Everyone please vote for my buddy Jeffrey Steel's blog, Meam Commemorationem (see link at bottom left), as being the "Most Theological" Anglican blog out there. If you read it you will see that it truly is the most theological! You vote at the "All Too Common" Anglican blog. Jeff is working on a Ph.D in the eucharistic theology of Lanceleot Andrewes over in Enlgand. I have a couple of funny college stories about him, but will keep them to myself! :-)
N.B. Sorry there are no links in the text of this post. I am on my wife's computer, and for some reason the link editing buttons are not popping up. I am too lazy right now to type in the html code myself!
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Friday, December 23, 2005
Where are all the parishes?
I had lunch a couple weeks ago with a local evangelical Episcopal priest whom I met through a mutual friend. He has had a good ministry over the last 30+ years, and helped plant numerous churches all over the country. Although he identifies himself as an "evangelical", and I identify myself as an "anglo-catholic", we made a real connection over the essentials of the faith, the inspiration and authority of the scriptures, the need for evangelism and mercy ministry, and more. Hopefully he'll be able to attend my ordination this spring as a guest.
He didn't seem to know much about the APA or the continuing movement, so I filled him in as best I could. Actually, I was kind of surprised he he knew nothing about us, because he was at the Pittsburgh meeting a few months back where we also were. Anyway, when he asked where our parishes were in this area, I told him that we have three: mine in Harford county, and two outside of Annapolis. This really surprised him. He couldn't believe that we have been around as long as we have and still only have three churches in this area! It is quite shocking, I must admit. It was a little comforting to be able to tell him that our unity partners, the REC, which has been around 5 or 6 times as long as us only has 6 parishes in the area. So we, and the other anglo-catholic continuing churches are not the only ones who have not always been fervent evangelists over the years. Still, it is a situation that we must rectify.
If denominations and parishes are not growing, then they are dying. How do we evangelize? How do we grow parishes and start new ones? One of the things we talked about in relation to evangelism is empowering the laity to minister. He made the point that a parish where the priest does everything will eventually reach a certain size and then just stop growing, because the priest simply runs out of time and energy to do anything more. But if the priest can work to "equip the saints" for good works and ministry, as St. Paul talks about in Ephesians, then the laity can take the lead in some of these areas and help grow the larger Church and fulfill the Great Commission. This is, after all, part of their baptismal vocation. Laity who travel far to come to a traditional/continuing Anglican parish, for example, might be willing to help start a mission parish in their town. We need to think ahead and be proactive in these areas... otherwise we might just barely hold on for another 100+ years.
He didn't seem to know much about the APA or the continuing movement, so I filled him in as best I could. Actually, I was kind of surprised he he knew nothing about us, because he was at the Pittsburgh meeting a few months back where we also were. Anyway, when he asked where our parishes were in this area, I told him that we have three: mine in Harford county, and two outside of Annapolis. This really surprised him. He couldn't believe that we have been around as long as we have and still only have three churches in this area! It is quite shocking, I must admit. It was a little comforting to be able to tell him that our unity partners, the REC, which has been around 5 or 6 times as long as us only has 6 parishes in the area. So we, and the other anglo-catholic continuing churches are not the only ones who have not always been fervent evangelists over the years. Still, it is a situation that we must rectify.
If denominations and parishes are not growing, then they are dying. How do we evangelize? How do we grow parishes and start new ones? One of the things we talked about in relation to evangelism is empowering the laity to minister. He made the point that a parish where the priest does everything will eventually reach a certain size and then just stop growing, because the priest simply runs out of time and energy to do anything more. But if the priest can work to "equip the saints" for good works and ministry, as St. Paul talks about in Ephesians, then the laity can take the lead in some of these areas and help grow the larger Church and fulfill the Great Commission. This is, after all, part of their baptismal vocation. Laity who travel far to come to a traditional/continuing Anglican parish, for example, might be willing to help start a mission parish in their town. We need to think ahead and be proactive in these areas... otherwise we might just barely hold on for another 100+ years.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Honeymoon Cope
While honeymooning in Italy, my wife bought purses and I bought this nice, yet affordable cope (as well as a chasuble - not pictured). It was purchased in a store caddy-corner to where the pope gets his vestments made. Rome is a great place to buy vestments. Since there are lots of stores (competition), the prices are pretty good. That lovely lady standing next to me is my wife, of course.
Friday, December 16, 2005
"Merrily on High"
I have just begun reading an absolutely fantastic little book called 'Merrily on High' by the Rev'd Colin Stephenson. He was a priest in the C of E, who came of age at the height of the anglo-catholic movement in 20's and 30's. Eventually he became the warden of the shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham. This book is his spiritual biography. Sadly, it is no longer in print, but I managed to procure a used copy through the Anglican Bibliopole. It was recommended to me by my spiritual director and confessor.
Stephenson has a real gift for writing. The book is full of all sorts of hilarious ancedotes about churchmanship, and the sometimes misguided effort of a hearty band of priests and laymen to rescue the C of E from the clutches of Protestantism, and to restore to its liturgy the color, sound, and smell of its Roman ancestor (from the introduction). It is a MUST read for every anglo-catholic... absolutely hilarious. Once I am finished with it I plan to lend it to my rector whom I know will enjoy it.
Stephenson has a real gift for writing. The book is full of all sorts of hilarious ancedotes about churchmanship, and the sometimes misguided effort of a hearty band of priests and laymen to rescue the C of E from the clutches of Protestantism, and to restore to its liturgy the color, sound, and smell of its Roman ancestor (from the introduction). It is a MUST read for every anglo-catholic... absolutely hilarious. Once I am finished with it I plan to lend it to my rector whom I know will enjoy it.
Friday, December 09, 2005
I am Tired of Roman Triumphalism
Every morning, one of the first things I do, after my Daily Office, is sit down at my computer and read the New Oxford Review online. I check out their news links and read about all of the crazy stuff going on in the Roman Catholic world (Legionaries of Christ and their scandels; the banking scandels; the supression of traditional liturgies; clergy murdering people; bishops involved in hit-and-run accidents; child sexual abuse scandels; etc.). They have this ongoing parody about "Fr. Flapdoodle" of St. Bozo's Catholic Community - a wishy-washy priest who is always embroiled in some sort of homosexual scandel, or trying out some weird new thing at the liturgy... it is quite funny.
These articles, as well as the history of Christianity general, show that the Roman Church is just as screwed up as any other church out there, despite all of their claims to the contrary. The Episcopal Church, and other western Anglican churches, are, without a doubt, completely wacko themselves (one could fill volumes with their antics: bishops divorced and remarried multiple times; acceptance of Mormon baptism; woman "priests" and "bishops"; syncrenistic rites; clergy that double as Wicca clergy; etc.). But I will say this for them: at least they are not outright hypocrites with a lot of this stuff like Rome - at least the American Church - is. The Episcopal Church may ordain practicing homosexual clergy, but at least they are following their collective conscience (however disordered that may be), whereas Rome speaks out of two sides of their mouth on the issue, saying publically that homosexual acts are disordered and evil, but privately turning a blind eye to the highly active gay subculture culture in their own church - a very well-documented culture (e.g. is anyone else following the Fr. Haley affair in the gloriously "traditional" Diocese of Arlington?).
Rome looks great on paper. But their (false) belief that the pontiff is infallible, and the "center of catholic unity", and the "Vicar of Christ on earth", is just a lot of smoke and mirrors when it comes to day-to-day Roman Catholic parish life. The authoritarian model of their governance, and their innovative "four-fold office", is not a foolproof system that absolutely prevents strange doctrines and practices from ever developing. In the long run, there is nothing doctrinally or morally more "safer" or "secure" about the Roman Church as compared to any other Church. The faith that some Roman Catholics have in the office of the pope is truly amazing. They truly believe that the pope and curia will never err (e.g. ordain women, or allow married clergy, etc.). They would do well to learn from history, and study the corrupt lives of some of the Renaissance popes, or perhaps revisit some of the controversies of the Reformation (treasury of merits, indulgences, etc.... oh, yeah, indulgences are still around , by the way.). Popes have erred in the past, so why would they not in the future? They are, after all, only human. Those who think "swimming the Tiber" will solve all of their problems, and answer all of their questions, and end the struggle with sin and heresy, should think twice. It won't.
My point, believe it or not, is not to sit and bash Rome. Continuing Anglican churches have their problems too, don't get me wrong. Any church will have its problems. I think, though, we have to choose our poison. Personally, I would rather be in a church that may have a problem with overlapping jurisdiction, too many people running around claiming to be bishops, and buildings that are not grand edifaces instead of being in a church where God is spoken of as "mother", and where so-called bishops and clergy routinely deny the core doctrines of Christian faith and morality and go undisciplined. And personally, I would rather be in a church that does justice to the scriptural and historical notion of a collegial episcopate (among other things) than one that does not. I do not condemn those who, following their conscience, belong to some other church (Roman, PCA, Episcopal, ELCA, etc.). But we should always be aware of the problems in our own commmunity before we criticize others' communities. Rome seems to be one of the only churches left out there that hasn't quite realized this just yet.
These articles, as well as the history of Christianity general, show that the Roman Church is just as screwed up as any other church out there, despite all of their claims to the contrary. The Episcopal Church, and other western Anglican churches, are, without a doubt, completely wacko themselves (one could fill volumes with their antics: bishops divorced and remarried multiple times; acceptance of Mormon baptism; woman "priests" and "bishops"; syncrenistic rites; clergy that double as Wicca clergy; etc.). But I will say this for them: at least they are not outright hypocrites with a lot of this stuff like Rome - at least the American Church - is. The Episcopal Church may ordain practicing homosexual clergy, but at least they are following their collective conscience (however disordered that may be), whereas Rome speaks out of two sides of their mouth on the issue, saying publically that homosexual acts are disordered and evil, but privately turning a blind eye to the highly active gay subculture culture in their own church - a very well-documented culture (e.g. is anyone else following the Fr. Haley affair in the gloriously "traditional" Diocese of Arlington?).
Rome looks great on paper. But their (false) belief that the pontiff is infallible, and the "center of catholic unity", and the "Vicar of Christ on earth", is just a lot of smoke and mirrors when it comes to day-to-day Roman Catholic parish life. The authoritarian model of their governance, and their innovative "four-fold office", is not a foolproof system that absolutely prevents strange doctrines and practices from ever developing. In the long run, there is nothing doctrinally or morally more "safer" or "secure" about the Roman Church as compared to any other Church. The faith that some Roman Catholics have in the office of the pope is truly amazing. They truly believe that the pope and curia will never err (e.g. ordain women, or allow married clergy, etc.). They would do well to learn from history, and study the corrupt lives of some of the Renaissance popes, or perhaps revisit some of the controversies of the Reformation (treasury of merits, indulgences, etc.... oh, yeah, indulgences are still around , by the way.). Popes have erred in the past, so why would they not in the future? They are, after all, only human. Those who think "swimming the Tiber" will solve all of their problems, and answer all of their questions, and end the struggle with sin and heresy, should think twice. It won't.
My point, believe it or not, is not to sit and bash Rome. Continuing Anglican churches have their problems too, don't get me wrong. Any church will have its problems. I think, though, we have to choose our poison. Personally, I would rather be in a church that may have a problem with overlapping jurisdiction, too many people running around claiming to be bishops, and buildings that are not grand edifaces instead of being in a church where God is spoken of as "mother", and where so-called bishops and clergy routinely deny the core doctrines of Christian faith and morality and go undisciplined. And personally, I would rather be in a church that does justice to the scriptural and historical notion of a collegial episcopate (among other things) than one that does not. I do not condemn those who, following their conscience, belong to some other church (Roman, PCA, Episcopal, ELCA, etc.). But we should always be aware of the problems in our own commmunity before we criticize others' communities. Rome seems to be one of the only churches left out there that hasn't quite realized this just yet.
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
What to read?
I am currently reading "Principles of Christian Theology" by John MacQuarrie. He is a recognized expert on Heidegger (he translated "Being and Time" years ago) and Bultmann, and taught at Union (NYC) for many years before going to Oxford where he currently teaches. He is Scottish, so he's obviously wonderful, as all Scottish people are, and a priest - I guess in the Scottish Episcopal Church. It is a very interesting book, and it reminds me of my seminary days when we were studying (in virtually ALL of the classes) the theology of Karl Rahner, who was also a student of Heidegger. When I am finished this book, I hope to zip through his book on the sacraments.
Other books I am reading right now include "Narcissus and Goldmund" (Hesse), the Thomas Cranmer biography by MacCulloch - which is very long and ponderous, and reading through the Copleston "History of Philosophy" series (I am currently on the Neo-Platonists). Like many of you, I have a backlog of books to read, and sometimes it overwhelms me. I want to read the monumental N.T. Wright series on Christian origins, maybe beginning this spring, as well as the "Stripping of the Altars" (Duffy), and the new biography on Mao. But will there ever be enough time?. There is just so much great stuff out there to read, but not enough time to read it all! Theology demands that you read in many different areas too, so I think we "theologians" (armchair or no armchair theologians) have a lot more to read than your average person. May God help us get it done! I will close with a prayer:
I consecrate my reading and study to Thee, O Lord, that thou wouldest use what I have learned and reflected on to help others come to a deeper knowledge and love of Thee, and that my own heart wouldest be pierced by Thy holy grace and mercy. AMEN.
Other books I am reading right now include "Narcissus and Goldmund" (Hesse), the Thomas Cranmer biography by MacCulloch - which is very long and ponderous, and reading through the Copleston "History of Philosophy" series (I am currently on the Neo-Platonists). Like many of you, I have a backlog of books to read, and sometimes it overwhelms me. I want to read the monumental N.T. Wright series on Christian origins, maybe beginning this spring, as well as the "Stripping of the Altars" (Duffy), and the new biography on Mao. But will there ever be enough time?. There is just so much great stuff out there to read, but not enough time to read it all! Theology demands that you read in many different areas too, so I think we "theologians" (armchair or no armchair theologians) have a lot more to read than your average person. May God help us get it done! I will close with a prayer:
I consecrate my reading and study to Thee, O Lord, that thou wouldest use what I have learned and reflected on to help others come to a deeper knowledge and love of Thee, and that my own heart wouldest be pierced by Thy holy grace and mercy. AMEN.
Bible Sunday - Advent 2
This past Sunday I preached at all three services, so I preached on the Bible and Bible study. The Second Sunday in Advent is traditionally known as "Bible Sunday", because the collect - which dates from the Reformation - asks for God's grace that we might"...read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest..." the sacred scriptures. One of the great things about the Reformation was that its leaders sought to give the Bible to people. In England during the reign of Henry VIII, for example, Cranmer issued a decree that an English Bible should be placed in every parish church. Thus, from the beginning, study and knowledge of the scriptures was very important in our tradition. Just look at the Daily Offices: look at how much scripture we have to read compared with Roman Catholic "Liturgy of the Hours". We read a lot more. (Disclaimer: The Liturgy of the Hours has other merits, though.) Scripture study is still important for us today - perhaps more than ever before.
The guy that runs Prayer Works, which is a great little company that all traditional Anglican's should check out (they sell these snazzy little 1928 BCP desk calendars), writes that the traditional BCPs are two-thirds direct scripture, while the remaining third is scripture put into devotional form. Anyone who reads the BCP and the Bible will notice this. The various versicles and responses are direct quotes from the Bible. So, the 1928 BCP is 100% scripture, and if you know the BCP, you will know the scriptures.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)