before the bishop.
The Bishop addresses the ordinand as follows.

My sister, every Christian is called to follow Jesus Christ,
serving God, through the power of the Holy Spirit.
God now calls you to a special ministry of servanthood directly under your bishop.
In the name of Jesus Christ, you are to serve all people, particularly the poor, the weak, the sick, and the lonely.
As a deacon in the Church, you are to study the Holy Scriptures,
to seek nourishment from them, and to model your life upon them.
You are to make Christ and his redemptive love known, by your word and example, to those among whom you live and work and worship.
You are to interpret to the Church the needs, concerns and hopes of the world.
You are to assist the bishop and priests in public worship and in the ministration of God's Word and Sacraments, and you are to carry out other duties assigned to you from time to time. At all times, your life and teaching are to show Christ's people that in serving the helpless they are serving Christ himself.

I cannot help but think of my own ordination that is, hopefully, this October. Andrea is going to make a great priest. She is already an excellent witness to the work of God in her community at All Saints. Again, it was an honor to sing the Litany. Hey, they even called me the Litanist! That was a first. I kind like it. Sometimes I wish Christianity had an office of Cantor like some strains of Judaism do...ordained, service minded and musical...necessarily musical. I experienced the same urging I always do when I sit in the choir loft of an Episcopal or Roman Catholic church. The architecture evokes a strong response for me. The schola cantorum is located between pulpit and altar (or close enough in most traditionally designed churches). There is a lot of musical leaderaship from the choir...including the singing of offeratory anthems and communion anthems which, I have always felt, serve the community in approaching the altar. In spite of whtever the realities are, I have always felt like we sing people up...we sing them to the altar. The schola cantorum is as much of a pulpit as the actual pulpit. Then, as if to tease me further, it is a small choir...they need help. I sang in the bass section. That made three of us. It is a devoted group of singers. They could use someone to uphold them. That is all. I am always drawn to that. Ego? Probably on some level, but I also know I can offer that service.

Here is another something for you to chew on.

Thy Will Be Done

Edith Stein

"Thy will be done," in its full extent, must be the guideline for the Christian life. It must regulate the day from morning to evening, the course of the year, and the entire of life. Only then will it be the sole concern of the Christian. All other concerns the Lord takes over. This one alone, however, remains ours as long as we live. And, sooner or later, we begin to realize this. In the childhood of the spiritual life, when we have just begun to allow ourselves to be directed by God, we feel his guiding hand quite firmly and surely. But it doesn�t always stay that way. Whoever belongs to Christ must go the whole way with him. He must mature to adulthood: he must one day or other walk the way of the cross to Gethsemane and Golgotha.

Will you remain faithful to the Crucified? Consider carefully! The world is in flames, the battle between Christ and the Antichrist has broken into the open. If you decide for Christ, it could cost you your life. Carefully consider what you promise.

Before you hangs the Savior on the cross, because he became obedient to death on the cross. He came into the world not to do his own will, but his Father's will. If you intend to be the bride of the Crucified, you too must completely renounce your own will and no longer have any desire except to fulfill God's will.

The Savior hangs naked and destitute before you on the cross because he has chosen poverty. Those who want to follow him must renounce all earthly goods. It is not enough that you once left everything out there and came to the monastery. You must be serious about it now as well. Gratefully receive what God's providence sends you. Joyfully do without what he may let you do without. Do not be concerned with your own body, with its trivial necessities and inclinations, but leave concern to those who are entrusted with it. Do not be concerned about the coming day and the coming meal.

The Savior hangs before you with a pierced heart. He has spilled his heart's blood to win your heart. If you want to follow him in holy purity, your heart must be free of every earthly desire. Jesus, the Crucified, is to be the only object of your longings, your wishes, your thoughts.

The world is in flames. Are you impelled to put them out? Look at the cross. From the open heart gushes the blood of the Savior. This extinguishes the flames of hell. Make your heart free by the faithful fulfillment of your vows; then the flood of divine love will be poured into your heart until it overflows and becomes fruitful to all the ends of the earth.

Do you hear the groans of the wounded on the battlefields in the west and the east? You are not a physician and not a nurse and cannot bind up the wounds. You cannot get to them. Do you hear the anguish of the dying? You would like to be a priest and comfort them. Does the lament of the widows and orphans distress you? You would like to be an angel of mercy and help them. Look at the Crucified. If you are bound to him by the faithful observance of your holy vows, your being is precious blood. Bound to him, you are omnipresent as he is. You cannot help here or there like the physician, the nurse, the priest. You can be at all fronts, wherever there is grief, in the power of the cross. Your compassionate love takes you everywhere, this love from the divine heart. Its precious blood is poured everywhere, soothing, healing, saving.

The eyes of the Crucified look down on you, asking, probing. Will you make your covenant with the Crucified anew in all seriousness? What will you answer him?

"Lord, where shall we go? You have the words of eternal life."

Edith Stein, �Thy Will Be Done,� from Edith Stein: Essential Writings, selected by John Sullivan, O.C.D. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2002. Used by permission.

litany for ordinations

This evening, Andrea Mysen will be ordained into the deaconate of the Episcopal Church, USA. I have been asked to sing the Litany for Ordinations. It is a great honor and I am looking forward to it. This will be the second time I have participated in an ordination service this way. I think I may be getting the hang of it.

Here is the litany.

The Litany for Ordinations

For use at Ordinations as directed. On Ember Days or other occasions, if
desired, this Litany may be used for the Prayers of the People at the
Eucharist or the Daily Office, or it may be used separately.

God the Father,
Have mercy on us.

God the Son,
Have mercy on us.

God the Holy Spirit,
Have mercy on us.

We pray to you, Lord Christ.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For the holy Church of God, that it may be filled with truth
and love, and be found without fault at the Day of your
Coming,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For all members of your Church in their vocation and
ministry, that they may serve you in a true and godly life,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For N., our Presiding Bishop, and for all bishops, priests, and
deacons, that they may be filled with your love, may hunger
for truth, and may thirst after righteousness,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For N., chosen bishop (priest, deacon) in your Church,
we pray to you, O Lord.

Lord, hear our prayer.

That he may faithfully fulfill the duties of this ministry, build
up your Church, and glorify your Name,
we pray to you, O Lord.

Lord, hear our prayer.

That by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit he may be sustained
and encouraged to persevere to the end,
we pray to you, O Lord.

Lord, hear our prayer.


For his family [the members of his household or community],
that they may be adorned with all Christian virtues,
we pray to you, O Lord.

Lord, hear our prayer.

For all who fear God and believe in you, Lord Christ, that
our divisions may cease and that all may be one as you
and the Father are one,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For the mission of the Church, that in faithful witness it may
preach the Gospel to the ends of the earth,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For those who do not yet believe, and for those who have lost
their faith, that they may receive the light of the Gospel,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For the peace of the world, that a spirit of respect and
forbearance may grow among nations and peoples,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For those in positions of public trust [especially _____________],
that they may serve justice and promote the dignity and
freedom of every person,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For a blessing upon all human labor, and for the right use
of the riches of creation, that the world may be freed from
poverty, famine, and disaster,
we pray to you, O Lord.

Lord, hear our prayer.

For the poor, the persecuted, the sick, and all who suffer; for
refugees, prisoners, and all who are in danger; that they may
be relieved and protected,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

For ourselves; for the forgiveness of our sins, and for the
grace of the Holy Spirit to amend our lives,
we pray to you, O Lord.

Lord, hear our prayer.

For all who have died in the communion of your Church, and
those whose faith is known to you alone, that, with all the
saints, they may have rest in that place where there is no pain
or grief, but life eternal,
we pray to you, O Lord.
Lord, hear our prayer.

Rejoicing in the fellowship of [the ever-blessed Virgin Mary,
(blessed N.) and] all the saints, let us commend ourselves,
and one another, and all our life to Christ our God.
To you, O Lord our God.

Lord, have mercy.
Christ, have mercy.
Lord, have mercy.

At Ordinations, the Bishop who is presiding stands and says

The Lord be with you
People And also with you.
Bishop Let us pray.

The Bishop says the appointed Collect.

When this Litany is used on other occasions, the Officiant concludes
with a suitable Collect.

be still - the last thing I read before bed

Be Still
Johann Christoph Arnold

If we had even an inkling of the loneliness and suffering that Jesus went through, it would change our whole view of life. There would be a lot more love and caring and less violence in the world.

In the end, all of this is a mystery that will never be understood with our intellect. It will only be comprehended with reverence; it needs quiet. No Hollywood film can bring this alive in our hearts. We have to pray for it. Children feel something of it, much more than we adults. Read Psalm 46: �Be still and know that I am God.� If we understood this short message with our hearts, then Easter would have its true meaning.

http://dailydig.bruderhof.org

individualism and individuality: a long quote

Okay, I am reading this book for my Sex Ed class called Sexuality and the Sacred.

Individuality can become an ethical principle in two ways. Philosophically speaking, it may become so by a recognition that my individuality is intelligible only as an expression of the principle which renders every other human being an individual, too. This principle was already being expressed in antiquity in the Golden Rule; respect for my individuality implies respect for that of others. As such, it enters into Christian ethica, but it is by no means the crowning element in them. It could not, for example, have generated the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross or the witness of the martyrs, which require the further principles of love, faith and hope for their understanding. On the other hand, individuality can also become an ethical principle in the form of individualism - an idolatry of the self, which treats the self as its own end. Such individualism has been a pervasive ethical influence in the modern West, enshrined in certain forms of capitalist ideology as the image of the "self made" person - that is a person who has chosen to forget the role others played in their fashioning and rise and who regards with interest only those people and things that contribute to their own agrandizement. This individualism, like idolatry, is utterly inconsistant with the Gospel. - Countryman, in Sexuality and the Sacred p.39

I think I like this. It bears some more thinking. Countryman has some useful thinking on sex and cultural interpretations of scriptures. He will probably be too much of an historical relativist for some, but his challenges to us are good. Without attempting to ressurect a culture 2000 years past, why not ask how the Gospel speaks now and would transform current ethos. Interesting, not the first time I have encountered it, but it is dern near conservative in this volume of sex talk. Who knew Countryman was conservative?!

morning happiness - erasmus and calvin

Hey.

I have a couple of new books to apply to my thesis: In Praise fo Folly by Erasmus and Christian Humanism and the Reformation: Selected Writings of Erasmus ed. by John C. Olin. I realize that my thesis is about liturgical theology. I know. But I am learning that if I do not understand this brand of humanism, then I may miss what Calvin is getting after. Right now I am fixated on his use of Rhetoric. How much of his liturgical language rhetorical and how much is theological? Would he have distinguished a difference? Why or why not? His theology is rhetorical. That is clear. His philosophy of rhetoric had theological overtones as well. This facinates me. Jesus was not a philosopher to Calvin, but a humanist, a rhetorical genius who knew how to reach people with his message no matter what their social standing. It is facinating on a couple of levels. One, it is a departure from the early chruch in some ways. It relativises (sp) faith somewhat. Two, Calvin may simply be trying to frighten/move/encourage us sometimes in his liturgy. The visceral responses one has are intended by Calvin. How do we deal with this kind of manipulation? Is there a theology behind this that devalues Calvin's ues of Chrysostom? Fun.

So, read Erasmus. Calvin did. They did not always agree but the shared the humanist idea for certain.

Oh, it is the last beautiful day for a while. The windows are open in the apartment. Snow is in the forcast for later this week. Ah, Chicago.

a sermon...sorta

Hey guys. I preached today. Believe it or not, I am usually very organized about my sermonizing. I outline, pray, write manuscripts etc. I know that the pulpit may not be a place for my circular thinking. But today's sermon would not be such an animal. I have been wrestling with this one...and the time I had to pull it all together.

So, it was much more extemporaneous than usual. Thus, I have no real manuscript to show you guys. But below is where you can find what I was thinking around. Note: It helps to listen to John Michael Talbot when you read this. I listened to a lot of his stuff while I was musing and the like.

Exodus 16:13-21
John 6:32-35

You can find some of my earlier thinking here and here.

The sermon title was Facing our Fears: Financial Insecurity. We have been doing this series during Lent about how we face a variety of fears. It has proven an interesting project. The feedback from today's sermon proves that to me. This is the stuff i played in...

There is no competition in Christ.
What is it that we hunger for when we are poor?
What is it that we thirst for when we are wealthy?
What fear posessed those who followed Moses? Was it simply an anxiety about going hungry? It may have been. But there is something else that happens for us when we are anxious about money...rich or poor. We are anxious about who we are. Am I a guy who drives a red car or am I someone else? It is easy to be anxious about the car. It is easy to be anxious about who I am and hope that a new car will cure that anxiety. But this would be wrong.

Yes, there is anxiety about wealth and providing for ourselves. But so often our identities are wrapped up in what is in our bank accounts. Our identities are wrapped up in what we own. The Israelites were wrapped up in what they would be able to gather. Moses suggesed this is not why God had gifted them with manna. There was going to be enough. Have no fear. You follow the great "I Am." No competition is necessary.

But in our culture we live differently. We live for competition. What we own is who we are. What we accomplish is who we are. Where we are educated is who we are. The Gospel suggests something else.

I am the bread of life. I satiate hunger and thirst says Christ. This is not a verse about how the poor will be fed by Christ so we have no responsibility. It is quite the opposite.

This verse about Bread is about who we are. The issue of our anxiety is about who we are. Who are you? Am I a guy who drives a red car or am I guy who has fed on the bread of Life? Am I a follower of Christ? Where do I place my identity? Who am I? Do I cease being myself if I get a new car? I am to a Follower of Chist. It is who I am. There is no way to be anxious about that. God has fed me with his body and blood. God is the bread of life.

I played in this a bit. I used Ben's quote: Christianity is about the saving of souls and the building of a community of justice -- nothing more and nothing less. You can�t have the one without the other. A person whose soul is �saved,� cannot help but work for justice. A person who truly seeks justice must seek first the healing of his own soul. God puts it all together.

That was too much. Trying to get it to say something about social justice was another sermon and not appropriate to this one.

The above thought were played in on one level or another with a couple of stories thrown in for good measure - for about 20-25 miutes. It was not boring. I kept people laughing and answering questions. I tried to keep them engaged. Being off manuscript means I could wander around and look people in the eye. This is a good thing.

Now, speaking of money in a spiritual way, getting us away from identifying ourselves with our stuff (or lack thereof) or our status/education etc...was a good thing. We are children of God, not money. We need to realize this. Then what Ben says ("A person whose soul is �saved,� cannot help but work for justice.") actually makes more sense. Who we are is not our stuff. Jesus asks us to do specific things with our stuff...but the underlying question of financial insecurity if often identity and not really about making ends meet.

Ah, this is hard. So much was said that was specific to people in the pews.

Anyway, what was interesting was that, in spite of its circular almost groundless nature, people got it and came to me with statements like: "I need to be reminded of that." "I do not think of myself as belonging to Christ." "I do not think of money as not being about me." "Is money an issue for our spirituality?"

This was the most interesting thing for me. I felt I was getting at the most obvious thing. And whether or not that was so, people expressed a desire to hear more like this. Facinating.

sunday post...akma is famous!

AKMA is not really famous. But this idea of his is taking on a life of its own. I think it is a great idea. Rich, what do you think? Sarah? Wanna find a book where the same is possible? Hmmm...this could be a job for bookblog!

Heh.

This is really interesting.

great big sea and life together

Yesterday was a banner day.

I had lunch with Larry K. He is the prior of a religious community here in Chicago that may or may not end up working with a church plant I am part of (dangle). Our conversation was very promising yesterday and I think that they would make an excellent addition to the project. It is, of course, up to everyone else involved. Consensus is an amazing discipline. Urggle. Sometimes I just want my way, dernit! Heh. Anyway, as many from his community who can show will join us at a potluck in a couple of weeks. Yay! Larry is exceedingly cool. I enjoyed speaking with him and hope for that to continue no matter what happens otherwise. Still, I can see it happen. The "buzz" was there...that mojo that makes me say "Oh. Shit. I think the Spirit may be here. Now what do we do? Wow."

Last night I went with Andrew, Susie, Jenni, Trish, Nick and Luke to hear Great Big Sea play at the Metro. Very cool. They rocked. I want that job...only in a collar and the freedom to say "Jesus" from time to time. Wow. Incredible music. Gret energy. Wah.

How does this happen? Hard work. Some luck and practice. One of the Girls...hmm...heh. Who knows?!

m.i.a.

In honor of his return, I am posting the text from a Washington Post Op Ed column by David Ignatius. It is actually not all that stron a polemic, and yet, somehow I think he might spark some conversation.

Welcome back, Rich! Let me know if you like your position here at the UofBSC. We can tinker with the chair as necessary.

'Wartime President' MIA

By David Ignatius
Friday, March 26, 2004; Page A23

What would a "wartime president" have done this week, as a bipartisan commission's public hearings on the Sept. 11 tragedy were being engulfed by political bickering?

I like to think that this hypothetical leader would have found a way to rise above the fray and unite the country: He would have embraced the commission's work, forthrightly admitted his own mistakes, sent his national security adviser to testify publicly -- and insisted that the security of the United States was too important to be buried in election-year squabbles.

President Bush and his White House handlers did pretty much the opposite. They fanned the flames of partisan debate; when asked awkward questions, they stonewalled; rather than testify before the cameras, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice spent part of her Wednesday afternoon dishing dirt to reporters about a commission witness who had criticized the president.

Bush flunked the test, in other words. Rather than working to bring the country together, the Bush team added to its nasty political divisions -- and allowed them to contaminate the terrorism commission's work.

It is this failure of leadership -- not any critical comments in the new book by former White House terrorism adviser Richard A. Clarke -- that poses the real problem for Bush's reelection hopes. A wise president would have accepted the obvious truth of what Clarke said: that the White House didn't do all it could have before Sept. 11 to prevent that disaster. He would have apologized, as Clarke did, to the victims -- and moved on.

That kind of magnanimity could have defused Clarke's charges and showed that Bush can lead a divided country. But the White House instead smeared Clarke personally, ignored his substantive criticisms and, in the process, helped turn Sept. 11 into a political football. That's bad for the country and, I submit, bad for Bush politically.

The White House's circle-the-wagons response was in sharp contrast to the impressive and refreshingly self-critical comments by the administration officials who did appear before the committee. They rose to the challenge in a way that Bush and Rice did not.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's crisp, candid testimony illustrated why so many people once assumed he would someday be president himself. He lauded the committee's work and then explained the difficulties he faced in framing a military response to al Qaeda in the months before Sept. 11. Perhaps most important, he reached out to the families of Sept. 11 victims in the hearing room, speaking of "the pain and the heartbreak and the suffering of the families whose loved ones perished."

More rumpled but just as impressive was CIA Director George Tenet. Even though he had been warning about the al Qaeda threat for nearly five years before Sept. 11, he took the blame for failing to stop the plot and to close the gaps in intelligence that prevented its detection. "We collectively did not close those gaps rapidly or fully enough before September 11th," Tenet admitted.

Yes, the White House feels under attack in an election year. And, yes, Clarke may be selling some books with his incendiary claim that the Bush administration did not consider terrorism an "urgent" issue until Sept. 11. But these factors don't excuse the White House's go-for-the-jugular approach on such an important topic.

A "wartime president" would find ways to rise above this partisan din and speak to the country, calmly and convincingly. He would take the blame onto his own shoulders, rather than leaving it for subordinates to admit mistakes. In his speeches and by his very body language, he would defuse the apprehension and anger people feel in such stressful times.

For reasons that are hard to fathom, Bush still lacks that reassuring touch. More than three years into his presidency, he still looks uneasy in many of his public appearances; he still lacks the grace and charm of a Ronald Reagan that would disarm critics. In recent months, he has seemed oddly off-key even on the issues that matter to him most, such as terrorism.

I criticized John Kerry a week ago for failing to rise to the challenge of wartime leadership by not offering clear policies on Iraq and terrorism that put these issues beyond politics. I must make a similar critique of Bush. This is a crucial election, in which the United States is facing its most serious problems in decades -- deadly enemies abroad, frayed alliances with old friends, a sluggish economy, a bitterly divided electorate.

I can't help feeling that the winning candidate will be the one who can bridge the domestic divide and give the country a confident sense of purpose. In short, the winner will be the one who truly earns the mantle of "wartime president." This week, that wasn't George Bush.

davidignatius@washpost.com

sermon notes

Some people have been posting their sermon notes as they are in process. If you are interested in the random stuff going on...well. Go ahead and read.

Facing our Fears: Financial Insecurity

Exodus 16:13-21

13 In the evening quails came up and covered the camp; and in the morning there was a layer of dew around the camp. 14When the layer of dew lifted, there on the surface of the wilderness was a fine flaky substance, as fine as frost on the ground. 15When the Israelites saw it, they said to one another, ?What is it??* For they did not know what it was. Moses said to them, ?It is the bread that the LORD has given you to eat. 16This is what the LORD has commanded: ?Gather as much of it as each of you needs, an omer to a person according to the number of persons, all providing for those in their own tents.? ? 17The Israelites did so, some gathering more, some less. 18But when they measured it with an omer, those who gathered much had nothing over, and those who gathered little had no shortage; they gathered as much as each of them needed. 19And Moses said to them, ?Let no one leave any of it over until morning.? 20But they did not listen to Moses; some left part of it until morning, and it bred worms and became foul. And Moses was angry with them. 21Morning by morning they gathered it, as much as each needed; but when the sun grew hot, it melted.

John 6:32-35

32Then Jesus said to them, ?Very truly, I tell you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33For the bread of God is that which* comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.? 34They said to him, ?Sir, give us this bread always.?
35 Jesus said to them, ?I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

Looking up the word ?poor? in the Bible we find 179 entries

Throughout this sermon series we have been looking at our fears and what responses Christianity may offer?How we as Christians respond to these fears, these very real and pervasive fears. We know that as Christians we are called to respond to fear in ways that may not seem ?normal.? Sometimes we are asked to respond to fear in a way that is almost counter intuitive. This morning I want to talk to you about money?about the fear of financial insecurity.

Competition?what is this about? Why do we compete? Is it because we trust in capitalism? Is it because we believe that is a healthy economic practice? Do we compete because we do not know what else to do?

Do not store up?simplicity?

The Israelites were storing things up?are we asking for more than we need?

Do we take more than we need?

Is God what we need?

Wednesday night Bible study group has some thoughts to offer on wealth and poverty in our conversations about Matthew?s gospel. The most important thing is this: Money can be a distraction from what we should be mindful of and that is God. Jesus is what we need.

This is a hard notion because we cannot escape the realities of the world. We need to eat?but this is where our own identity as Christians comes in.

There is also the sense of the spiritual gift of poverty. Some are called to holy poverty. Some are called to share their wealth. But is there a shared call, a shared gift through the bread of life, Jesus?

Christianity is about the saving of souls and the building of a community of justice -- nothing more and nothing less. You can?t have the one without the other. A person whose soul is ?saved,? cannot help but work for justice. A person who truly seeks justice must seek first the healing of his own soul. God puts it all together.
?
On such matters the future of a civilization rests. On such matters the integrity of a nation is judged. In such matters spirituality is something other than pretense, something closer to the courage of Christ?s Kingdom.
-Rev Ben Campbell

The same God who led the Israelites, the Great I am, is the God who says ?I am the Bread of Life.?
I am.
I am.
I am poor.
I am rich.
I am yours. Take. Eat.
I am wounded; I am healed.
I am meek. I am gentle. I am jealous. I am wounded. I am healed...
I am all in all.
I am your God, who led you out of Egypt, who died upon the cross, who lies in city streets...
Yes.

conversion of life

These are the vows one takes when one becomes a resident of Richmond Hill. I am wondring how this would translate into church life. Certainly it should not be hard, and yet I wonder if this easier to do in more "monastic" situations? Can a congregation do this without holding tight the rollbook? Willow Creek does this. Other congregational traditions play in this depending upon the congregation. I know of some Baptist churches that ask members to sign contracts. It is a more modern version taking vows.

More "creedal" traditions take stabs at this in their baptismal liturgies. Think about the baptismal vows of the ECUSA. That has a similar feel. But these vows from Richmond Hill are interesting to me. I'll admit to some sentimentality. Nevertheless, somehow they strike me as different in intention from the other liturgical vows or "confessions of faith" or contracts. Interesting. It probably has everything to do with the fact that a monastic community is residential. It is not just communal, but it is shared life...meals, prayer, work. It is more intense/intentional than church. Does this intentionality make it easier or more difficult to live out these vows? Should it make any difference at all?

Would my Protestant readers willingly take these vows below? I think of them more as descriptive of Christian life than prescriptive. I dunno. My utopian fantasies take over sometimes. Do we even need vows? Hmm...sigh.

Conversion of life: a commitment to live one's life as if it were a conversation with God, attempting to take responsibility for one's own inner transformation through a regular personal discipline of life.

Stability: Committing oneself to the community of Richmond Hill and to the community of metropolitan Richmond as if it were a place of permanent residence, where one must live one's life fully and attempt to be a full part of the community's transformation.

Obedience: Living a life of service where the question is which is asked is, "What does God want of my life?" rather than simply, "What do I want of my life?" The community's decisions are made by prayerful discernment and consensus.

Hospitality: Community members commit themselves to the ministry of hospitality, healing, and racial reconciliation which are the vocation of the Richmond Hill community.

Prayer: A commitment to the community's daily offices of prayer at 7:00am, 12:00 noon, and 6:00pm of the community, which include prayers for all the people and institutions of metropolitan Richmond, and to a life of personal prayer.

evangelism project

Mae is a friend of mine who is in the Twin Cities at seminary. She is working on an evangelism project and wants YOUR help. As insane as that may sound, it is the truth. Go to her evengelism blog and check it out.

Robyn moved again. This is better for her I think. Make the changes as necessary and pay her a visit. She has a lot to say...heck, she called me catholic! Dear Jesus!!!

facing our fears: financial insecurity

(blogtitle edited)

The sermon text:

Old Testament: Exodus 16:13-21
New testament: John 6:32-35

Hymns:

Hymn of Praise #17 Praise the Lord! O Heavens, Adore Him

Hymn of Response #430 All Who Love and Serve Your City

Closing Hymn #433 Where Cross the Crowded Ways of Life

Unison Benediction:

Make us worthy, Lord, to serve those throughout the world who live and die in poverty or hunger. Give them, through our hands, this day their daily bread; and by our understanding love, give peace and joy. Amen. - Teresa of Calcutta

Why am I more afraid of this sermon than the last?

calvin post seven

Calvin had some interesting thoughts about liturgy. Aside from more simple ritual in order to "cleanse the church" from unecessary or idolatrous practices, Calvin was intent on expressing his theology in his liturgy. He was subtle like a red truck in flames.

...We have heard brethren, how our Lord celebrated his Supper with his disciples, thereby indicating that strangers, and those who are not of the company of the faithful, ought not to admitted. Therefore, in accordance with this rule, in the name and by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, I excommunicate all idolaters, blasphemers, dispisers of God, heretics, and all who form private sects to break the unity of the Church, all perjurers, all who rebel against parents or their superiors, all who are seditious, mutinous, quarrelsome or brutal, all adulterers, fornicators, thieves, ravishers, misers, drunkards, gluttons, and all who lead a scandalous and dissolute life. I declare that they must abstain from this holy table, for fear of defiling and contaminating the holy food which our Lord Jesus Christ gives only to his household and believers.

Therefore, in accordance with the exhortation of St Paul, let each man prove and examine his conscience, to see whaether he has truly repented of his faults, and is dissatisfied with his sins, disiring to live henceforth a holy life and according to God. Above all, let eact man see whether he puts hid trust in the mercy of God, and seeks his salvation entirely in Jesus Christ; and whether, renouncing all hatred and rancor, he truly intends and resolves to live in peace and brotherly love with his neighbors.

Philipians would also work, but he is looking at 1 Corinthians in this. His theology of the Table is drawn nalmost entirely from this passage. He may glean specific sins from the rest of scripture, but it is the situation of the church in Corinth that draws him. Paul is responding to the sins evident in that community. He is responding to the tremendous lack of compassion and egalitarianism. The practices would have gone against what Calvin saw as the work of the church which is tied inexorably to his humanism. The humanism of Calvin would not have stood for that behavior. That Calvin names gluttons and misers, for example, is both scriptural and indicative of his humanism. All are to be persuaded by the Gospel into right Christian behavior, the graceful and educated and the rough and crude alike. The Corinthian Christians deny this entirely by their actions. He wishes to persuade the Church by his own words. The choice is all in the hands of the believers, but that they are excommunicant until they get it worked outbetween themselves, God and the community is telling. He challenges from the get go. Is this rhetorical or theological or both? That is what interests me here. Is he trying to frighten and per chance offend? Perhaps that is his very intention.

ulrich luz und das baptiste punk

Here is something fun from Ulrich Luz in his little book The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew.

In short, Matthew concludes his Gospel in a manner quite unusual for Protestant sensibilities, by intermingling grace and commandments, the 'indicative' and the 'imperative' of salvation. Jesus' commandments are the Gospel that his disciples owe the world. They represent the Father's will to redeem his world. But they are not the will of a distant or unreachable God. On the contrary, the 'God with us' will remain with his community always, to the end of time, helping it, teaching it, and standing by its side as it faces new challenges.

I am bringing this word to my Wednesday night bible study group at North Shore Baptist Church. We have been reading through Matthew and Luz for the last several weeks. I have enjoyed it. And we have all been challenged by Luz and our own attempts to get at the text of Matthew while sifting through our own stuff. How can you get at Matthew? Isn't that the task? Interesting. I want to know what Matthew says, not what Tripp says Matthews says...or Luz for that matter.

living in community

Hey. I am to understand that my last post was, well, challenging for some. That is good to know. That is a big bunny.

So, things on the church plant front continue anon. We had a meeting last Sunday that was inspiring for me. Brought to the conversation was a possible connection with an existing contemplative community in Roger's Park. They, too, are ecumenical though that seems more by accident than by intention. I don't know that for certain, but there you go...my observations. The promise of the relationship is as follows:

1. Connecting to another group of praying and worshiping Christians is a good thing.
2. The focus we bring is to young adult ministry. This is not the sole focus of the endeavor to be sure, but knowing that there could possibly be a contemplative community affiliated/attached to the congregation is a cause for joy. There needs to be more than one example of how a/vocational Christianity can be lived. The resourse could be a deep one.
3. I, personally, need to be in a praying community again...one with a strong contemplative bent. Seabury is great, but that is ending in June.
4. They want to grow. We want to grow. If our paths are bing brought together, then huzzah! Let's pray and wait and see.

This is all just talk right now. I don't know what will happen. I have conversations lining up all over the place. We shall see what God is asking of us all soon enough.

why?! why do people do this?

Oh no. Click at your own risk.

sexuality and pastoral care

This is the plan: If anything interesting is said, I'll post it.

Note: Since we are talking about sex and its related issues, try to keep the conversation peaceful. I will delete rude or inappropriate posts. Most of you who post here regularly have nothing to fear. I just want to to make certain that the rules are as clear as I can make them for those who do not regularly comment here. Everyone is welcome to post. Just keep your wits about you and know we are not always going to agree.

Peace.

Denominations represented: Eastern Orthodox, ECUSA, UCC, ABC-USA, UMC

Are we dealing with sex well at all. Let's get away from the specifics of premarital sex or homosexuality...can we even talk about sex in committed marital relationships much less "divergent" practices? What has been y'all's experience? How does your church manage this at the parish/congregational level? How do you faciltate this conversation? I am not asking what your theology is, yet. But I am curious how you manage the discussion at all.

I am a little concerned that we will only give voice to the liberal viewpoint as the only valid one. I realize that many who read this blog do not want to hold multiple viewpoints at once as plausible, but I do...if for no other reason than I will never serve a parish where only one viewpoint is held by people sitting in the pews. The ideas will always be diverse. I am hoping to get into multiple viewpoints.

That is enough for now...just these general questions, as huge as they are.

calvin post six - he's a humanist, people!

Here are some things I have been thinking about for my thesis...

Regarding Calvin and scriptural hermeneutic: How humanist was he? Calvin expresses some understanding of cultural relativism, but to suggest the same degree of cultural relativism that exisits in some theological/socio-anthropological circles today would be inappropriate. His read of scripture straddles a line between cultural specificity (a better way to speak of Calvin's thinking as not to confuse it with our own) and scriptural literalism. Calvin seems to appreciate Chrysostom's commentaries because the Church Father is not inclined to fall into fiurative or allegorical interpretations of the scriptures. And yet, Calvin wants us to recognise that the Fathers, like Chrysostom, were responding to specific issues facing the church, had a different facility with the language (Greek or Hebrew) and were accostomed to different customs, thus their practices and interpretations would differ. He even says the same of Paul regarding Paul's desire to keep men's hair short in 1 Corinthians. Calvin will say that this must be Paul's custom. Nothing is intrinsically wrong with long or short hair.

So, for me, lest I digress even further, what does this mean for Calvin's thinking about liturgical practice? What cultural concerns will he allow to reamain "merely" cultural and which will he deem of scriptural prescription? This will color how one composes the anaphora, for example. Does one come from a culture accostomed to great rituals, with majesty, pomp and circumstance, or does one come from a culture where simplicity is the cultural ideal? Or is there somthing that Calvin suggests scriopture says about all this?

Where this continues to be interesting is in Calvin's use of rhetoric in his own interpretation. Bouwsma states it in this way:

But his rhetorical Christianity is most profoundly apparent in his emphasis on Scripture as everywhere accomodated by God's decorum to human comprehension: God speaks to us of things "according to our capacity for understanding them, not according to what they are." Taking into account the "diversity of times" annd "diverse ways of learning," The Holy Spirit always "accomodates itself to our infirmnity." This had strong egalitarian implications; it means that God not only wants to instruct learned clergy [les grands clercs] and people who are very subtle and have been trained in school, but wishes to accomodate to even the roughest common people [les plus rudes idiots qui soyent]. (p. 124 Bouwsma)

Bouwsma is pushing this line hard. The strength of Bouwsma's argument is his deep grasp of the humanism that was extant during Calvin's time and Calvin's seeming willingness to employ its tools, rhetoric chief among them. He continues:

But God also accomodates his word to human beings in all ages, including the wisest and most cultivated. Otherwise it would be "impossible for God to make us feel his power [vertu] without annihilating and destroying us [nous abysmer du tout]" If God "whished to speak his own language," Calvin asked, "would mortal creatures have been able to bear it? Alas, no. How then has he spoken to us in Holy Scripture? He has stammered [bagaye]." He has presented himself "like a nurse who will not speak to a child in the same way as to a man but keeps in mind the child's capacity." God must "descend to us that we may mount to him."(p. 125 Bouwsma)

It would seem that Christ had rhetoric in mind when he taught in parables. This is the greatest gift God can give. This, for Calvin, is the incarnation found in scripture. Scripture is in itself a humbling of God's self. The sacrament's too have this aspect of "rhetorical communication" to them.

Rhetorical communication, he insisted repeatedly, is God's only way of revealing himself to human beings; we know nothing of God except through his revelation in Christ, who "represents and exhibits to us whatever is useful to be known about the Father." This is why the sacrament in which God is present shows how "our merciful Lord, according to his infinite kindness, accomodates himself to our capacity." In short, "whenever our mind seeks God, unless it meets Christ it will wander, restless and confused, until it wholly fails."(p. 125)

One possible temptation may be to relegate Calvin to the realm of "Enlightenment Thinkers" and forget him after reading this. Simply, does Calvin emply scripture as he sees fit, allowing his own ego to dictate what scripture says? Is he so wedded to his own understanding that there is no room for the divine to peek though or is faith a simple thinking exercise? Certainly not. The above passage rescues Calvin from this fate. He is, after all, a sacramentalist. The seeming dualism between rhetoric as revelation and mystery as revelation is brought together with Christ, the Logos (sermo?) turned the Incarnate Rhetoric. The tool, rhetoric, brings God to earth so that we may hear God's word in our own tongue, through our own lives. It is the greatest of mysteries how this happens, but that it happens is undenyable for Calvin. It is through Christ that any and all mystery exists.

emerging church stuff

Bob Webber, a professor at Northern Baptist, keeps a regular email newsletter. It is often helpful in getting at what this emerging church thing is after. Know that Webber himself is a traditionalist. He calls himself a "classical Christian." What he means by this is he leans heavily on the Fathers and that end of the faith spectrum in forming his understanding of the Church. Now, he is also a good evangelical Christian...a little conservative in places, orthodox in others, but always pushing people around in what I see as helpful ways. This is his most recent letter.

Ancient-Future Talk Thematic Worship: Whose theme?

I made a comment in the February 2004 issue of Ancient-Future Talk that resulted in a number of thoughtful e-mails.

My comment? Thematic worship does not reflect the fullness of biblical worship.

The correspondence I received makes me realize I need to clarify the difference between "thematic worship" and a "theme" in worship. Thematic worship is a single theme that organizes the whole liturgy, like love or faithfulness. My concern is that this kind of thematic worship does not do what worship is designed to do.

Sunday worship should center around memory and hope. It recalls God's saving actions in history and anticipates God's salvific actions at the end of history. This is God's mission: God will put away evil forever and restore creatures and creation to himself. This mission is accomplished by one man, Jesus. This saving work of Jesus is God's worship theme, which we proclaim through the Word and enact at the Table.

Within God's overarching worship theme, there are four distinct actions. We gather in God's presence; hear God's Word; celebrate at God's table; and are sent forth. Each action expresses a different theme.

� The theme of Gathering is to come together. In the gathering we approach God, come before God, and enter his presence. This theme determines the songs and prayers we do as we gather.

� In the service of the Word the theme will vary from week to week depending on the Scripture. Because the service of the Word is instructive, a teaching theme is appropriate. A teaching about God or about the Christian life in the world is put in the context of God's mission. This may be called "the theme of the week."

� The theme of Table worship brings the whole story together: You created. We fell. You came to us in Jesus Christ. In your death and Resurrection you do for us what we can't do for ourselves. You dethroned evil. You will come again to destroy all evil. We live in this hope. Thank you! The theme is always the same-the story of God and the redemption of the world and humanity.

� Then the Dismissal. The dominant theme is to go in peace and live God's mission, which has been rehearsed. The benediction sends us forth.

Now I can more clearly express my concern about thematic worship.

Biblical worship is first and foremost the remembering, the recalling, the proclaiming, the enacting of God's mission in Jesus Christ to redeem, rescue, and restore creatures and creation. We gather to hear that story, enact that story, sing that story, and go forth to embody the story.

If that is true then a thematic worship that chooses to shape the gathering, Word, Table, and dismissal by a "theme of my own choosing" may disrupt God's theme of worship and distort the themes of gathering, hearing, celebrating, and going forth.

How then shall we plan worship? First ask, is God's theme of redemption prominent? It will be if the Lord's Supper is celebrated rightly. Then ask, How can I gather the people? What should be proclaimed today (here various themes are chosen week by week)? Does the way we celebrate communion give thanks to God for God's story? Have I sent people forth to love and serve the Lord?

In sum, thematic worship will be limited by the theme I choose. But true Biblical worship will be characterized by God's overarching theme and the four themes that serve God's theme-gathering, Word, Table, and dismissal.

Planning worship around God's theme and the four themes that serve God's theme retains integrity with the biblical meaning of worship and allows the planner a great deal of freedom to work with the biblical and historically tested fourfold pattern of worship.

What think ye? Write me at: rwebber@northern.seminary.edu

Bob Webber
Myers Professor of Ministry
Director of M.A. in Worship and Spirituality
Northern Seminary�www.seminary.edu
(See Northern's M.A. in Worship and Spirituality and D.Min. in Worship by clicking on the website.)

Tahdah!

howard dean

He will never quit. Know this.

My run for the White House ended last month. But for me, and for supporters around the country, our work to take this country back has just begun. That?s why I have formed Democracy For America, a new organization building on the phenomenal grassroots support for our presidential campaign.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com

I need your help. Defeating George W. Bush will not be easy. His strategists have a $100 million war chest available to transform his failed record into an avalanche of misleading "morning in America" advertising.

What is the best response? To defeat George Bush, the Democratic Party and its nominee must stand up strong for our principles, not paper over our differences with the most radical White House in our lifetime. We must directly expose the ways in which George Bush?s policies benefit the privileged and right-wing ideologues.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com

To win, we must confidently advance an agenda rooted in hope and real American values ?opportunity, integrity, corporate responsibility, and community. People want back the country they believed in, a fair country where middle-class people could make a decent living and send their kids to college. That is not only the right way to take on George Bush; it is also the most effective way to succeed with voters who might be tempted to support independent or third-party candidates.

First, Democracy for America will be committed to strong, sustained grassroots involvement in the democratic process. Today, half of Americans don?t even bother to vote. People see what the problems are, but they are cynical about the system and prospects for change. Only through acting will people recognize the power they have to change this country.

Second, Democracy for America will be committed to promoting an America where candidates and office holders tell the truth about policy choices and stand up for what they believe. The era when politicians equivocate about matters as fundamental as war and peace must end.

Third, Democracy for America will be committed to fighting against the influence and agenda of the two pillars of George W. Bush?s Washington: the far right wing and their radical, divisive policies, and the selfish special interests who for too long have dominated politics.

Fourth, Democracy for America will be committed to fighting for progressive policies, like health care for all; investment in children; equal rights under law; fiscal responsibility; and a national security policy that makes America stronger by advancing progressive values.

To help defeat George W. Bush and his agenda in 2004, Democracy for America will focus on key battleground states, mobilizing our supporters and the groundbreaking organizing tools we developed during our campaign ? planting seeds on the Internet, meeting face to face at the grassroots, bringing new people into the process. We will use these same tools to support congressional, state, and local candidates across America who stand for our principles.
In the coming months, we will:

1. Recruit and encourage progressive candidates to run for office at every level. We will help them find the resources to campaign successfully with small donations from grassroots supporters, to begin to break the stranglehold special interests have on the political process.

2. Raise funds for Congressional candidates for whom financial support could be the key to winning, and whose election will be key to winning back a House of Representatives that has become the tool of the Republican right wing.

3. Develop strategic partnerships with other progressive organizations to maximize resources for candidate recruitment, training, and organization.

4. Build relationships with other political initiatives to focus on the failed, destructive policies of the Bush administration.

5. Harness the power of the Internet to enlarge and support our grassroots organization committed to taking back America from special interests that control the right wing leadership of our Congress and the White House.

The Democrats will win in November ? if we can continue the innovative campaign techniques learned through our nominating process -- and if we have the have the courage to stand up and tell the truth about our stark differences with this failed President.

Please join me in making Democracy for America a powerful tool to continue the battle for America?s future:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com

I hope you will support us with your ideas and your energy, as well as financially, as we move toward the November elections and beyond.

Sincerely,
Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

PS: Be sure to watch CBS's Face the Nation this Sunday morning.

Well, there you have it. What think ye all?

a new term at school begins today

Today may be one of the days where I take a wee bit of caffeine. Urggle.

It's the first day of a new term at SWTS. Classes: Genesis, Homosexuality and Pastoral Care, NCTI (what this stands for I am never sure, but its a class through the ACTS consortium) - a study of Christian Spirituality, Church Architecture and,finally, a .33 unit class on dream discernment. It shoud be a good term. Huzzah! Off I go to shower and play with protopriests.

Pax Dei, y'all!

sunday in geneva - calvin post five

So, here I sit in my livingroom in Chicago. Right now large snowflakes are falling from the sky. Flurries. Yesterday we had the windows open because it was 60 degrees outside. Weather is insane this time of year. This last 24 hours only serves to prove that peculiarity.

I want to share a little Calvin with you guys, something from one of his letters, but before I do this, Robyn, draws our attention to the emerging church. She has some good questions that bear attending before we move on.

So, head on over. John Calvin and I will wait here while you read her post.

Go ahead. We'll wait. Really.

So, you're back? Good. Here is what John and I were discussing this morning.

STRASBOURG, 24th October 1538

...Whether it is lawful for himself, and others similarly situated, to receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper from the hands of the new ministers, and to partake of it along with such a promiscuous assemblage of unworthy communicants.

In this matter I quite agree with Capito. This, in brief, was the sum of our discussion: that among Christians there ought to be so great a dislike of schism, as that they may always avoid it so far as lies in their power. That there ought to prevail among them such a reverence for the ministry of the word and of the sacraments, that wherever they perceive these things to be, there they may consider the Church to exist. Whenever therefore it happens, by the Lord's permission, that the Church is administered by pastors, whatever kind of persons they may be, if we see there the marks of the Church, it will be better not to break the unity.

Nor need it be any hindrance that some points of doctrine are not quite so pure, seeing that there is scarcely any Church which does not retain some remnants of former ignorance. It is sufficient for us if the doctrine on which the Church of God is founded be recognized, and maintain its place. Nor should it prove any obstacle, that he ought not to be reckoned a lawful pastor who shall not only have fraudulently insinuated himself into the office of a true minister, but shall have wickedly usurped it. For there is no reason why every private person should mix himself up with these scruples.

The sacraments are the means of communion with the Church; they must needs therefore be administered by the hands of pastors. In regard to those, therefore, who already occupy that position, legitimately or not, and although the right of judging as to that is not denied, it will be well to suspend judgment in the meantime, until the matter shall have been legally adjudicated.

Therefore, if men wait upon their ministry, they will run no risk, that they should appear either to acknowledge or approve, or in any way to ratify their commission. But by this means they will give a proof of their patience in tolerating those who they know will be condemned by a solemn judgment. The refusal at first of these excellent brethren did not surprise nor even displease me. In truth, at a time of so great excitement, which could not fail to produce an ebullition in the minds of men, a schism in the body of Christ was the infallible result. Besides, they were still uncertain whither at length this tempest would drive them, which for the time put everything in confusion and disorder.

It is so good to know that nothing new exists under the sun. So, when do we confess our sins against one another? What does it mean that we have to be reconciled to one another before we come to the table? Does the priest/pastor have to be a flawless godly person or are they just a s fallible as the rest of us? What of schism? Calvin sets up the reality. It is anathema and yet it happens, "that among Christians there ought to be so great a dislike of schism, as that they may always avoid it so far as lies in their power." But power is the issue. In Calvin's time of great ekklesial confusion and a dissolution of traditional structures, the powerbase was rent assunder. The situations were deeply confusing. Even Calvin, who often appeared to insist that the scriptural prerequisites to communion were gifts from God to maintain right Spirit and order in the Body, recognised that it was all simply more complicated than that.

This will be important when I get to look at the Genevan liturgies. Reconciliation was ongoing work. The churches in Geneva were idealistic, striving to return to a rigorous following of the scriptural mandates, and yet there were these realities evident in their communities. Confusion is nothing new.

So, now I am off to that glorious and schismatic church, the baptist church. God bless us schismatics! We live into confusion with a fervor undenyable! Huzzah!

marty speaks

This is a little editorial from the Christian Century written by Martin Marty. It is an interesting tightrope, but I like it. It is from a Protestant perspective. So, leave your RC/EOC/AngloCatholic sensibilities at the door if you got 'em.

Ordained by baptism

Testimony, not advocacy, is my intent in this first foray into a subject about which church bodies argue: the "blessing of gay marriage/unions" and "ordination to clergy status" of men and women in committed homosexual partnerships. Let me separate the two. The "blessing" item is now part of presidential politics, a subject M.E.M.O never touches. But the "ordination" motif is focal in the Body of Christ, and is not the business of the unregenerate.

Impressed by my own church body's fair-minded materials (www.elca.org/faithfuljourney) but dismayed by the heat of the arguments here as in all churches, from Roman Catholic to Anabaptist, I lapse into a wishing mode. I wish we could start this one all over, this time dealing with it not only as what Martin Buber would call an "I-It" dispute but in a conversational "I-Thou" form.

The "It" people in both camps write and read lengthy biblical, theological and psychological documents that cancel each other out. A fundamental mistake made by those homosexual people who would be ordained, or those who would support them in this quest, was to let their opponents type their pleas as part of "the [secular] gay agenda" or "the homosexual issue." Put this way, the conflict leaves us at war with each other and poised for divisive denominational votes.

My perspective is that of a senior visitor at theological schools and ministerial assemblies, a wanderer who is open to listening and who gets approached by candidates for ordination. That experience helps me understand why so many moderators, presbyters, bishops, professors, credentialing committees and pastors are seen as "soft." They regularly look into the eyes of men and women who have a consuming desire to serve in the ordained clergy. I puzzle with them about church bodies that proclaim we are all ordained to ministry by our baptism--a.k.a. "the priesthood of all believers"-- and yet set standards of Christian living for ordained clergy that exclude gay and lesbian members of the church who have been "ordained" by baptism.

My friends are bemused by what they call the "hermeneutical" issue: why the six or seven inches of print in the biblical testaments that condemn man-with-man and woman-with-woman sexual relations get treated "literally" while the much more strenuous Jesus-of-the-gospel strictures against divorce are not treated in the same way by most denominations.

Most of the gay and lesbian Christians with whom I meet don't spend much time scrambling to pick up allies on a "gay agenda" or "homosexual issues" front. They are more likely to speak in puzzlement about the mystery of their own sexual identity, as unsought as was that of their heterosexual counterparts. They denounce homosexual promiscuity as much as others denounce, or should denounce, heterosexual misconduct.

Some cry when they talk about the portrayals that demean the quality of their covenanted partnership. Though they don't bring it up, people in the parishes where they worship and where in ordained-by-baptism ways they minister point to the exemplarity of their grace-filled lives. We hear that he or she is "exactly the kind of person" or, in the "I-Thou" world, the person we would like to be our minister. Most of those I meet speak with far more clarity about their life in Christ, their call under the Holy Spirit, than do those who do not have to defend their very being, as gays do.

Jesus observed the Sabbath, but also knew when the "Thou" before him called him to transcend the boundaries of Sabbath rules. It is called "loving," a loving that needs to be extended to gay Christians.

Copyright 2004 Christian Century. Reproduced by permission from the March 3, 2004 issue of the Christian Century. Subscriptions: $49/year from P.O. Box 378, Mt. Morris, IL 61054. 1-800-208-4097

ah well

The Mighty Spiders imploded last night. It was a fun game to watch. It would have been more fun if the Spiders had kept stompin' them like they did when they came out of the gate the second half. It was wild. But then they started playing containment ball...you never never play containment ball when you are the underdog at the NCAA Tournament. You just don't. So, with 20,000 seats and onlt 550 occupied by U of R fans, the sixth man did their job and we got stomped.

Well, I think I can say that. There is next year. Watch out, Atlantic Ten. We actually know how to play. Now we just need to remember how to win...and win big.

Here is the ESPN article.

In other news...

Hanging out with my old college Bud, Rob was great fun. We have always orbited one another. We have the same interests. Some of teh same drive. It has always facinated me that I will not see him or hear from him in three years and then we get together, get cought up, and realize that we know all the same people. It is "small world syndrome" to the extreme. We are trying to do better than three years this time. It looks like we need to pay close attention right now. Our lives are damn near on top of one another at this point. If appropriate, I'll share later.

calvin post four

From Bouwsma's book John Calvin, A Sixteenth Century Portrait...

Effective communication, for Calvin as for other humanists, required more than a fidelity to truth, the sole aim of a philosophical discourse, which accordingly, refusing to make concessions to a general audience, employed a specialized vocabulary. A humanist, in contrast, recognised that the distance between one human being and another can be bridged only by the essential rhetorical virtue, decorum - that is, deliberate adaptation to one's audience for the sake of persuasion. Calvin held decorum in profound esteem." (p. 116)

I am glad he said this. I have been wondering this for a while. Calvin's use of Chrysostom is not prooftexting to get at the historical truth, per se, but because Chrysostom was a rhetorical tool for Calvin. Yes, Calvin agreed with much of what Chrysostom had to say, but he was not covicted/converted by Chrysostom. He simply used him to prove his own thinking as a rhetorical divice.

The slogan ad fontes had led these scholars back to the exegetical tradition of the church, of which Calvin was generally respectful. "Since in this life we canot hope to achieve a permanent agreement in our understanding of every passage of scripture, however desireable that would be," he wrote "we must not be carried away by the lust for novelty, nor be pushed into scurrility or impelled by hatred or titillated by ambition, but only do what is necessary and depart from the opinions of earlier exegetes only when it is beneficial."(56)...He turned for guidance, though always with discrimination, to the Fathers. Their "godliness, learning, and sanctity," he wrote, "have secured them such great authority that we should not dispise andthing they have produced."(58) He especially approved of Chrysostom, log a favorite of humanist students of Scripture because of his simple, literal-historical approach to the text. (p. 119)

footnote 56: Serm no. 3 on 2 Sam., 23
footnote 58: Comm. Is. 3:17

I am enjoying this more and more. "...though always with discrimiation" is very telling. This is the truth of it. He disagrees with the Fathers almost as much as he agrees with them. Calvin did not employ Augustine's exegesis because he found the interpretation to be too metaphorical, not simple, direct and literal as Chrysostom was. He knew the Fathers as human beings first, ensconsed within their own context, driven by their own concerns as he was driven by his. Yes, he revered them, but always with the caveat of context and, perhaps, a sense of dialogue with them. Disagreeing with the Fathers was never a theological problem for Calvin. Again, decorum or rhetoric would win out.

You have to love a lawyer.

And in other news, Robyn has a new site where she is working some hard stuff out. Give it a glance. She is cool.

And Jennifer has popped it wide open. Oh my.

calvin post three

Mc Donnell is a find! This is a great book. Everyone who wants to know what Calvin thinks about the Sacraments must have this little volume...all 400 pages of it.

"So far, then, is God from resigning the grace of his Spirit to the sacraments that all their efficacy and utility are lodged in the Spirit alone." His sovereignty "demands that a division between Spirit and sacraments" be made so that "the power to act rests with the former, and the ministry alone is left to the latter - a ministry empty and trifling apart from the action of the Spirit, but charged with the great effect when the Spirit works within and manifests his power." This division between Spirit and sacraments is the dialectic between total commitment and the uncomitted in Calvin's Pneumatology.(p. 260 McDonell)

Cool...

basketball spiders?!

You bet!

Richmond Spiders to Compete in NCAA Tournament

The Richmond Spiders (20-12) will be making their seventh NCAA tournament appearance when they play sixth-seeded Wisconsin (24-6) at 7:20 p.m. ET on Friday, March 19, in Milwaukee. The #11 seed Spiders earned the program's second at-large bid. All NCAA men's tournament games will be televised by CBS network affiliate stations around the country, which have the option of choosing the games to be shown in their local markets. Please check local listings to see if the Richmond-Wisconsin game will be shown in your area.
To read more, go to http://richmondspiders.ocsn.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/031704aaa.html.

And I may be going to the game on Friday! Wahoo!!

was calvin irish?

So, Micah sed me this link. It is a loverly site. I have to say that it makes me happy. This link is also precious. It too makes me happy.

I know my Arminian and Orthodox friends will find them troubling somehow. My response? Ah well. I wade in your waters every day. In all Christian love I say thee "deal." Pax Christi!

Here is a recap of my St Patrick's Day.

6:00 am get out of bed
10:00 am new refrigerator arrives (huzzah!)
11:00 am go to Tom's for a rehearsal with One of the Girls

Rehearsal quickly becomes a late brunch (elevensies?) and carousing until 4:00pm.

4:00 pm return home to prepare for Wednesday night bible study at NSBC
6:30 pm go to NSBC
8:30 pm drive to The Handlebar in the Wickerpark neighborhood of Chicago
9:30? ish pm ROCK the Casbah

1:00 am bed

This was an exceedingly cool day. It was certainly one of the top ten in history. Music, friends, Jesus and multiple other sourses of happiness. What a great day.

excellent

It was an excellent, even stupendiferous day! Huzzah! Food. Friends. Hours of music. It was a blast.

I even got to rub my butt against Anna's butt. Cliff had the baby, so Anna came out to play. It was fun.

Sorry you were not there, Clifton. You were missed.

Huzzah!

st patrick's day and priestly dreams

I am a sorry excuse for a baptist sometimes. Not only are my politics left-ish, and my theology dern-neigh neo-orthodox, I am also a fan of the saints of the church. I have an icon wall in my house. I have icons on my blog. As much as this is a big arse joke between me and my friends, it is the simple cofusing truth about my life.

To add fuel to this fire, I had another one of my priestly dreams last night. I do not have them often, but whenever I dream about being clergy, I am always, without exception, making eucharist. Whether at a funeral or in my own home town, the one stabe image in my dream is that I am presiding at the altar.

Altar. Not table.
Eucharist. Not Lord's Supper.

But enough about me and my apparently unresolved denominational identity crisis. (Who knew?!)

Today is St. Patrick's Day. It is a wondrous holiday full of foolishness, pinching, general misbehavior and loads of music. God bless all musicians and dancers today.

Thomas had this on his site...

Troparion in tone 3
Holy Bishop Patrick,
Faithful shepherd of Christ's royal flock,
You filled Ireland with the radiance of the Gospel:
The mighty strength of the Trinity!
Now that you stand before the Savior,
Pray that He may preserve us in faith and love!

Kontakion in tone 4
From slavery you escaped to freedom in Christ's service:
He sent you to deliver Ireland from the devil's bondage.
You planted the Word of the Gospel in pagan hearts.
In your journeys and hardships you rivaled the Apostle Paul!
Having received the reward for your labors in heaven,
Never cease to pray for the flock you have gathered on earth,
Holy bishop Patrick!

But in a different light...the parting glass...

Of all the money ere I had, I spent it in good company,
And all the harm I've ever done, alas was done to none but me
and all I've done for want of wit, to memory now I can't recall
so fill me to the parting glass, goodnight and joy be with you all.

Of all the comrades ere I had, they're sorry for my going away,
and all the sweethearts ere I had , they wish me one more day to stay,
but since it falls unto my lot that I should go and you should not,
I'll gently rise and softly call, goodnight and joy be with you all.

If I had money enough to spend and leisure time to sit awhile
there is a fair maid in this town who sorely has my heart beguiled
Her rosey cheeks and ruby lips, I alone she has my heart in thrall
so fill me to the porting glass goodnight and joy be with you all.

See you tonight!!!

calvin post two

Be it known throughout Blogaria, its universities, their satellites and the other various and sundry blogish communities that from this point until May 15th, I will be blogging about John "Just Call Me Right" Calvin. Be ye warned.

Just picked up these two books to add to the research collection.

John Calvin, the Church and the Eucharist by Kilian McDonnell, OSB
The Reception of the Church Fathers in the West, vol. 2 by Irena Backus ed.

Ah...Calvin.

Christ is not a deceiver, to mock us with empty representations.20 Hence it is regarded by me as beyond all controversy, that the reality is here conjoined with the sign; or, in other words, that we do not less truly become participants in Christ's body in respect of spiritual efficacy, than we partake of the bread. This is from his commentary on 1 Corinthians 11:24.

Why, O why do I love it so?!

thesis proposal

Fasten your seatbelts!

Thesis

Calvin regards the work of the Holy Spirit in a particular way that places him within a solitary peerage during the Reformation. Through exploring Calvin�s doctrine on the sacraments, specifically his understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit, what is uncovered is that Calvin relied heavily upon the early church fathers to formulate his own theologies. Augustine, Ambrose, Basil, Jerome, Cyprian and even Chrysostom all have their influence in Calvin�s sacramental theology. For the purposes of this essay, we will focus upon the influence of John Chrysostom on Calvin�s sacramental theology.

Unlike Calvin�s engagement with Augustine and other patristic theologians, his engagement with Chrysostom is almost purely through his exegesis of Pauline scripture. He will agree with Chrysostom. He will disagree with Chrysostom. In either case, the work by the fourth century saint has great influence upon Calvin�s own sacramental theology. That theological influence will manifest itself in liturgical formula as well.

I Corinthians 11

This section will focus on the interpretation of the communion narrative by both Calvin and Chrysostom focusing primarily upon how they understand the work of the Holy Spirit to fulfill the promises of Jesus: �This is my body�this is my blood��

There are several interesting historical realities to consider within this interpretation. With whom was Calvin arguing? Who was his audience? Anthony N.S. Lane suggests that Calvin was not arguing with Rome at first. Instead, he was arguing with other reformers. As a humanist scholar, he would have all been searching for the original source of interpretation (ad fontes). The questions he asked were unique.

Thus, it will be important to make it clear that Calvin does not always look to Chrysostom for proof, but for a dialogue partner. Calvin was as likely to disagree with Chrysostom as he was to agree with him. I will try to explain how Calvin reads Chrysostom and then comes to his own conclusions.

Eucharistic Theology

Once established that Calvin has indeed utilized Chrysostom as a dialogue partner in his interpretation of Corinthians, I will explore the ramifications on Calvin�s Eucharistic theology. In his commentary on John Calvin�s First Catechism, John Hesselink makes the following broad statement regarding the Lord�s Supper: �Here, as in many other areas, Calvin� heirs have often failed to understand and appreciate the depth and sophistication of Calvin�s understanding of this sacrament.� Through the catechism and Calvin�s biblical exegesis, Hesselink unearths the theologian�s sacramental understanding of the rite thus distinguishing Calvin from Zwingli and other reformers who proclaim the rite as memorial alone. For Hesselink, the distinction relies upon Calvin�s understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit within the Eucharistic rite . I will attempt to demonstrate how this understanding is derived from Calvin�s use of Chrysostom.

Liturgical Manifestations

Once I have explored the theological relationship and its foundation in exegesis, I will demonstrate how this is manifested in Calvin�s liturgical theology. This can be gleaned by exploring the eucharistic liturgies from the earliest Calvinist congregations. Paralleling them with one another and with the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom should reveal how the dialogue between Calvin and Chrysostom appears in the liturgies as well. Again, we will not see absolute coherence between the two traditions. We will, however, continue to see a dialogue.

Conclusion

The conclusion will once again draw our attention to Calvin�s use and understanding of Chrysostom. It will underscore the history of Calvin�s use of Chrysostom as a scriptural interpreter and a liturgical reformer. It will restate that Calvin�s eucharistic theology rests in his interpretation of Chrysostom and is exemplified through liturgy.

the day after the ides

I awoke at 5:30 this morning when Mike, one of my cats, decided that my dresser was too cluttered for his tastes. Yeah. I love that. So, nagging cough in tow, I walked to the couch to blog. I mean, really, what else am I supposed to do with my time (and that list grows longer and longer)?

So, in order to combat what will surely lead to One Bigarse Blue Funk, I think now that I will talk about the things that make, or recently have made, me happy.

Been debating/clarifying with Megan how I think and how my tradition thinks about preaching. Megan is a good foil for me...a good long-time friend.

We had snow last night. It cannot be more than an inch. It is a beautiful dusting. As I was walking home from rehearsal with One of the Girls, it was drifting gently down. It made me think of home and the rare March snow that we would get. It would be warm enough to go fishing, but the surprise snow somehow made the whole experience surreal. Walking home with drum, mandolin and guitar in hand(s), there was nothing at all surreal. It was perfect.

Susie came over yesterday. We watched Mae's Buffy dvd's (season five). That was a gift as well. Susie is a wondrous friend. And Mae is cool eough to loan her dvd's!

Today I will go to school and work work work on my thesis. I'll post the proposal for those who are interested. If you are interested in John Calvin, you may find the thesis useful. If you are interested in ecumenism, you may find the thesis useful. Otherwise, well, I make no claims to being a stage or screen writer. No entertainment value here for the non-theology geek. Move along. Nothing to see here.

The Mighty Spiders are in the NCAA playoffs. I know, I said that yesterday, but I need to say it again. Go, Spiders!

And finally, our corner preacher placed this image on his blog. I figured I would do no less. God save us from our own insanity.

gospel according to debbie

Oh. My. God.

Bwahahahaha!!!

how we live faith

Rats. I have so much reading to do, and yet here is a book I think I should read.

The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith by Alan Wolfe is goa be interesting. His take is peculiar in my eyes, but it may be how others think of Christianity in America. Thus, a good book for me to read. I wonder if Wolfe has read Calvin. Steinmetz would be good for him.

-interview
-review
-another review:this one about Rick Warren and his purpose driven stuff. It is interesting to read because Wolfe uses him as an example of this Americanized Christianity at its best.

spiders, rams and flames

Have you been keeping up with the NCAA basketball tournament? Here is some interesting news, I think. As a UofR grad, I find the Spiders' inclusion in this tournament pretty exciting. Basketball was one of the few things that actually excited me about UofR when I was there. No reflection on the school, just one on me. I have fallen away from following the team. Maybe this will inspire me to keep an eye on the Mighty Spiders (I'm Spider born and Spider bred, and when I die, I'll be a Spider dead.). They play their first round in Milwaukee. I wonder if I can get a ticket and find my way up there. Doubtful.

VCU also go in. This is fun. As a native Richmonder, I am glad to have yet even more representation.

And my theory on the relationship between basketball and conservative evangelical protestantism has been proven true. Those boys play basketball. Ya have to do something with all that pent up sexual frustratio. The Baptist Student Union used to clean up when I was in school. Liberty University's Flames are in the tournament. How does jerry Falwell feel about this? They play St Joseph's in the first round. I wish them luck, but I am afraid we might have more protestant martyrs in the face of an overwhelming Catholic presense. Ha!

sjlbvdnzv campus news: the spring break issue

No, this has nothing to do with "Girls Gone Wild" or some other semi-pornographic reality show. Spring Break is upon many of us in school right now. I am on Spring Break. This means, of course, that I will be working on my thesis. I really need to get a HUGE chunk of that done. With that being said, let's see what distractions are running about the Sjlbvdnzv Campus.

Go, Puffins!

Oh, there are so many sermons. Are you ready for this? Does everyone at the UofBSC preach? Is anyone listening to these sermons? I certainly hope so. Give them a read. Trevor, Jane Ellen, Rev Ref(He also told me that the Mighty Spiders made it into the NCAA tournament! Wahoo!), The Sacristan, and Bill all have participated in the preaching moment. Veni sancte spiritus.

It is not often that I do this, but I have been slow in pointing people to Heather's questions and thinking. Here are two posts that are worth a read: Leadership and Sex. Hold on. Is there a relationship between these tow posts? Oh no.

AKMA is making me think again. Let's talk about what signifies what...sound and fury...signs and symbols...huh. This is a possibly interesting line of thought. Maybe after I finish trolling around in Calvin I'll look at this. There are certainly some Baptist thought sin this area. Then, of course, there is the AngloBaptist tradition.

At St. Stephen's, Karl begins the post this way: "Guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid the godless chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge, for by professing it some have missed the mark as regards the faith." 1 Timothy 6:20-21

"Is this not what many of our clergy do? Do they not choose for themselves teachers who flatter their hearing? They do not learn from the one teacher--Christ; they do not learn from His Gospel or His Church."

My.

Cliff wants to know if we can trademark Christianity.

Geoff is also looking for what makes Christianity distinct. Is the Church an oppressive community? And is its particular brand of oppression actually a good thing?

Scandalofparticularity is talking about transhumanism. What the heck is transhumanism?

And lastly, Joel Gagne is interested in young people and how to get them to ente