Stand Up For Jesus - April 8, 2005

As promised, here is the latest installment of the Rev'd Fr. Chandler Holder Jones, SSC's travle diary from the "Stand Up For Jesus" meeting of the SSC in England last spring. Enjoy!

"Friday 8th April 2005 will ever remain one of the most wonderful days of my life. Our official Society of the Holy Cross pilgrimage to the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham had finally arrived. There are 1100 plus members of the Society throughout the world, with over 700 in the United Kingdom. Large numbers are also present in the United States, Canada, the West Indies, and Australia, with a few in Africa and other places. A significant collection from North America and from Australia was present for the SSC event, most of whom had never been to Our Lady’s Shrine at Walsingham. For this reason, and to acknowledge the prominent place of Walsingham in the Catholic Revival, we made a pilgrimage to Walsingham on Friday. Several coaches of priests made their way to distant Norfolk on that cold blustery day. Father Hope Patten, the Restorer of the Shrine, was a brother of the SSC, like so many other famous Anglo-Catholic priests throughout history. The morning was, as the BBC predicted the night before, surprisingly cold, sharply so. The dark swirl of grey and white clouds above, the wind so sharp it felt like it would cut through you, the pelting droplets of rain all combined to create an almost surreal atmosphere for a day that would be indeed unlike any other. The condition of the weather seemed a fitting commentary on the fact that the Pope would be buried that very morning in Rome. John Paul II had only died less than a week before. In fact, as it turned out, probably 200 of our brethren decided not to join us for the Walsingham pilgrimage because they were glued to the television to watch the proceedings from the Vatican. However, nothing on earth could have stopped me from going to England's Nazareth that day! After a hurried breakfast we all made our way onto the coach omnibuses that would drive us three hours northeast to the county of Norfolk and the ancient Shrine of Our Lady. Behind me was Canon Charles Hough of Fort Worth, Texas and his lovely wife. As I sat down, donning cassock, biretta, and bag, I was joined by a elderly English priest who made his acquaintance and politely asked if he could sit next to me. I of course said 'yes' - it was one of the best yeses of my life. For six hours that day I enjoyed the unique privilege of being graced by the company of a Catholic priest's priest, the retired Archdeacon of Croydon, a former missionary, parish vicar, teacher, theologian, a living embodiment of the Oxford Movement. All the way up to Walsingham and back we talked and talked (not an unnatural activity for me, as anyone who knows me will testify!); we discussed politics American and British, the Churches of England and Rome, the controversies in the Church, immigration in Europe, Anglo-Catholicism past and present, and on and on. It was one of the most illuminating times I have ever spent with anyone, and additionally, it certainly helped to pass the time quickly as we made our way north and south. The beauty of the English countryside itself is a mesmerising and enchanting experience, and so I must confess I kept one eye on my companion and the other out the window upon the clash of rolling hills and big sky, grey clouds and bright green grass, and the seemingly endless steeples peaking above the horizon as we made our way through 'England's mountains green.'

I should pause here for a moment and describe exactly what is the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham. It is the national Shrine of the Blessed Virgin Mary in England, the spiritual epicentre of world Anglo-Catholicism. In AD 1061 the Holy Mother of God appeared in a vision to a Saxon noblewoman, Richeldis de Faverches, and commanded that a Shrine in honour of the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Family be built on her land. Our Lady revealed the design she desired to be built, a small house, a replica of the Holy House in which the Annunciation from the Archangel Gabriel took place and in which the Holy Family dwelt at Nazareth. A miraculous well sprung up in the place chosen by the Mother of God for the erection of the Shrine, and so the original Holy House was built thereon. Eventually the small chapel consisting of the House itself was transformed first into a great pilgrimage Church, and later an entire Augustinian Priory surrounded and protected the little House of England's Nazareth. Augustinian Canons governed and administered the largest centre of Marian pilgrimage in all of Europe dating from 1146. The most popular place of Marian pilgrimage in the country, it closely rivalled the Shrine of Saint Thomas of Canterbury for overall celebrity. Over the centuries the Kings of England offered their royal patronage to the Shrine and endowed it with gifts of all kinds: Henry III, Edward II, Edward III, Henry IV, Edward IV, Henry VII, and Henry VIII all made pilgrimage to the Shrine of the Mother of God in Walsingham. The wicked King Henry VIII, at the dissolution of the monasteries, brought about the destruction of Our Lady's House and Shrine in 1538. The devotion lay in abeyance until a young Anglican vicar, Father Alfred Hope Patten, moved to Walsingham in 1921 with the hope of restoring the ancient Shrine as well as the ancient Faith. A leader of the Catholic Movement in the Church of England, the energetic Father Patten restored the fullness of Catholic doctrine and practice to the parish Church of Saint Mary's, Little Walsingham, and in 1922 he restored the Image of Our Lady of Walsingham inside the parish Church at the north side of the building. It was his idea to base the new statue of Our Lady of Walsingham on the Image depicted on the seal of the medieval Priory. Regular pilgrimage and devotion was returned to Walsingham. >From the first night the Image was restored, people gathered to offer their intercessions in union with the prayers of Our Lady, and the ministry of prayer, intercession, and devotion has gone on unbroken every day since. Father Patten firmly believed that if the Church of England were truly a Catholic Church, it must have a living centre of devotion to the Mother of the Lord. The Restoration of the Shrine was for him a proof of Anglicanism's Catholicity and a vital connexion with her pre-reformation Faith and history. Throughout the 1920's, the trickle of pilgrims became a flood of large numbers, for whom eventually a Pilgrim Hospice was opened (a hospice is technically the name of a place of hospitality for pilgrims) and in 1931, a new Holy House encased in a small pilgrimage church was dedicated, and the Image translated there with great solemnity. In 1938 that church was enlarged to form the Anglican Shrine of Our Lady, more or less as we know it today. Catholic Anglicans around the world continue to flock to England's Nazareth to worship and adore the Divine Son of Mary, Jesus Christ, and to venerate God's lowly Mother. Devotion to Our Lady under the title of Walsingham has become an undoubted defining characteristic of the Anglican Catholic. 15 October 1931 is today commemorated as the Feast of Our Lady of Walsingham. Last year, in 2005, the Anglican Shrine was ranked by the BBC as Britain's most popular and loved site of Christian pilgrimage and prayer: the dream of Father Patten has been realised and Walsingham is once again the centre of English Catholic life and devotion!

Now to pick up my narrative. Once we arrived in Norfolk the weather had turned colder and brisker, and for the first time snowflakes appeared dancing in air. The atmosphere on the bus was one of palpable excitement, the air was electric with joy and anticipation. Everyone was so excited that they chatted vigorously. Once we arrived at the Holy Mile, an authoritative voice came over the speaker and commanded us to keep a prayerful silence, and we did. The Holy Mile tracks the ancient route along the River Stiffkey from the Slipper Chapel to the Anglican Shrine: the Slipper Chapel, which now serves as the national Romanist Shrine of Walsingham, was in the medieval period that place at which pilgrims removed their shoes or slippers and from which they walked barefoot to the Shrine a mile distant. It is the last leg and holiest stretch of the old pilgrimage route to Walsingham. I recall vividly the scene in the cold of that frosty spring morning as we pulled up to the front of the Shrine Church and our entourage quietly departed the buses and made its way into that venerable and loved Church for our opening devotion and prayers. There are 15 Altars in the Shrine Church in honour of the 15 Mysteries of the Holy Rosary. After our prayers before the first Altar of the Annunciation and some time in the Holy House in prayer before the sacred Image, we walked en masse from the Shrine in the village up the hill to the parish Church of Saint Mary's for an utterly unique treat, my first Mass celebrated in the parish of Father Alfred Hope Patten. As we darted up the small incline to the church, the sky opened from its grey shell and a burst of sunlight poured out on the group. The Lord Jesus seemed personally to welcome us to this holy place in honour of His wondrous Incarnation, to which we had come from such great distances. As other priests hurriedly scooted into the church I could not help but stop motionless before the small and very humble grave of Father Patten, which is located just outside the west door of the church building. In silence I recounted all the wonderful works he had accomplished in his long life, offered a prayer for his repose, and joined the rest of the eager band as they made their way inside. The Church of Saint Mary's is a new beautifully-reconstructed building of radiant white interior and clear glass, bright and happy. A beautiful stained-glass window on the east wall behind the Altar clearly depicts Henry VIII, Father Patten, and a church on fire. The burning church in the original Saint Mary's, which was gutted by fire in 1961, during the ministry of the famous Father Colin Stephenson. The ancient church building's interior had been almost entirely destroyed; precious little of the original design remained afterwards - but what did remain was carefully incorporated into a faithful and handsome replacement.

Since I had paused outside I was late, and many priests were already vested and had hungrily seized their seats up in the chancel on either side of the 'Cranmerian Holy Table' which was set up in the middle of the church crossing. Oddly enough the lovely red and gold High Altar and reredos had been obscured the large freestanding table plopped in front of it. You see, this was to be a concelebrated Mass in the modern Rite, typical of British Anglo-Catholicism. As much as I admire and respect the faith and courage of my British brothers, I still cannot acclimate myself to the liturgical modernity expressed there. 'When Rome sneezes, Anglo-Catholics get the 'flu.' I confess I find this particular 'Rome-aping' not only unnecessary, but theologically and aesthetically undesirable. Anyway, I rushed over to a grand piano hidden on the north side of the nave, concealed by bag, vested as fast as I could in alb and concelebration stole (very mod), put my biretta on my head and flung myself at the chancel. It was full. Several American priests chuckled at my biretta; one snobbishly remarked that the English would think I was crazy or eccentric or both. I ignored the comment and started looking for a seat. Things looked dire - all my life I had been looking forward to having the privilege of celebrating Mass in this Church and it appeared I was to be relegated to a seat in the congregation. All of a sudden, as things usually happen at Walsingham, a little gift mysteriously materialised. My new friend, the retired Archdeacon, had saved me a seat, a seat on the front row right next to the Altar. He and I would stand adjacent to the concelebrating Bishops for the Mass. It was an indescribable blessing. I took my seat and minutes later the Mass began. We sang the Angelus as the sacred ministers stood before the parish shrine of the Virgin Mother. Offered with careful and loving reverence, the Mass unfolded flawlessly. The sight was a vision to behold, the four-hundred priests and 15 or so bishops all vested in white, Bishop Keith Ackerman of Quincy celebrating in a modern chasuble with an image of Our Lady emblazoned on the front. A religious sister with a strong cockney accent read one of the lessons. The Vicar of Walsingham, Father Patten's successor, preached a carefully-prepared and timely sermon. Then came the Liturgy of the Eucharist itself - this was the first time I had ever publicly concelebrated the Mass since my own ordination to the Priesthood. I shall never forget as long as I live standing in that beautiful church alive with spiritual power, extending my right arm and hand and saying over the sacred gifts the words of consecration: 'This is my Body...' 'This is the Cup of my Blood...' The Eternal Sacrifice of the Son of God and Son of Mary was pleaded to the heavenly Father in the praise and worship of God and the honour of His Incarnation. Once again in the mystery of the Mass, the Word was in mystic form made flesh, under bread and wine. The very Incarnation of God, celebrated in image, symbol, paint, wood, building, shrine, sacred place, was extended, made-present, once again in time and space, by Sacrament, under the veil of earthly food. Walsingham means Incarnation, God made Man, God with us. The Reality pointed to at Walsingham became our Reality once again. At Communion, a ciborium containing the Blessed Sacrament was passed very gingerly from priest to priest as each removed a fragment of a broken host and held It until all received together. At that moment I recall adoring the Lord of Glory, the Body of Mary's Child, present in my hands, the hands of an unworthy sinner who was, in spite of his innumerable sins, a priest, an alter Christus, another Christ. Like Mary, the Catholic priest is a Theotokos, a God-Bearer. The Catholic priest is himself in a mysterious way the Incarnation prolonged in history, the icon or image of the Incarnate Lord. The Church, the Mass, the Priesthood - Our Lord, Our Lady - all unites in one amazing gift of God's disclosure of Himself to and in us. Walsingham's truth came surging forth again. The chalice was passed priest to priest and all received the Precious Blood.

As the Mass concluded with all of its splendour and solemnity, that old familiar sense came flooding back once more, gratitude, gratitude to God for His many gifts, for His love which from our birth surrounds and sustains us, for the gift of Himself in becoming Man for our salvation and in forming His Church, His Mystical Body, in which we have come to live, love, and delight, and for the grace of pilgrimage to that place, England's Nazareth, where the veil between heaven and earth is thinnest - Walsingham is as close to heaven as one comes on earth. After the pontifical blessing, the coterie of priests began to form a procession which would wind through the village streets, bearing in its midst the Image of Our Lady to her Holy House. The next great Walsingham tradition was about to begin..."

Chad+

Denying Your Roots

One thing that I absolutely cannot stand is when people have nothing good to say about their religious past. By that I mean, people who were raised in one Christian tradition, say for instance in the Roman Catholic Church, but then get "saved", and for the rest of their Christian life have nothing better to do than to bash Catholicism. We all know the type.

Now, I must admit that I do not come across many people like that nowadays - not in Anglican circles, anyway. But I do meet a great many people who were raised strongly Protestant (or were raised pagan, but got "saved" though an evangelical ministry like Campus Crusade for Christ) who now, having converted to Anglicanism, Catholicism, or Orthodoxy, spend all of their days pointing out all of the horrible problems associated with Protestantism. It seems to me that that is a real slap in the face to their past, and more important, to God. It almost comes across as a self loathing of sorts. They act as though they never learned anything, or grew in grace in any way during their sojurn with the people or congregation that first taught them to read the Bible, to pray, and trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. Or they think all of their time with such people was a waste, when in fact it was not: God was present to them all along, and their Christian journey was as much under His sovereign guidance then as it is now. They think that there are no grace in others' sacraments, perhaps, when in fact their own lives prove otherwise. God is present to us at all stages in our lives, guiding us and watching over us that we might become all that He wants us to be.

One does not have to agree with, or affirm, every doctrine that they were taught as a youth, or in college, or wherever. But I think that if we are converts from another Christian tradition we should, when remembering our roots, try to focus on the positive things from that tradition. And we should try to keep in mind that other people do not experience God in exactly the same way we do, and that God works with different people in different ways, and on different schedules (e.g. they remain in their tradition thinking it is fine for them while you leave). When we do this, it helps us stay level-headed, and avoid "extremist" notions, and "black and white" thinking about God and the faith.

When one converts to Roman Catholicism from another traditi0n, the people leading RCIA are supposed to go affirm as much as possible and is reasonable all of the marvelous ways that God has worked in the person's past. In some places they even let people bring their cherished Bible up with them as they are received into full communion with Rome. But the "catholic extremists" of whatever stripe never tell anyone that, probably because it would interfere with their "black and white" mentality.

The really scary thing, though, is that many people with this mentality eventually end up leaving the Christian religion altogether. Yes - I have seen it happen, folks. First, Presbyterianism is no good. Then, low church Anglicanism is no good. Then, Anglo-Catholicism is no good. Then Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy is no good. A healthy respect for our religious upbringing is a healthy respect and love for God. It is good for our souls, and for the unity of the Church and all Christians.

New Artistic Horizons

As many of you know, I am an artist, and have been selling my art for several years now. I have recently decided to get into icon painting - or "writing", as it is called. Many people have suggested that I get into this, because my art is pretty geometric and abtract, and that is basically the way icons are. It seems like it would be a good fit, and a good way to combine my various interests and skills. As an aside, I have never been able to figure out why many Christians do not like abstract, or non-realistic art (especially in churches) when so much Christian art, from all over the world, and going back centuries, was that way. It really makes you wonder if these people have ever actually looked at medieval art. Most have not. But that gripe is for another post! Suffice it to say that most Christian art is more abstract than realistic. Anyone who disagrees needs to just visit a few more museums, read a few more books, and study art history. (And please note that "abstract" is different from "non-representational". Van Gogh and Picasso are "abstract"; Pollock and Rothko are "non-representational".)

Okay, so back to icons...

Living, as I do, near Washington D.C., I went to the Icon and Book Service recently to buy a book on the subject of icon writing. And now that I have several boards primed and ready to go, I will soon begin my first two icons. Once they are done I will post pictures of them. A lot of people think that icons do not belong in an Anglican parish, because they are so "eastern". But I have actually seen them in many ECUSA and continuing parishes. Transfiguration, in Manhattan, has them, as does my home parish, and our diocesan pro-cathedral (St. Alban's, Oviedo, FL). I think they fit in just fine as long as they are put in the right place and the church isn't covered with them. An Anglican church should not be covered with icons. They should be taastefully used here and there, keeping with that English spirit of moderation in all things.

Icon writing originally did not appeal to me as an artist because the aim is to copy exisiting icons as closely as possible (in style and manner of painting/priming). This goes against every canon taught in contemporary art academies (except a few). In most art schools today, individualism is held in the highest esteem. But when you think about it, there is nothing wrong with following traditions. Tradition is something that is living. And frankly, even postmodern , secularist artists follow "traditions". The postmodern, secularist artistic tradition usually has something to do with chain smoking (Lucky Strikes, or rolling your own), sleeping with your model and also some of her friends, hating organized religion (read: Christianity), drinking a lot, and wearing black all the time. Oh, and you have to eventually make your way to the holy Mt. Zion of the art world - NYC - to visit the haunts of Warhol, DeKooning, Rothenburg, and the other secular "artist-saints". So, everyone has traditions that they follow. The question is: which tradition will one follow? And even when one follows a tradition there is always a unique style that emerges, because each person is unique. Icon writing may be thought of like regular writing: two people will write the same word, with the same pen in cursive script, but it will look very different, because everyone's handwriting is different. The same with painting. Even with specific instructions, and following the same model, slight (or sometimes very great) differences will appear in two artists' works. So once I thought about all of that, I overcame my aversion to painting traditional icons.

Lord willing, this is just the beginning of my artistic/theological masterplan, which I hope to make my life's work, and about which I will reflect on (here) from time to time.

Future Anglo-Catholicism

The other day I met up with a college friend who happens to attend one of the historic anglo-catholic (ECUSA) parishes here in Baltimore City. We got to talking about the future of anglo-catholicism, and whether parishes like his (or mine, for that matter) are really sustainable in the long run. I believe that anglo-catholicism can have a real, viable future, but that to do so it must migrate to the suburbs. The problem is not with the liturgy, or with the cermony in other words, but with the location.

In my secular career I work in church art and church restoration, and have been doing so for several years now. Without question, and no matter what the denomination, the people and the money are in almost completely in the suburbs. The city churches of just about every tradition are barely holding on, or just outright dying, just as many American cities themselves are dead. The reason is that there are so few families living in the city. City life in historic, east coast cites, is simply not compatible in many peoples' minds with postmodern family life. So young families leave the city, and move to places with lawns, swimming pools, and peace and quiet. Without families, churches slowly die, and that leaves city parishes with the short end of the stick in most cases. The problem isn't with ceremony, or overly formal worship and language. Suburban catholic parishes in the Archdiocese of Baltimore are booming (although their liturgy is rather banal there is still a lot of ceremonial in it). And the problem isn't with strange, and unusual ceremonies in worship. There are Orthodox parishes in the Baltimore and Washington suburbs that are gigantic, attracting not only people from their ethinice tradition, but also westerners. Mircea Eliade has pointed out for many years now that ritual and ceremony are part of the fabric of human life. Even secular man has his set of cherished ceremonies and "sacred" actions.

Anglo-catholicism can and does appeal to a great many people. My friend and I are both converts to it, as are many other people I know. That says that ACism still has something to offer people today. Many people are still converting to anglo-catholicism because it is a beautiful and mysterious way to worship the Triune God. It doesn't appeal to everyone, obviously, but there are many people I know who could not worship anywhere other than in an anglo-catholic setting. We need to take our wonderful tradition to the suburbs, so we can share it with more people, and with more families. There it will grow and prosper, and help people grow in holiness, for the greater glory of God.

Candlemass 2006

Yesterday I went to two services for Candlemass: one at my home parish at noon (low mass), and one at my spiritual director's parish in downtown Baltimore (blessing of candles, procession, solemn high mass, the whole show). Unfortunately, St. Alban's just doesn't get enough people for weekday masses - even big Holy Days - to justify doing all of those things. We are just a small, country parish. So it nice to be able to go to places where they do all of that every once in a while.

During the service at Mt. Calvary, right when people began to go up for communion, an old man in the back row started to have a heart attack. So a couple of us got up to help him. An ambulance was called, and he was taken safely away. While waiting for the ambulance to come, an old, retired priest, the famous Fr. Woolley, got up, pulled a purple stole out of pocket and came over and annointed the man with oil. I must say, if you have to have a heart attack, that is the place for it to happen. It is a gorgeous church, there were at least 10 clergy present, the Blessed Sacrament was being received by the faithful, and beautiful organ music was being played.

Mt. Calvary uses the Anglican Service Book, which is nice, but it is not the American Missal. They also do not follow Ritual Notes very strictly. It is still strange for me to think of an anglo-catholic parish that does not use the missal or follow Ritual Notes to the letter. To me, that is synonymous with being anglo-catholic. But to each his own, I suppose. They have most of what is in the missal, such as the pax, the confessions, the minor propers, etc. But a lot of it is not in the traditional order. The pax, for instance, if after the confession and absolution, whereas in the missal it is at the fracture and co-mingling.

At my home parish, when we do have a solemn high, it follows Ritual Notes almost perfectly, and we use the American Missal exclusively. Perhaps someday, when we build a new building, we will be able to do the more elaborate liturgies for Holy Days like Candlemass. Lord willing that day will not be far off.

Mass Practice

As my priestly ordination is fast approaching, the rector has been teaching me to say mass. I must say that I find it quite enjoyable. Timing all of the complex manual acts, and navigating the American Missal has its difficulties. Also, careful attention must be paid to the singing and proper reading of the prayers. In short, getting everything "perfect" takes dedication and concentration. With enough patience and practice, though, I should be able to offer the Holy Sacrifice in a beautiful and reverent manner one day when I am finally ordained. The Holy Mass is re-presentation to God of the one sacrifice of Christ for the sins of the world. It is first and foremost an offering to God. Thus, it should be said with the greatest dignity and solemnity.

At today's session, the rector went through the mass and let me stop him and ask questions along the way. Towards the end, though, we realized that the dominical words had been said by him over the host which was upon the corporal. Had it been consecrated? We briefly discussed personal intention vs. the intention of the Church, and related topics (which was fun in and of itself). But since we were running out of time he decided to simply consume the host. Better to just play it safe. Maybe next time we will use something else instead of a priest's host to practice with!

The Inflatable Church

Here is an innovative idea: an inflatable church. Can't afford a new building? Get the inflatable church instead! Kicked out of your building by your ECUSA bishop? Buy an inflatable church, and set up across the street in protest! It even has inflatable pews and stained glass windows. It would probably be too risky to use incense inside, so it may not appeal to anglo-catholics, but for everyone else this thing might be a real problem solver.

Tithes and Offerings

While we are waiting for Fr. Jones to provide us with the last two installments of his "Stand Up For Jesus" travelogue, I will go say a few words about a topic that is very important: giving to support the work of the Church. On page 291 of the BCP, in the First Office of Instruction, we are taught that our bounden duty as a member of the Church is to (among other things) "...work and pray and give for the spread of his kingdom."

It is not my intention here to go over the exact details of the word 'tithe' and how it is used in the Old Testament, nor the difference in meaning between that word and 'offering'. My point is to say simply that we should worship God with our whole person and being, and bring our entire lives under the Lordship of His son, Jesus Christ. One of the most important areas in which we should do this is in our finances. In a day and age when people are so irresponsible with their money, and so self-indulgent, how much more important is it that we earnestly strive to honor God with how we use our money? When we live in such a prosperous nation, how much more important is it for us to be generous with the money that God has entrusted to us? We think nothing of spending gobs of money on little indulgences for ourselves (e.g. buying a $50 bottle of French vodka, or something like that), but many times shudder at dropping Ben Franklin into the offering plate every other week. We worry about getting our bills paid early lest our credit report be damaged, but we think nothing of slighting the maker and ruler of the universe.

The Church is a volunteer organization, and it relies on voluntary giving by members to exist. Many continuing Anglican parishes - well, many parishes in many different traditions in general - are not able to minister as they should because they lack the necessary financial support to hire additional staff, build, have outreach programs, buy necessary items, and more! Giving to causes outside of the Church (e.g. Red Cross for Katrina Relief, etc.) is important, and should not be neglected. But we should give first and foremost, I believe, to our own local parish. Giving to your parish is a powerful way of worshipping God.

I used to never give money to the Church. I always had some excuse why I couldn't give. Once in a while I would drop $20 in the offering plate and think I was so great and generous. But finally it occured to me that I was not honoring God with my finances. The background to this was that I was always short on cash, and struggling to get by - even though I was making great money in the IT industry for a while. But when I started to regularly give to the Church, in obedience to God and in love and worship of Him, a strange thing happened. Despite the fact that my pay was cut in half when I changed careers, and despite the fact that I still had the same amount of bills to pay, I was able to get ahead on my bill paying, sell more of my art, and put more and more money away into savings! Pretty amazing.

Now, I don't think we should give to God to "make it rich" (I am by no means rich, I can assure you), but I do believe that when we seek to honor and glorify God with our money that He will bless us. When we are obedient and devoted to God, we should expect His blessing. Let us remember our responsibility to provide financially for the work of the Church. Let us remember the work and expenses of our own parish, and prayerfully consider how much we drop in the offering plate each week. We are ultimately giving for God, and for His glory.

Travelogue Three

Thursday 7th April 2005

More groggily than before I rose on Thursday morning with a half-start and rushed down the street to Gordon Square at attend the beginning liturgy of the day. After Exposition of the Most Blessed Sacrament beneath the yawning fan-vaulted ceiling of Christ the King Church, and Matins sung with an intense beauty, Father Barry Swain presented another very stirring meditation on the 'architecture of the priesthood,' reminding us all of the need continually to awaken and deepen the sense of vocation to serve Our Lord in priestly life. Thursday brought a great deal more excitement for the British participants, admittedly, than for some of us from the Colonies. Perhaps it was less exciting still for those of us who are proud 'Non-Jurors' of the orthodox Continuing Church tradition. For, you see, Thursday was devoted largely to the visit to the Society of the Holy Cross of His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. In reality, for me at least, this was a bitter-sweet experience. On one hand, Archbishop Rowan, an astoundingly brilliant theologian, philosopher, teacher, and preacher, is one of the most intellectually gifted men ever to sit in the Chair of Saint Augustine. Additionally, the Archbishop is a Welshman, a true Celtic Archbishop of the British Church, the first Welshman to hold the Archiepiscopate of Canterbury for a thousand years - which thing gladdens the heart of every Welshman like myself. On the other hand, however, Archbishop Rowan has renounced Catholic Faith and Order by accepting and promoting the innovation of women's 'ordination.' More troubling, the Archbishop was once a thorough-going Anglo-Catholic, committed to the fullness of the Catholic Faith as received and practised in the Church of England, a clear sometime exponent of the theology of the Great Tradition. Some brothers of the SSC see his former allegiance to Catholic orthodoxy as a means by which he may more personally and sympathetically understand the plight of traditional Anglicans in a modernist-laden communion. Others see his abandonment of historic Catholicism as a devastating and painful betrayal. Needless to say, I greeted the occasion with very mixed feelings indeed.

From the Church on Gordon Square the long line of becassocked priests and bishops filed down the street to the conference centre at the University of London where the Archbishop was to address us. As we made our way into the auditorium a palpable sense of energy and anticipation began to fill the room. A friend and I seized front row seats, next to those reserved for high-ranking dignitaries and representatives of the SSC. I noticed once we were seated that we strategically positioned next to the only religious sisters present for the SSC gathering, the Sisters of the Holy Cross, Rempstone. Once everyone was seated, a hush fell over the crowd. Then, when all was ready, the Master General briefly addressed the group, and, a few seconds later, a tall man with incredibly bushy white hair and a thick unruly beard wearing a simple black cassock with a red cincture very briskly made his way down a side aisle and onto the stage: the audience burst into applause. Introductory remarks from the Master followed, and the Archbishop proceeded to give one of the most eloquent and engaging presentations I have ever heard in my life. A more admirable character one will never meet. Being a preacher myself, I noticed immediately the Archbishop's smooth, rich, deep basso voice which continued for over 45 minutes to give a penetrating and understandable explanation of the meaning of worship as explicated in the Epistle to the Hebrews. He tied his subject to the life and ministry of the Catholic priest with love and devotional attentiveness. +Rowan never made one verbal mistake or gaffe; his speech was absolutely flawless, his grammar perfect. He neither stumbled nor uttered a single 'er' or 'uh.' And I know the presentation had to be good because I still remember what he said. In a chameleon-like way (from the perspective of a strictly traditional Anglican), the Archbishop gave an exposition of the nature of worship and the Incarnation that could have been delivered by an Eastern Orthodox Bishop or the Pope himself - it was perfectly orthodox. The Archbishop had certainly tried to connect with his Anglo-Catholic audience, and he succeeded ingeniously. After an extensive question-and-answer period, the 104th Archbishop of Canterbury was whisked away to his awaiting car to be flown directly from our meeting to Rome in order to attend the funeral of the late John Paul II. But the Archbishop could not get away before a certain priest from Oviedo, Florida presumptuously introduced himself and shook the archiepiscopal hand. He was most gracious, impeccably kind and polite. And with that the spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion disappeared as briskly as he arrived. It appears the group as a whole was genuinely and profoundly touched by the Archbishop's generosity and grace. Some English priests after the meeting explained to me their enthusiasm by saying that Anglican Catholics in the Church of England still hold the Archbishop in the highest veneration because he is second only to the Monarch as a personification and representative of the Nation. To meet the Archbishop of Canterbury, they contended, is to meet the Ecclesial Person, the Man of the Church, just as to meet the Queen is to meet the Royal Person, the embodiment of the State. I must confess that, in the face of the Archbishop's known problems with Holy Order and other moral questions, I was not fully convinced. Perhaps that feeling naturally arises in the heart of an American whose own Church has been autocephalous from the 18th century - it more definitely arises in the heart of one whose Church's commitment to uncompromising orthodoxy caused a necessary breach with Canterbury only thirty years ago in defence of the Catholic priesthood. Having met both Archbishop George Carey and Archbishop Rowan Williams, I should assert that +Rowan is the far more formidable of the two, but I still remain unconvinced that one must be in full communio in sacris with either of them to be a genuine Anglican. If anything, my personal conviction that the measure of one's Anglicanism is determined by one's fidelity to the faith and order of the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the Undivided Catholic Church of the first millennium was only reinforced in a new and positive way by the experience on 7th April 2005. No doubt the SSC owes the Archbishop of Canterbury a debt of gratitude for his willingness to visit us, as his schedule was far more complex than he had originally thought. He left us in that government car to board an aircraft of The Queen’s Flight with the Prime Minister and the Prince of Wales to fly to the Vatican. As a result, the Archbishop was unable to sing High Mass that day and preach to us, which he had originally intended to do; but the address he gave and subsequent questions entertained for nearly two hours were a thoughtful gift to the Society of the Holy Cross, which he has known for many years. In his speech, he attempted to assure us of the importance of our vocation as Catholics in the Anglican Communion. It can safely be said that the current successor to Saint Augustine is a talented and creative theologian whose understanding of the Faith originated in time past from the Catholic milieu.

Thursday’s Noon Mass was sung at Christ the King, Gordon Square, and Father Jeremy Sheehy, SSC, Principal of Saint Stephen’s House, Oxford, preached to us in place of the Archbishop. The sermon was stimulating and given with care and concentration.

We were in for far more than we bargained in the afternoon, as our programme resumed with a symposium and conversation entitled 'The Church of Christ: Principles of Ecumenism.' Our presenters were two outspoken modernist ecumenists in the Church of England. These choices, as it was to turn out, were indeed rather curious considering the character of those participants who were seated in the audience. The Bishop of Guildford, Christopher Hill, co-chairman of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, spoke first; as this reflection goes to press, Bishop Hill is currently involved in creating the official legislation in the C of E which will permit the purported consecration of women to the Sacred Episcopate. His liberal views are well-known and unambiguous. The second presenter, Dr Mary Tanner, former secretary for the Council for Christian Unity, spoke on the matter of relations between the Anglican Communion and the Church of Rome. Bishop Hill's presentation was very academic; he clearly intended to avoid ruffling the feathers of the Anglo-Catholic constituency before him. Dr Tanner was less nebulous and sought to be outright politically-correct in her remarks. Speaking on ARCIC and the remarkable progress made between the Anglican and Roman Churches over the last four decades, she unwisely decided to give the revisionist rationale for the 'ordination' of women. She went so far as to attempt to justify the irreparable damage in ecumenical relations with Rome done in favour of the innovation of priestesses. She could not have had a more unsympathetic and delicate audience before which to make such insensitive claims. As the question-and-answer period began and continued, the good priests of SSC became more and more agitated and more and more pointed in their comments and questions. The atmosphere in the auditorium grew thick with anxiety and irritation. It was most uncomfortable. Finally, exasperated and having taken quite an unanswerable theological critique from the assembly, our undaunted revisionist, frustrated to no end but still convinced of her superior knowledge, clamoured with that self-importance which is typical of modern theological entrepreneurs, 'the ordination of women is still in the 'process of reception' - it is going to continue, it is going to happen and we might as well accept that fact now!' She might as well have thrown a bomb into the room. Priests in significant numbers rose from their seats in a dignified huff and exited the hall quietly and quickly. Some decided to stay and listen to what else was said. Still others began to protest in that quintessentially fabulous British way... some began to murmur, some began to boo, and others began to shout such succinct summaries as 'heresy!' and 'nonsense!' As Dr Tanner tried to persevere, I knew I could take no more. Feeling particularly British I blurted under my breath 'this is absurd!' and with that I rose and joined the rest of the recessional which made its way solemnly out into the street. That afternoon conference is one of the most unforgettable of my life. It was both amazingly humorous and terribly disappointing. To this day I still do not know how such persons so wholly incompatible with the Society's vision of the Faith found their way into our 150th anniversary celebration. It seems in the Church of England one can never avoid or escape controversy, even if one tries.

In the evening came the magnificent Solemn Evensong and Benediction held at Saint Alban's Church, Holborn in celebration of our SSC anniversary. Cormac Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, head of the Roman Church in England and Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, was scheduled to preach. Sadly, of course, this was not to be as the Cardinal had already arrived in the Vatican to take his rightful place in the funeral ceremonies for the deceased Pope. The Bishop of Guildford, curiously enough again, was asked to preach in the Cardinal's place and addressed the congregation on the subject of John Paul II and his ministry and legacy. The liturgy was celebrated with tremendous reverence. At the lovely champagne reception that followed Evensong and preceded Benediction, I enjoyed a thoroughly delightful encounter with Bishop Ewen Ratteray of Bermuda and his charming wife. After a rather lengthy conversation and an invitation to visit the island, I pledged that I would somehow make my way to Bermuda at some point to visit the Diocese. I am still trying to figure out how to fulfil that pledge! Then the day ended as it began, before Our Blessed Lord in the Most Holy Sacrament. The highlight of the day for me was Solemn Benediction, replete with a dozen servers and two deacons, given by my friend Bishop Edwin Barnes, the retired Bishop of Richborough. Father Daniel Clarke of Charleston, South Carolina and I knelt next to each other in the heavenly glow of the church as seemingly hundreds of candles burned around the Most Holy on the Altar. It was one of the most riveting and powerful sights I have ever been privileged to witness. I have never seen so many servers and candles in my life as
I did on the evening of 7th April - the scene was so otherworldly and so profound that I believe the most hardened opponent of Benediction could not help but be moved by the great love and adoration for Our Blessed Lord manifested in that most dignified of services. We beheld the Throne and the Lamb in the midst of the Throne. I was helplessly moved to tears as I contemplated the love of God tangible in that place, shown in sacramental sign, in the history of the parish in which I knelt and the witness for the Faith, through trial and suffering, which had been prophetically maintained there for decades upon decades. My mind floated to the great saints and confessors whose lives in that very spot had been caught up in love of the same Lord adored on that same Altar. The response that welled up in me, gratitude, was the only right one I could imagine. The next day would bring the best experience of all, the ultimate Anglican pilgrimage... Walsingham.

Stand Up For Jesus - Rev. Chandler Jones' SSC Travelogue #2, April 6, 2005

It seemed like a very short night indeed. I rose by 7.30 AM in order to join the rest of the brethren on a quick walk down the street to Gordon Square, only a few blocks away. I shall never forget entering the neo-Gothic church building which resides on a busy and very elegant corner in east central London. The Church of Christ the King, Gordon Square is the official headquarters of Forward in Faith United Kingdom and of Bishop John Broadhurst, replete with its own offices, library, and meeting spaces. It is a truly impressive building, but what is most remarkable about it is its architecture. I have never seen such complex and beautifully interwoven arches and columns in a church. The building is a 19th century Victorian creation erected by a strange sect that has long since disappeared - the 'Catholic Apostolic Church' founded by the Rev'd Edward Irving. This colourful charismatic sect established an amazingly elaborate liturgical and sacramental life, which in turn gave rise to the truly magnificent church building on Gordon Square. The Irvingites also created another familiar phenomenon - the dispensationalist doctrine of the Rapture. LaHaye and Jenkins of Left Behind fame owe their religion and their livelihood to a defrocked Presbyterian minister and his eccentric liturgical community. If one happens to find oneself in London at any given time, a trip over to see Christ the King is a must. To this day, the Anglican Catholics still rent the building from an Irvingite trust which owns and maintains the property. Upon arriving in the dimly-lit church with its incredibly ancient feel, all found their places in the pews and knelt before the Most Blessed Sacrament exposed on the simple Altar beneath the great canopy of windows, columns, and arches which comprise such a unique temple. It was truly breath-taking. After half an hour of silent Eucharistic adoration, Morning Prayer was sung according to the modern Common Worship rite of the Church of England. Father Barry Swain of Resurrection Church, New York City, gave a moving and very thoughtful address on the 'Architecture of the Priesthood,' combining his verbal images with those of the stunning building surrounding us. After Mattins and a short break, we assembled in the lecture hall of the University of London, just across the street the Royal National Hotel, for our first academic exercise of the Synod: the Society of the Holy Cross is very keen to combine prayer and spiritual formation with serious theological training and study. After all, the Anglican ideal of priestly ministry has always been that of the pastor-scholar. And so Wednesday and Thursday of our meeting were devoted to a conference on Christology, the Person of our Blessed Lord. Entitled, 'Who Is This Son of Man?', the conference began with an introduction by Father Houlding, the Master of the Society, and an excellent exposition of the Church's faith in Our Lord's Person by Father Jonathan Baker, Principal of Pusey House, Oxford. Father Baker was joined in a discussion session by my friend Father Martin Warner, Canon Pastor of Saint Paul's Cathedral, London. It was an illuminating conversation which dealt with the fact that the crisis currently swirling in the Anglican Communion and in western society in general is a direct result of error, Christological error regarding the Incarnation of Our Lord and Saviour. Everything from the innovation of women's ordination to the election of an unchaste man to the episcopate to the breakdown in the structure of societies at large can surely be traced to a faulty understanding of the nature of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. To summarise the discussion: in short, if we misapprehend the Incarnation, we get the Gospel and its application wrong. After another short break, we returned to the Church of Christ the King, Gordon Square, for the Noon Mass. The liturgy was celebrated with reverent dignity and solemnity according to the Common Worship rite: I was struck by the way in which the modern rite was offered with such great decorum and beauty, so unlike what we often see in modern-rite American parishes. The celebration was impeccable and the music was grand. Bishop Andrew Burnham of Ebbsfleet, one of the English Church's 'flying bishops,' gave a powerful and well-articulated sermon on the Resurrection. Never before had I seen a bishop preach with a purple biretta firmly planted on his head. After Mass, luncheon followed back in the University hall. In the afternoon, a group of pilgrims, including myself, decided to take a walking tour of the old city of London. Off the Underground at The Strand in central London, we made our way first to the National Gallery for the once-in-a-lifetime Caravaggio exhibit. After our tour of the Gallery, we started off on foot towards London Bridge. Our band of pilgrims shared a break at Saint Paul's Cathedral for a photo-op. Eventually we worked our way down the streets of old London to the eminent Anglo-Catholic Church of Saint Magnus Martyr, where we enjoyed the fantastic conflation of architectures old and new. Saint Magnus Martyr is an Wren building refurbished by that quintessential English artist Martin Travers in the early 20th century, under the auspices of the famous Catholic priest Father Fynes-Clinton. After our memorable stop, we slowly made our way back to the Hotel. At 5 PM we enjoyed Evensong again in the glowing evening light of Christ the King, Gordon Square. The incense formed a cloud which filled the entire Church - my mind was filled with the images of Isaiah 6, of the Lord in His holy Temple. Following Evensong, a special treat was held at the Church of Saint Mary-le-Strand in central London. The Society of King Charles the Martyr sponsored a Solemn High Mass according to the rite of the Laudian Liturgy, the 1637 Scottish Book of Common Prayer, celebrated by Bishop Keith Ackerman of Quincy, Illinois. The Mass in the traditional rite, in honour of Anglicanism's Royal Martyr, was moving beyond description. At the conclusion of the Mass, the relics of King Charles Stuart I of England, including the shirt and gloves he wore at his decollation, were brought out for the veneration of the faithful. The event brought to the fore the unquestioned and unbroken Catholicity of the English Church, and of our heritage as members of the living Body of Christ. Dinner and bed followed - another incredible day in the journey which was to be unlike any other...

Stand Up For Jesus

It is my great pleasure to post over the next couple weeks the travel journal of the Rev. Fr. Chandler Holder Jones SSC (Sub-Dean of St. Alban's Anglican Cathedral - Oviedo, FL) from his trip to the SSC conference "Stand Up For Jesus" held last year in England. Fr. Jones is one of several APA priests (and one bishop) who are members of the SSC. Thank you, Fr. Jones, for sharing this with us.

++++++++++++++++++++

Tuesday 5th April 2005

I rose on the morning of Tuesday 5th April in my room in the Royal National Hotel to discover a note under my door. My luggage had finally arrived and was downstairs in the concierge office. 24 hours ago American Airlines had managed to leave my bags in Orlando while it flew me first to Raleigh and then to Gatwick. What a day yesterday had been: after discovering that my luggage had been 'left behind,' I finally managed to escape the Monday-morning panic at Gatwick by taking the number 6 Gatwick Express train to Victoria Station. By the time I arrived at Victoria, the morning hub-bub had settled down a bit. A moment's visit to the cashpoint for some desperately needed British Pounds, and the next thing you know I am in a taxi on my way to East London. Upon arrival in Holborn, I realise that I am mere seconds from the Senate House of the University of London and the British Museum. Naturally, the front desk cannot locate my name and registration. Why? My name has been listed as 'Holder-Jones' in the British way, not simply Jones. I rather like the affectation. Mercifully, I had managed to place my toothbrush and toiletries into my carry-on bag, so I could at least freshen-up before launching out for a London adventure. Clad in a raincoat and water-proof shoes, I spent that whole typically and gorgeously grey, rainy, damp, cool British Monday afternoon on my own in the British Museum. It is my first trip to the Museum, and I am simply and unabashedly awestruck. Its sheer size is enormous, and the treasures to be found within it are, to succinctly describe it, beyond imagination. Although haze and blurriness of jet-lag begin to set-in during my tour, I still remember now most distinctly the vast array of Egyptian mummies and artefacts, the massive Assyrian wall bas-relief images, the seemingly endless collection of ancient Greek vases, Roman military gear, Celtic artwork, the Rosetta Stone, the original statues of the Athenian Parthenon, an original cuneiform tablet of the Epic of Gilgamesh, the oldest Christian mosaic in Britain, dozens of Christian vestments, images, and vessels from the 2nd century forward, and the oldest artefact in the Museum, an idol over 30,000 years old. And all this having been seen, I believe I actually visited about 1/4 of the entire facility. My next trip to the UK is going to be a solid week spent just in the British Museum! After a short nap, I caught up with my dear friends Father John and Mary Klein of Baltimore for a splendid Greek dinner at a local spot across the street from the Hotel. And then Tuesday arrived...

It might help to remind the reader what my trip was all about: the Society of the Holy Cross (SSC) was founded as an institute for Anglican parish clergy in London on 28 February 1855, and was based upon a model organised by Saint Vincent de Paul in France in the 17th century. Many priests of Anglicanism's Catholic Revival have been members, and the parish work of many of its clergy has been well known. Many parishes in Britain have had nothing but SSC clergy for much of the past one hundred and fifty years, and would thus insist on the 'SSC standard' of worship, doctrine, and teaching. The SSC is the greatest legacy of the Oxford Movement, and the lasting bequest of the Catholic Movement to the Anglican Tradition.

The week of 5th April was a truly amazing week in our lives, and in world history. Pope John Paul II grew more and more ill and died three days before the Synod began. In the United Kingdom, a General Election approached and the Prime Minister went to the Palace to ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament. Millions crowded into Rome to pay homage to the Pope as world leaders rushed to his funeral on Friday. The wedding of Britain's most infamous couple, the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker-Bowles, was postponed at Saint George' s Windsor, just around the corner from our hotel, until Saturday. Just as mourning for the Pope was beginning, Prince Rainier of Monaco died. And through it all, much of Anglo-Catholicism's priestly leadership converged on a humble parish church in London. It seemed that God had designed a truly providential week for our time in old Albion.

On Tuesday morning, my luggage was swiftly recovered from the Hotel office, and once into a black suit I was straight out the door and directly headed for... a bookstore. For a little detour on the way to the parish church, which was only minutes from our Hotel by foot, two fellow American priests and I decided to take a side-tour of some lovely out-of-way shops and stores in Holborn. One bookstore proffered many theological titles too expensive and too tempting for me to buy. I believe one of us did happen to buy a book or two. In a hardware shop, one bought some simple items while another bought an authentic sign for his parish's WC. Our Holborn detour carried us through streets lined with many modern flat buildings and business complexes all built after WWII. This area of London was devastated by bombing during the War. Finally we happened upon our destination, the modest parish church nestled amongst the 60's-looking school buildings and flats of East London.

Saint Alban’s Church, Holborn, in London, was the parish church of Blessed Alexander Mackonochie, one of the first and most famous Masters of SSC and one of the pioneers of the liturgical, sacramental, and pastoral implementation of the Catholic Revival. Saint Alban’s, like much else in this section of the city, was remodelled by the Luftwaffe during the Second World War, and the only part of the Victorian neo-gothic church remaining as it was from the 19th century is the Mackonochie Chapel itself, outside the main body of the new faithfully-reconstructed church. Today the new church houses a dramatic and very modern painting portraying the glorified Christ with saints of the ancient and Anglican Churches behind the restored high Altar. Devotion to Blessed Charles Lowder, the founder of the Society of the Holy Cross, as well as to Father Mackonochie, is alive and well in that place of mystic prayer and communion, a place aptly described as one in which the veil between heaven and earth is strangely thin. People still venerate the effigy of Father Mackonochie in the Chapel, light candles of votive intention, and remain in silent reverence before the memory of that great Anglo-Catholic lover of souls. The Shrine of Father Mackonochie is surprisingly separated from the nave, found at the rear of the Church and opposite its main entrance; without some guidance, it would be easy to miss the entrance to it. I only learned upon my pilgrimage to Saint Alban's that Father Lowder, Father Mackonochie, and Father Stanton, amongst others, are buried in a parish cemetery several miles outside of the city of London. The memorial of Father Arthur Stanton, possibly the holiest curate in history of the Church of England, lies before the sanctuary on the epistle side of the nave. I was tickled and delighted to see a representation of his pet dog with him on the effigy. The church itself, so lovely and so graceful, so filled with the prayers, sacrifices and sufferings of dedicated and unwavering conscience-bound Catholics for so many years, mostly destroyed in World War II and rebuilt with costly devotion, can easily bring a person to tears. Next to Walsingham it should be regarded as the Anglo-Catholic 'mecca.' If Saint Alban's may be seen as an accurate indicator, it is certain that real Anglo-Catholicism (as opposed to the 'Affirming' variety) is living and healthy in the Church of England. Some of our readers will be pleased to know that Saint Alban's continues unabated a strong, vibrant, active, very orthodox Anglo-Catholic tradition. Although the parish, with typical British Anglo-Catholic curiosity, uses the modern Roman Rite, its liturgy is splendid: beautiful and reverent with the highest calibre of music and vesture imaginable. All in all, Saint Alban's Holborn is Christocentric, incarnational, sacramental, organic, transcendent, mystical, grace-bearing Religion at its very best. It's really Catholic.

Upon our arrival, we slowly made our way through the church to the parish hall, collected our registration packets, and found our way back into the church in time for the proceedings to begin. Hundreds of priests packed the parish church to begin the Synod - there was very little room for comfortable seating so all of us had to be quick to find a good spot. At 12 Noon the Synod programme officially began and all stood. We began to sing the Marian Anthem for Easter, the Regina Caeli, 'Joy to thee, O Queen of Heaven,' sung beautifully to the tune of 'Jesus Christ is risen today.' Imagine the thrill one instantly has upon hearing six hundred male voices all singing together with proper pitch and energetic joy. It was truly remarkable. Following the Anthem, all the Brothers of the Society present sat to hear both the Registrar and Secretary General report on the Roll, or membership, of the Society. We were first greeted by Father Howard Levett, the Vicar of Saint Alban the Martyr, Holborn. We then learned that there are currently over 1200 priests of the Society of the Holy Cross worldwide. Following the Roll and a financial report, the Synod moved to its most vital function, worship. Exposition of the Most Blessed Sacrament of Our Lord's Body and Blood ensued, with a meditation by Father Martin Warner, now Canon Pastor of Saint Paul’s Cathedral. It was a supreme privilege for me to get to know Father Warner during my 2000 pilgrimage to the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham, when he was Administrator of the Shrine. One powerfully personal moment in the meditation came when I realised that I was kneeling next to a man so deeply absorbed in prayer that he began to cry in the midst of the love and beauty that surrounded us - it turned out that the man was the former Bishop of Papua New Guinea, who had just retired to England. At the end of Exposition, Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament was given by the Bishop of Beverley, Martyn Jarrett, a member of our Society. Bag lunches were provided for all of us as we processed outside to a sunny, warm, beautiful, spring day to enjoy our repast on the church lawn. My break was spent sitting on the ground, lunch in hand, conversing with Father Graham Canham, the Master of the Province of Wales. We discovered both our families originated from the same region of Cymru.

After lunch, the Synod proper, the Ordo ad Synodem, began. The Master-General of SSC, the Society’s head throughout the world, Prebendary David Houlding, gave a tremendous address. Then the Provincial Masters, from the USA, Wales, and Australia, addressed the Synod. These speeches were followed by the Right Reverend Geoffrey Rowell, Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe, who gave an address on the Society’s past and future entitled 'In This Sign Conquer'. Bishop Rowell is arguably the greatest living historian on Anglo-Catholicism and gave a fascinating and compelling presentation. Many expected it to be a bit 'dry' or academic, but its power made it quite dynamic and stirring. The Bishop of Gibraltar has consented to become the new Visitor of the Society consequent to the resignation of the former Archbishop of York David Hope, who has returned to parish work. After the special address, a service of Veneration of the Relic of the True Cross followed. Then at 4 PM the piece de resistance occurred: the Synodal High Mass. It was truly magnificent liturgy. Imagine all of the prelates, in silken purple and tall mitres, arrayed in flowing copes and other pontifical regalia. The music was a combination of classical sacred style and inventive (if not kitsch) contemporary settings. The Mass was celebrated with stunning red vestments according to the modern Roman Rite. The only way one could distinguish our celebration from that typically found in parishes across the Tiber was that ours was more reverent, more tasteful, and closer to the rubrics of the Missal! The Mass was concelebrated by the Master General, the Provincial Masters, and all Local Vicars of the Society. Our preacher was the Right Reverend Keith Newton, SSC, the Bishop of Richborough, and successor of my friend Bishop Edwin Barnes, whom I first met in 1992 while studying at Oxford. The celebration of the Mass was profound and incredibly moving - the deepest emotions, gratitude, wonder, peace, thanksgiving, welled-up as I approached the Blessed Sacrament at Communion and received a holy card commemorating the event. 150 years of love, dedication, priestly self-sacrifice and devotion were perfectly expressed in the postcommunion hymn:

In our day of thanksgiving one psalm let us offer
for the saints who before us have found their reward;
When the shadow of death fell upon them, we sorrowed,
But now we rejoice that they rest in the Lord.

In the morning of life, and at noon, and at even,
He called them away from our worship below
But not till his love, at the font and the altar,
Had girt them with grace for the way they should go.

These stones that have echoed their praises are holy;
And dear is the ground where their feet have once trod;
Yet here they confessed they were strangers and pilgrims,
And still they were seeking the city of God.

Sing praise then, for all who have here sought and here found him
Whose journey is ended, whose perils are past:
They believed in the Light; and its glory is round them,
Where the clouds of earth's sorrows are lifted at last.

The official 150th Anniversary Banquet of SSC was held at the Imperial Hotel, just down the street from the Royal National. The facility, named the 'Elizabeth Room,' was spacious and yet packed to capacity as we socialised and conversed for a solid hour or more before dinner. The champagne was excellent and abundant. At the dinner table I was privileged to enjoy the company of several priests from all over the world: to my left was an American priest from Denver, Colorado, on my right, an English priest from Devonshire. Most of our dinner conversation addressed the recent history of the SSC, the abortive effort in the mid-1990's to erect a Roman Province of the Society, the ongoing dilemma regarding the effort to introduce bishopesses into the Church of England, and the seemingly-hopeless divisions of the Continuing Church in the USA. My English and Australian dinner companions were visibly amused by my description of our American liturgical practice centred on the Book of Common Prayer, which thing they find very quaint and antiquarian - you see, most Anglo-Catholics worldwide use either modern alternative service books issued by the various provinces of the Anglican Communion or the modern Novus Ordo Missae of the Roman Rite. They seemed fascinated yet befuddled by our insistence on using the BCP! My English colleague suggested that we should strike up an arrangement for altar and pulpit exchange - he recommended that I should come back to the UK and serve in his parish with him for a duration, and then he should come to Oviedo to serve with me at Saint Alban's Cathedral. His was a brilliant idea. Perhaps we may still make those plans someday. Dinner concluded with toasts to the Queen, the Archbishops, the Church, our respective nations, and detailed stories about them all. By the way, the food was actually delicious, contrary to what many expect of English food. It was one of the most memorable meals of my life, and all for the most positive of reasons.

After dinner, two Britons, an Australian, a Canadian and myself all trekked off for a walk and then a pint at the local pub. Pimms and lemonade (real UK lemonade) followed beer. After more conversation lasting at least another hour, I finally made it back to my room - exhausted. As I lie on my bed, I can't help but think: 'so much has happened, and it's only the first day - how tired will I be by this time tomorrow?!'

CHJ+

Faded Glory

Here is a picture of the former Christ Church (Episcopal) in downtown Baltimore. It is an absolutely stunning church that has three Tiffany windows, and other stained glass windows imported from England. There are huge wood carved angels going down each side of the nave up near the clerestory windows. The pulpit is intricately carved with all of these tiny, medieval looking figures. The floor has intricate mosaics all over it. It is a masterpiece of a building. Apparently it was once pretty anglo-catholic. My former spiritual director who was quite spikey used to preach there every once in a while when he was a military chaplain. The church's rector at the time, I understand, eventually went to Rome after ECUSA began ordaining women, but not after letting the congregation die, and running through the various endowments the church had by constantly throwing lavish parties. My feeling on priests like that: I don't care how "orthodox" they are, or how anglo-catholic they are... who needs lazy people like them. I presume this priest - now a Roman priest, as he was never married - is presently busy destroying some Roman Catholic parish somewhere out there. Eventually the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland sold the building in the 80's.

It is now called the "New Refuge Deliverance Cathedral", and it is completely falling apart. Quite sad. I guess they do not have the money to properly maintain the building. Honestly, I don't know why groups like these buy buildings like this when they can't maintain them! So year after year it just continues to rot. The most intriguing thing about the group there now is that they use all of this catholic terminology for their staffs' titles, and their pastor is called: "Her Eminence: Archbishop Naomi DuRant". They even make up such interesting titles as "co-Archdeacon". I can only figure that the "archbishop" must have an Anglican or Roman background, even though the church itself was organized as a Holiness church. Anyway, it all seems pretty weird to me... but what do I know.

Maybe one day churches like this will become Anglican churches once again, and the Holy Sacrifice will once again be offered on the altars within these grand edifaces. Maybe one day we will be able to buy back buildings like this in order to minister to people in the cities. But until then, they will continue to sit and decay.

Minor Orders - a minor question

An interesting little article on Zenit today about whether or not deacons (in a seminary setting) should serve in other liturgical roles at mass. This is intersting to me as a deacon at a small parish, where I sometimes have to act as a server at the late mass. The professor who addressed the issue says that deacons should not serve in any other capacity, but that other seminarians should be used as lectors since they have already been instituted in those offices.

All of this got me thinking about the idea of "minor orders" in Anglicanism. The 'minor' orders were: porter, exorcist, acolyte, and sub-deacon; the 'major' orders are deacon, priest, and bishop. The Roman Church has retained something of this, as they have specific rites that institute people as lectors, and acolytes, but I think that is all they have. We Anglicans seem to have maintained the tradition of sub-deacons, but it seems to be seen as a purely liturgical role. I wonder if there was ever a movement in the anglo-catholic tradition to bring back the each of the seven offices, or if we would have something to gain by doing so? Many times it is the same men who serve in the various roles at mass - right down to collecting the offering plates. So why not have a rite where they are "set apart" for their role, and where we pray for God's to give them grace for their work and ministry?

"Book of Daniel" Television Show

Last night when my wife and I got back from church for the feast of the Epiphany, we were just kind of lazing around watching some tv, and we came across this incredibly idiotic NBC program, that is apparently new, called "Book of Daniel". It is about a middle aged episcopal priest who lives with his wife and family in a small, wealthy suburban town. This show is a real piece of work. Let's see... in this episode we learned: the wishy-washy priest is addicted to prescription meds; his son is openly homosexual and is in love with a guy in the choir; his father - who is the diocesan bishop - is having a clandestine affair with a woman because his wife has dementia; one of his vestryman's wife (also a neighbor) is a racist; his daughter is pot-head; another church "family" is openly lesbian (oh, but they just broke up - plot twist!); and all of the older women on the show get toasted on martinis all day long. The most ridiculous thing of all? "Jesus" makes cameo appearances and talks to the priest giving him counsel. For example, when one of the priest's sons goes off one night to spend time with his girlfriend, the priest suspects that some hanky-panky is going to go on. As he watches his son skateboard away, "Jesus" wanders by and they talk about it. Jesus' words are "Well, boys will be boys". There's also a Roman Catholic priest on the show who has mob connections and is trying to use them to help the Episcopal priest build a Christian school or something weird like that. This show is offensive in so many ways. From an artistic perspective, the acting is awful, and the writing is banal. Everyone mumbles - especially the Jesus character. I wonder if any mainline episcopal bishops have come down hard on this show? It doesn't make their church look good at all. Actually, I guess it doesn't make any ministerial family look good. Anyway, it was the first - and LAST - time I will waste time watching that trash. It's too bad that this is how Anglicanism gets mainstream exposure. Why not do a drama about an episcopal priest that is positive?

Plugging Joint Services

Yesterday a few of us APA and REC clergy got together over lunch to discuss our upcoming joint choral evensong service. It reminded me to, once again, suggest that some you all try this. If your parish is not doing this with other continuing churches in your area, you need to think about trying it out. It has been a really edifying experience for us. We get together once a quarter - sometimes more - and have joint choral evensong services, with preaching, and followed by a reception afterwards. The responsibilties of the liturgy are divided up amongset the clergy, and the location varies each time. It has been a great way to build community, discuss new ministry opportunities, discuss starting new missions, and brainstorm about strengthening older parishes, etc. It has also allowed us to share prayer concerns with each other (as clergy). Sometime in the not-too-distant future we will be having a joint communion as well, and we have also talked about having a joint clergy retreat sometime in Lent. There are infinite possibilities. Worshipping together in Word and Sacrament is one of the main ways to bring organic unity about. Once again, I heartily recommend you try it!

Newman on the Ceremonies of the Church

There is wonderful book published by Ignatius Press called Parochial and Plain Sermons which are sermons preached by John Henry Newman while an Anglican priest. One of the nice things about this expensive little book (about $70.00 new) is that it is arranged according to the traditional BCP lectionary, so those of us who use the old prayer book can read his sermons as the Church year progresses. It also contains "plain" sermons that are topical in nature. There are many things that could be said of this book and how useful and interesting it is.

This past Sunday, after preaching for the Feast of the Circumcision, I came home and decided to read the Newman sermon for that day to see what he had to say. His topic was the "Ceremonies of the Church". He argues that while Paul and the early Church clearly did not believe the Old Testament Law and rituals to have any value in terms of adding to our salvation in Christ, they clearly had a great deal of respect for the rituals of the Jewish "church" - especially circumcision. Custom was a sufficient reason to maintain them in most cases. Paul circumcised Timothy himself, shaved his head because he made a vow, and more. Jesus did the same thing, of course - paying the Temple tax, telling people to offer the sacrifices commanded by Moses, etc.

Newman uses this as a jumping off point in discussing the ceremonies of the Church. Quite often people ask: "Why do we bow at the Holy Name? Why do we kneel at the Holy Communion?" Because ceremonies and actions like that are not "in the Bible", they either remain indifferent to them or deride them. The most extreme example of this is the unsound teaching held by some extreme Reformed Christains known as the "regulative principle in worship." Simply put, this corrupt doctrine teaches that worship can only consist of things that are positively commanded for corporate worship in scripture. This teaching is based on a faulty understanding of the nature of revelation and the scriptures. There are many things that we prohibit that scripture is completely silent on, such as suicide. Yet no one would argue that suicide is okay. And there are many things that we do that scripture is silent on. We find out about these things in other ways (e.g. Paul: through nature). Newman says that the Bible gives us the spirit but that the Church must provide the body in which that spirit is to be lodged. It tells us what to believe and aim at, but not how to do it. Scripture talks about meeting for prayer, but it doesn't say where, or for how long, or what to pray for, or who should pray first, etc. The wisdom of the Church in her tradition, and human experience guided by God's Holy Spirit tells us these things.

Newman says that when people attempt to worship God in the excessively "spiritual" way described above that they very often end up not worshipping God at all. The mindset that goes, "Why pray at mass when I can stay home and pray in bed?" in most cases eventually leads one to neglect of prayer altogether! But the ceremonies of the Church give flesh and blood to the biblical admonitions on prayer and worship. They give them form, and help us remain faithful to the teachings of scripture and to God. Newman says that when "profane persons scoff at our forms" we can say: "These forms, even were they of mere human origin (which learned men say is not the case, but even if they were), are at least of as spiritual and edifying a character as the rites of Judaism. Yet Christ and His Apostles did not suffer these latter to be irreverently treated or suddenly discardeed. Much less may we suffer it in the case of our own; lest, stripping off from us the badges of our profession, we forget there is a faith for us to maintain, and world of sinners to be eschewed."

Weird Science

Normally I am not one to be interested in the whole creation vs. evolution debate. I find that the most important parts of the creation story are not scientific, but rather philosophical and theological. It is those ideas that I ponder from time to time - not whether or not the earth is "old or "young". Still, one cannot listen to NPR, or read the newspapers today without finding out about the whole "intelligent design" debate going on in schools and universities, and it is those scientific questions that are always discussed. Political questions, such as with the separation of Church and State - are also raised, but they do not concern me here.

Recently I was listening to the Diane Rehm Show on NPR ("Nationalist" Public Radio, as they say), in which she took on this topic. It was quite interesting. She had about about three guests, one of whom was the president of Stanford Medical School. Numerous points were raised during the program. One was that "science is under attack" in America, and that there is a growing "anti-science" movement. Another was that religion does has a place in public life, but that it should not overlap with science. Overall, listening to the guests discuss the issues underscored how there are more important foundational questions and assumptions that are not even part of the debate.

First, scientists (When I say "scientists" in this post I am thinking of those on the DR Show that day in particular) who oppose intelligent design seem to be annoyed that people other than scientists are daring to probe the questions of human origins and to take part in the debate at all, despite their platitudes about religion being a part of public life. What they need to understand is that there are fields other than science that have an interest in human origins, so they should not be surprised that people of faith are trying to see how the two overlap and relate to each other. It would be like a theologian just flatly writing off any insights that science may bring to the table regarding ethics. Most fields of study overlap at some point. To deny that, or severely downplay it, is not very accurate or intellectually honest. These scientists need to seriously acknowledge the insights that people from other fields bring to the table, and not be offended when others outside of their field join in the debate.

Second, these scientists clearly have little to no philosophical training. Yet the debate is to a great extent a philosophical one, at least as much as it is religious and scientific. The scientists are not aware of some very basic philosophical issues at stake, such as the problems of inductive reasoning raised by David Hume, the nature of evidence, and more. Hume undermined the validity of scientific reasoning by stating that there is no reason to suppose that the future will be like the past. So scientific theories are really just that: theories. Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, brings to light the mercurial nature of scientific progress in general, and how science is not a long, organic development, but "progresses" in radical leaps and bounds, with new theories many times completely eradicating a previously held theory or idea. They also presume that scientists are completely unbiased in their work. But all people are biased. A very basic philosophical principle is that there are no brute facts. All that we experience is filtered through our presuppositions and assumptions. Scientists have been known to fake results of studies, be bought off (e.g. the people at NIH a year or so ago who were being paid by drug companies, and the South Korean cloning fraud recently uncovered), and bring their own personal convictions into their work (e.g. Alfred Kinsey). So their false neutrality, and their complete ignorance of hermeneutics is highly problematic. Also, the scientists presume that because there is supposedly a majority consensus on traditional evolution that it is therefore true. This is known as the "tyranny of the 51%" - something is right or allowable because of more people believe it. How would they like it if we approached their other theories and discoveries that way? Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't necessarily mean that it is true. I could go on, but you get the point. The debate would be much more productive if they had some people trained in the philosophy of science involved.

If these two items - openness to the insights from other areas of study, and acknowledgment of the philosophical issues at stake - were brought into the debate it would be much more productive, I think. These scientists can whine and complain about a so-called anti-science movement (I really don't see one myself), but they need to realize that science cannot give us all of the answers in life. Everyone else is smart enough to realize that, it seems. Just because one can mix chemicals, has the periodic table memorized, or can remove a spleen doesn't mean that he or she has an olympian knowledge of the world.

Anglican Blog Voting

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!

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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.