The Drama of Benediction

For the first time in about seven years I will miss Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament during Lent. I suppose I'll survive... maybe I can go to a local Roman parish to one of their services (they still do Benediction pretty nicely in most cases). We don't have Benediction at St. Mark's. We also do not have Stations of the Cross yet, as we are waiting to find the perfect set to match the new church (I am told they used to have them in the old church).

I love the drama and beauty of this service, especially when coupled with choral evensong. The priest, decked out in a gorgeous cope, places the luna in the monstrance, and turns it so it is facing the people. He and the other sacred ministers kneel in prayer before the sacrament. It is censed, and hymns are sung. Then prayers are chanted, and finally the benediction - the blessing of the people with the Body of Christ - is done. That is the most dramatic part. The priest ascends the altar, takes the monstrance and makes the sign of the cross with it over the people, blessing them with the Body of Christ. The bells are rung thrice, and it is censed with incense while the blessing is going on. The monstrance is then put back on the altar, and the preist returns to kneel at the step. Then are said the Divine Praises, a Psalm, and sometimes a Marian antiphon is sung.... it is a beautiful, holy, and reverent service of devotion to Our Lord. I strongly encourage anyone who not gone to Benediction before to find a parish in your area that has this service and go to it. It is especially nice on a Sunday evening, because, assuming you have already made your communion that day and follow the traditional rule of communion once a day, you are given another opportunity to get close to the Lord again, and adore Him and receive His blessing in the Blessed Sacrament.

To me, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament is an indispensible part of being an Anglican. Some would think that you have to believe in the doctrine of Transubstantiation to practice this, but I disagree. All that is required is a belief in the Real Presence. Anglican theologian E.L Mascall agrees (Corpus Christi, p.172), as does E.J. Bicknell (39 Articles, p.405). But I suppose the question with many people is the value of this devotion. While it may be permissable, and theologically justifiable, it does not serve any real purpose. I would certainly grant that it might appeal more to people of a one particular mindset than to people of another. Count me as the type to whom it really appeals. Maybe its the artist in me.

Only WE Have Valid Orders

A while back I was invited by my Presbyterian father to join him on one of his "credentials committee" meetings for his presbytery (their equivalent to a diocese). At this meeting they were interviewing a guy was transferring in from another presbytery (diocese). It was more of a formality than anything, as this guy was already ordained in their denomination. But nonetheless they used the occasion to get into several intense and fascinating theological discussions. I was just listening and kept my mouth shut since I was a "guest".

The thing that I found so interesting was that they started talking about a hypothetical situation: that if a Roman Catholic priest wanted to join their church and be a minister how he would have to be absolutely ordained, because they do not recognize Roman Catholic ministers as being truly ordained (because they preach a false gospel in this church's mind)! I don't know why I was thinking about this again recently, but it's very interesting. It goes to show that most churches do not recognize ministers from another church. If those guys were to become RC or Anglican they'd have to be reordained, and maybe even if they were to become something else (like Lutheran). If I was to join them, or the Lutherans I would probably have to be re-ordained. It's just the way it is. I think that it is far more common for churches to not recognize ministers from another communion/denomination rather than the other way around.

Sometimes we Anglicans get all bent out of shape because Rome doesn't officially recognize our orders. But we forget that other people don't recognize ours either, and that we don't recognize other groups' orders, and that they don't recognize ours or Rome's! It's just the way it is.

Dangers and Difficulties

I am very fortunate to have a vocation that I love - being a priest. Most people hate what they do, or at least that is what an old Sulpician spiritual director once told me. If you do what you love, then fall on your knees and thank the living God, because there are millions of other out there who would love to be in your shoes!

But doing what you love does not come without dangers and difficulties. For example, one of the major dangers that comes with doing what you love is that you do not always take the right amount of leisure time. For me, it is very tempting to go home and continue working on church things, and read theology all night long. But doing that leads to burnout. No matter what you do, if you do it all the time, you will suffer from burnout. A priest needs other hobbies and activities - and a wife - to help prevent burnout.

One of the major difficulties that I face on a weekly basis as a continuing Anglican priest is the appalling lack of educational resources to do my job - specifically educational resources for young children. At my parish we have used some material from the Anglican Church of Canada, which was pretty nice. Other priests have suggested various items from TEC, or from other denominations. The trouble with a lot of that stuff, though, is that it doesn't exactly fit our situation. It is designed for use with another liturgy (not the 1928 BCP and the Missal), and sometimes has pictures of priestesses, and girl altarboys. The Kalendar is different, the language of the prayers are different, and - even worse - when you buy them you are supporting a heterodox organization (e.g. TEC). Besides children's stuff, there are allso a great many other resources that we are lacking. The problem is that the various continuing churches spent so long simply trying to survive (survive outside pressure and severe in-fighting) that there simply wasn't a lot of time to devote to developing educational materials and other much-needed resources.

So what I do in the meantime is make my own signs and art for educational purposes. Currently I am making a series of posters on the church year (the real church year - e.g. with the Pre-Lenten season, the Trinity season, etc.). They are based on My Book of the Church's Year by Enid Chadwick, who decorated the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham in England. I also have some other projects in mind that will be for use with children in a traditional Anglican and anglo-catholic setting. I hope to make some of this stuff available for purchase down the road.

There is so much need... new books need to be written on various topics in theology, spirituality, and the Christian life. I know that many priests out there have written books for use in their parishes. Maybe one day they will publish them or make them available for wider use. Until we all start sharing resources by making what we have developed available to a wider audience, then each one of us will be constantly reinventing the wheel and using up valuable time. The good news about this is that it is a "good problem". It means that we are growing, which is a good problem to have!

Emerging Church Redux

A while back I wrote something about the so-called "emerging church" movement. In retrospect, I see that it was kind of a mean-spirited article, so for that I apologize. Well recently, the rector of St. Mark's gave me a copy of the latest issue of Christianity Today, which contains an article about this movement by one of its leaders and theologians. Also, my parents went to one of their church's denominational meetings a few weeks back, where a teaching elder spoke about this movement. We spoke at length about his presentation over the phone one evening. So now I find myself compelled to blog about it once again, but hopefully in a nicer and more charitable way.

I want to focus on one important aspect of this movement, namely its rejection of systematic theologies. The movement loves ideas and theologies, but it doesn't believe in an airtight system or statement of faith, or a system that possibly "gets it all right". It doesn't have a systematic theology or theologian that characterizes it (e.g. Calvin, Aquinas, etc.). God revealed a story, not a theology. He reveals Himself through events, not propositions. According to McKnight, "...all theology [is] a conversation about the Truth who is God in Christ through the Spirit, and about God's story of redemption at work in the church." In other words, it is an ongoing dialogue, not a "set in stone for all time" system. It says, "This is what I believe, but I could be wrong: What do you think? Let's talk." (quotes from CT article) What people believe is not as important as how they live.

While I would certainly agree that systematic theologies, and theology in general, as a meta-language, is limited, and does not provide an Olympian view of God or the universe, and while I also would agree that God reveals Himself primarily through events rather than propositions (Moltmann), I would disagree that grand systems and systematic theologies are entirely irrelevent today, which is what some in these groups seem to suggest. It really depends a lot on the person. One of the great errors of our day is to assume that everyone approaches various phenomena in the same way that we do. Quite simply, there are still many people out there that still find grand, unifying narratives to be extremely helpful in sorting out the stories of the bible and the tradition of the Church. Yes, even today in this postmodern world!

And besides that, I would say that it is impossible to avoid forming at least a basic systematic theology. It is human nature to look for unifying themes in things, and to systematize disparate phenomena. We see this in something as simple as looking for pictures in clouds and stars. It is human nature to search for order, or to create order, out of disorder. Besides that, grand systems and basic, set assumptions are still used in this postmodern world in a multitude of other fields, so why would they be less important or irrelevent to people in their quest of knowing God? McKnight says that "truth" is important to emerging Christians and churches, and that they believe Jesus is the truth, and that the Bible is truth, the question is what does that mean? Why is Jesus the truth? What does it mean when it says no one comes to the Father except through Him? Asking all of these questions invariably leads to a theology that works together as a system. Not a perfect system, but a rational system nonetheless.

The problem lies more, I think, with how these systematic theologies have been appropriated in recent years, with certain people making them out to be systems that give an Olympian view of the universe. No theology is that way, though. And while some people do not find long systematic theologies and rational, unifying systems to be spiritually helpful, jettisoning them altogether, or downplaying dogma, is not the answer. In fact, I believe that in the long run, elevating "dialogue" over dogma will be extremely damaging to people spiritually. The two must always be held in a creative tension, which is not easy. Yes, Christianity is journey, and living in truth is a journey, but there is also "truth". The ancient Church, as decentralized and multicultural as that was, saw dogmatic truthes as being very important (e.g. the Christological controversies and the Creeds). What we believe is as important as what we do, and the two overlap and influence each other.

So many movements in the Church are reactionary. They suffer from breaking radically with the past, and denouncing it completely rather than growing from it. We see this in the catholic world with regard to the "hated" Middle Ages. The Middle Ages and everything Medieval seems to have been the whipping boy of the 20th century (and they're not putting down their whips yet!). This movement has a whipping boy too, and it is modernity. But I would be careful about rejecting all that modernity had to offer, especially unifying systems.

The Anglican Eucharist in Ecumenical Perspective

Recently I read The Anglican Eucharist in Ecumenical Perspective: Doctrine and Rite from Cranmer to Seabury, by Edward Echlin, SJ. It was written in 1968, back, I guess, when there was still hope for some sort of a reunion between Anglicans and Roman Catholics. The book is a study of the development of the Anglican Eucharistic rite – specifically the canon of the mass – from the 1549 BCP to the American BCP of 1789. Fr. Echlin concludes that with the 1789 American BCP, all doctrinal requirements of the Roman Church with regard to the mass were fulfilled, and that the Anglican rite – in its American incarnation, anyway – has the right form, and so is a valid mass. He believes that the Eucharistic theology of each tradition has been steadily converging over the centuries, and at the end of the book he makes the radical suggestion that Roman priests should make use of the Anglican rite, and that Anglicans use the Roman rite as a way to show the unity in Eucharistic doctrine that the churches share. He also advocates concelebration of the Holy Eucharist as a further show of unity. Needless to say, the optimism of the late 1960’s gushes out of this book.

I’m sorry to say that I don’t think he really succeeds (much as I want him to) in doing what he set out to do, primarily because he doesn’t explain what the Roman Catholic position is, or what constitutes a valid Eucharist in that tradition. Presumably a valid Roman Eucharist has something to do with sacrifice and Real Presence, as he examines in great detail what a number of Anglican divines thought about those particular topics. But he doesn’t address the issue of Transubstantiation, which is kind of the “main thing”. The only time he addresses that doctrine is with regard to Real Presence, and all but one of the Anglican divines he looks at outright reject Transubstantiation. He also says in the introduction that, in his mind, Roman Catholic Eucharistic thought has been slowly moving closer to the Anglican, just as the Anglican has been moving closer to that of the Romans, but again, he doesn’t really explain how this is the case.

The main value of the book is that it briefly and succinctly examines the theology of Eucharistic sacrifice and Real Presence of a number of important Anglican divines (e.g. Cranmer, Laud, Cosin, Wren, Johnson, Deacon, White, Seabury, Brett, Smith, Forbes, etc.). While they all nitpick and disagree about things like the role of Holy Spirit, whether or not an invocation and oblation is necessary, the nature of the sacrifice, and so on, the one thing that they all seem to agree on is their complete repudiation of the doctrine of transubstantiation. Only John Cosin has a somewhat open mind towards it, when he states that while it is certainly possible through God’s omnipotence, “…none would believe that He would do it as long as it appears to our senses that the substance of the bread still remains whole and entire.” I would agree with Cosin. I personally have no objections to Transubstantiation rightly understood, but I do not subscribe to it. It is best to let mysteries be mysteries.

One of the things that reading this book made me think about that is rather timely is how Samuel Seabury and the American Church used the Scottish non-Juror’s Eucharistic canon of 1764. This was part of a deal that Seabury struck with the Scots for consecrating him when the English bishops would not. In some recent issues of Mandate, Peter Toon suggests that the 1662 BCP Eucharistic rite should be used as the new standard of Anglican liturgies from here on out. His reasons are that it is the most widely used version, and because it is more biblical, with the emphasis on the Lord’s Supper being on the Words of Institution. I think that it would be a betrayal of the Non-Juror bishops to do such a thing here in the United States. If we truly are continuing Anglicans, then we are continuing the work and ministry of the Episcopal Church, and part that includes honoring such commitments that were made by our forefathers. Seabury, interestingly enough, said of the 1662 canon: “To confess the truth, I hardly consider the form to be used as strictly amounting to a consecration.” I don’t know if I would say that myself, but I do believe that we have a strong obligation to continue using the traditional American canon.

St. Andrew's Academy, Lake Almanor, CA

Classical education has been a big trend in Christian schooling in recent years. Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, and others have founded classical schools and classical home school alliances to provide children with a quality education based on time-proven classical and medieval models. Traditional Anglicans are also involved in this movement. Recently I had the great pleasure of interviewing the Rev. Brian Foos, founder and headmaster of St. Andrew’s Academy, a K-12 classical school located in Lake Almanor, CA. He told me all about the amazing things that St. Andrew’s is doing in California and beyond.


St. Andrew’s Academy is in its seventh year as a full time day school. Founded by Fr. Foos, and his wife, it was originally a supplemental program for home schooling parents. Education had been Fr. Foos’ passion and vocation since graduating from college with a degree in English literature and composition, though at the time he was neither ordained nor Anglican. It was while teaching at a small, private school that he learned about and became interested in the classical approach to education. Immediately he began applying those principles in his classroom. Parental concern over whether or not children should read Homer’s Odyssey (because of the violence it contained) lead to Brian writing and presenting a paper defending the arts and the study of the classics for Christians. A colleague who attended the presentation later told Brian that he agreed with everything he said. The two became fast friends, and it was this man who introduced Brian to Anglicanism. So for Fr. Brian, the journey into classical education and Anglicanism were parallel journeys. Later, Brian attended Cranmer House Theological Seminary, and was ordered deacon and priest. Now, in addition to his responsibilities as headmaster, Fr. Foos pastors two APA parishes: Christ the Redeemer Church (Greenville, CA) and St. Thomas Becket Church (Lake Almanor, CA).

Fr. Foos explains that St. Andrew’s Academy is much more than a “movement” school. While “movements” come and go, St. Andrew’s Academy is simply doing what the Church has always done. St. Andrew’s promotes and passes on, not an ideology, but a way of life. Daily life at the school revolves around prayer, study, and work – which is also the school’s motto. Central to the mission of the school is the idea that study must be done in the context of prayer and worship. When separated from worship, study and learning leads to arrogance and pride, but when combined with godly worship, it leads to humility and service to God and man. Nowhere is this approach more evident than in the daily offices of choral matins and evensong services that the school holds. Each student, as well as faculty and staff, participates in these services. They chant the psalms and canticles in Anglican chant and plainsong from the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, thus preserving a great musical tradition. Part of the school from the beginning, the choir is now becoming well known in the Lake Almanor region. They are regularly asked to sing at local churches and venues, and recently sang a series of concerts with the Susanville Symphony Orchestra with over 200 people in attendance at each performance. Last year they sang all of the liturgical music for the APA provincial synod in Indiana, including some very difficult polyphonic pieces.


The curriculum of school is typical of classical schools, with children reading the great classics of western literature, and studying logic, Greek, and Latin. Some faculty members help in writing curriculum, and recently one of their first graduates has come back to teach at the school. St. Andrew’s has a travel program as well, and has taken trips to the British Isles and the East Coast. Plans are in the works for a trip to Italy. Fr. Foos believes that because education is incarnational, real world experiences and travel are an important part of the learning, and forming the whole person. The students come from all sorts of Christian backgrounds: Baptist, non-denominational, Nazarene, Anglican, Roman Catholic, and more. But the ethos and character of the school is thoroughly Anglican.

The biggest need of the school right now is money… money for scholarships, operating expenses, and expansion expenses. The school would like to buy 50 acres of land on which to set up permanent shop (they currently meet in an office park). Indeed, Father Foos hopes that one day St. Andrew’s Academy will be able to become a private boarding school, and for that to happen they need land. God has a definite plan for St. Andrew’s. Each year for the past couple years they have begun the year with a deficit, but the Lord has always provided the funding when they needed it. Prominent individuals, such as Dr. John David Seel, Dr. James Taylor, and General Josiah Bunting, serve on the school’s national advisory board. It is things like that which help confirm that the Lord’s blessing is upon this work.



Right now, I want everyone out there to look at the St. Andrew’s Academy website. Look at the site, and e-mail Fr. Foos if you want to find out more information about this great school and the work they are doing. Order the fantastic CD “A Hearty Rejoicing: Choral Evensong at St. Andrew’s Academy” directly from the school ($15.00) so you can hear for yourself some of they are doing. But more important, won’t you consider helping them meet their financial goals? Won’t you consider sending an offering to the school to help them preserve and hand on our classical Anglican heritage? Thanks be to God, they have gotten very far, and made some significant ground, but they need help to keep going, to expand, and to take it to the next level. Won’t you help? I know that Fr. Foos and his associates would be more than happy to talk to anyone who is interested in finding out more about this great work.

In recent years, it seems like the world has ruined the Church and its institutions and traditions in many ways. Well, Fr. Foos hopes that St. Andrew’s will help ruin the children for the world. Won’t you help them in this great endeavor?

Episcopal Missionary Church joins FACA

The Episcopal Missionary Church has recently voted to join the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas (FACA). According to the articles, the federation has five tasks:

(1) Furthering mutual understanding of its member Provinces, Jurisdictions and Ministries with a view to eventual union when and if deemed practical;

(2) Propagating the truths of the gospel as articulated and practiced in the historic Anglican way;

(3) Taking appropriate public and private steps in common causes in order to speak with one voice and act in concert for the welfare and witness of member Provinces, Jurisdictions and parishes;

(4) Pursuing a communal and charitable relationship with the world-wide Anglican Communion; and

(5) Planting mission parishes in the Americas

I think I speak for all the other members (if I may) in saying that we are thrilled to be working with our brothers and sisters in Christ in the EMC through the federation for the greater glory of Our Lord Jesus Christ in this spiritually destitute world. May the Lord continue to bring about goodwill, unity, and charity among all orthodox Anglicans both here and abroad.

I Asked For Wonder

That is the title of a great book I got for Christmas from my in-laws. It is a spiritual anthology from the writings of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who is one my favorite spiritual writers. When I was in seminary one of my systematics professors would often begin his classes by reading a selection from this book, which is how I found out about Heschel.

He is best described as a Jewish mystic. This particular book is a collection of sayings culled from his full length books on such topics as God, prayer, humanity, sabbath, bible, mystical awe, and more. Here are a few:

On God and Metaphors:
"Only words that would not be trite in the presence of a dying man, only ideas that would not pale in the face of the rising sun or in the midst of a violent earthquake: 'God is One' or: 'Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of Hosts...' may be used as metaphors in speaking of God."

Prayer:
"To pray is to know how to stand still and to dwell upon a word."

Sabbath:
"Judaism teaches us to be attached to holiness in time, to be attached to sacred events, to learn how to consecrate sanctuaries that emerge from the magnificent stream of a year. The sabbaths are our great cathedrals; and our Holy of Holies is a shrine that neither the Romans nor the Germans were able to burn; a shrine that even apostasy cannot easily obliterate: the Day of Atonement."

Religion:
"Religion is not 'what man does with his solitariness.' Religion is what man does with the presence of God."

Man:
"Man is a messenger who forgot the message"

"Man's sin is in his failure to live what he is. being master of the earth, man forgets that he is servant of God."

The Bible:
"The Bible is primarily not man's vision of God, but God's vision of man. The bible is not man's theology, but God's anthropology."

There are many more more quotes, with some of them being quite long, but this gives you an idea of the way he thinks and writes. I would highly recommend his works, and especially this little book, for anyone interested in spirituality and mysticism.

A Bear's Life

Sorry for the lack of posts in recent weeks. No, nothing bad has happened. Yes, everything is great. What have I been up to? Just hibernating! Now I am back.

I am working on a profile about St. Andrew's Academy, an classical Christian school in California which I hope to post very soon. I have also read some interesting books recently that I will comment on. And I have had a few funny experiences that I will relate to you all as well.

Merry Christmas

Everyone have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Can I brag about my anglo-catholic wife for a minute?

My beautiful wife came to Anglicanism through yours truly from a rather liberal Mennonite background. During our dating relationship and short year and a quarter of marriage it has been a joy to see her embrace and grow in the catholic faith in its Anglican expression. She now does it all... beats her chest, genuflects, makes the sign of the cross in all the right places, and she can explain the faith and worship to non-Anglican friends very well. On our very first date I spent a fair amount of time telling her about the Blessed Virgin Mary, and what she has meant to me in my life, and I think honoring Our Lady, and committing our relationship to her, and to her Son, of course, has brought much of this about. She's said and done a number of things that just warm my heart especially, and really make me smile. Here are a few:

When we were looking at wedding gifts after our honeymoon there was a big, huge, crusty old book in bag to us from my aunt. As we were opening the bag to see what it was Valerie said, "Maybe it's a missal!" (Turns out it was just an heirloom family old bible - which is also nice.)

We were watching something on TV the other day, and it showed an Episcopalian "womanpriest" talking about something, and Valerie goes, "Ewww, yuck." Then she changed the channel.

Recently a fellow choir member was loudly complaining about having to sing something that, in his mind, smacked of Marian devotion. So when Valerie comes home she says, "Why be Anglican at all if you do not believe that saints pray for you, or if you do not pray to them yourself?"

Indeed, I struck gold when I met and married Valerie!

Confessions

The greatest part about being a priest is being with people and families at the critical moments of their lives, and bringing the sacramental presence of Christ to bear on whatever situation they are in. Whether it is offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or annointing the sick for healing, it is a great blessing to be a shepherd of souls, and to continue the earthly ministry of Christ and His Church until He comes again.

Hearing confessions has been one of the most incredible experiences of God's grace and mercy. Many confessions I have heard have been a first confession, or from someone who hasn't been in years. It has been great to recommend the sacrament, and teach people about its necessity and place in the Christian life. I have found that most people do not mind making their confession at all. They may not go a lot, or maybe have never even been before, but when you ask them if they want to confess anything privately, and explain to them how it works and what it is all about, they gladly make their confession, and then are overwhelmed at the reconciling love they experience as they encounter Jesus in this beautiful sacrament. I firmly believe in the importance of regular confession in the Christian life.

I don't know how regularly other priests hear confessions (and I do not think priests should hear confessions if they are not regular penitents themselves), but if you do not, and would like to minister to people in this way, I would just make sure you ask people. Like a lot of other things in life, you have to ask people if they want to do it. They might say no, or have nothing to confess at that time, but at least you gave them the opportunity, and they know the offer is always there. But we have to ask. When you sense a moment coming on, where they are pouring their hearts out, why not gently recommend that it be done in the context of the confessional? It is like sales: you can have agreat presentation and product and so on, but if you never get to that point and ask, "Okay, so will you sign the contract?" You might miss out on a lot of sales. I do not like "sales" analogies very much, but it gets my point across. There is so much that we do not have simply because we do not ask.

More Plugs...

In my effort to promote everything traditional and continuing Anglican I have a few new plugs to make everyone aware of:

Great new blog by an APCK Deacon - Words Like Stone

A fantastic new journal of Anglican life and worship - Earth & Altar

And finally, please vote for The Continuum as "best new Anglican blog" over at the Anglican Blog Awards. Continuum is run by Albion Land, Poetreader, Fr. Matthew Kirby, and Fr. Robert Hart. They hosted some lively, but edifying discussions in the past, and will continue to do so in the future.

Prayer Book Catholics

I have a lot of friends who are Presbyterian/Calvinist, and one of the things that they talk about and debate in their circles is the “regulative principle” in worship. Those who adhere to this principle believe that the only things that may be included in the public worship of the Lord are things that are explicitly stated in scripture. This debate goes back to the Reformers themselves, who disagreed on the subject. Now, I have tried, on numerous occasions, to get people who believe in this principle to draw up a sample worship “bulletin” so I can see exactly what the ideal “Reformed” worship service on a typical Sunday would look like. It sounds interesting in theory, but what does it look like in real life? What does it boil down to on a Sunday morning? Well, I have never gotten a sample bulletin/worship service… probably because it cannot be done. The bible, after all, is not a liturgical manual. It’s a paper theory. It doesn’t work out in real life.

Related to this is the problem of so-called “Prayer Book Catholicism” (Note: I speak of this topic in relation to the 1928 American BCP and “liturgy”). Fellow traditional and continuing Anglican bloggers get on their high horse from time to time and denounce anglo-catholic “innovations”, such as the use of the missal, certain vestment styles (showing they care more about clothing and fashion than any anglo-catholic), and more, as being not truly Anglican, or Rome-aping. But when you ask those who adhere to this principle what the Church Year would look like in an authentic “Prayer Book Catholic” parish, you get nothing. Dead silence. Is a Pascal Candle used? Is there an Exsultet? Is there a mass of the pre-sanctified on Good Friday? Are there Stations of the Cross? Is there a form for private confession of sins to a priest and a form for absolution? Are there lessons and carols in Advent? Is a priest vested in a chasuble at his ordination, if so, at what point? The list could go on and on. And the question is: where do we find any of these things in the BCP? Nowhere. Some of them aren’t even addressed in the anti-Ritual Notes book “The Parson’s Handbook”. But I’ll bet a lot, if not most, so-called “Prayer Book Catholics” would not object for one minute to these things. Like those who advocate the regulative principle, when you ask for specific details from the people who advocate this view there is no response. Why? Because Prayer Book Catholicism (in terms of liturgics, anyway) is a myth and a fantasy. If they want to use those things they undermine their position. It doesn’t quite work out in real life.

On page vii of the 1928 BCP there is a note that says that the bishop is allowed to authorize certain “forms” that are not in the BCP. This is good, because the 1928 BCP is too stripped down for solo contemporary use. Even the most low church REC parishes I have attended have always added things to the BCP (usually some sort of adlibbed exhortation after the people have received communion and are still kneeling at the altar rail, but also other things). Personally, I am glad that there is no such thing as a liturgical “prayer book catholic”, because not only do I like the Stations of the Cross and Benediction, but I also like Advent Lessons and Carols, the Blessing of the Hounds, and many other English traditions that Anglican parishes do throughout the year that are not in the BCP. And if the Eucharistic liturgy must be supplemented, I would much rather it be supplemented with the use of the missal’s minor propers, which are mostly Psalms, and if not, are very ancient prayers used during the time of the undivided church (see “The Mass of the Roman Rite” by Jungmann, the authoritative commentary on the development of the Roman mass) than a prayer made up on the spot by the priest. So, to the “prayer book catholics” out there: go ahead and add things to your liturgy and to your Church Year, but realize that in doing so you are right there with us anglo-catholics!

The Lord Be With You, HON.

I am from Baltimore, and after years of denial I finally have the courage to admit that I have a Baltimore accent. It's not awful, but it's there. It is difficult to describe the Baltimore accent, but if you rent a classic John Waters movie like Pink Flamingos you will get an idea of what it is like.

So, my constant struggle is to say mass in such a way that my accent doesn't take over and make the whole thing a terrible mess. This involves careful enunciation, such as making sure I say the "D's" at the end of "and" in just the right way, and so on. But then you can spend so much time focusing on pronunciation that you mispronounce various words... you sort of overcompensate. Or even worse, some men do "fake" English accents, or sound like James Earl Jones when they say mass. There is a balance to be maintained. The key is to say it just right, which is easier said than done.

Some people out there might think that worrying about how to pronounce words, and where to pause in the canon and other prayers, is a waste of time. But we have such a great treasure in the Anglican liturgy that we must, I think, be very careful with such things. It would be like having a great old classic car that is in great shape, but is just a dirty mess... covered in mud, and full of empty candy wrappers inside. I hate it when our liturgy is rushed through, and words are not pronounced correctly, and everything is sloppy. With the Roman Mass it is one thing, or with Rite II, but with the 1928 BCP it just doesn't make sense. Why butcher the pronunciations, and rush through everything when it is written in this beautiful, poetic language? It would be like going to a Shakespeare play and hearing the actors rush through everything. Moreover, I think rushing and mispronouncing actually makes the mass harder to understand.

I can't axe my Baltimore accent completely, but I can at least work on controlling it so it doesn't rear its ugly head at the wrong time - namely at the altar!

Lessons from Television

One of the shows my wife and I love to watch is A Haunting, which is on the Discovery Channel on Thursday nights. This show has reenactments of various true hauntings and demon possessions/activities, mostly in America, but sometimes in other countries too. They interview the actual people involved, and do the whole thing in a really nice way. It is pretty creepy.

I have learned a few things from watching this show, and thought I'd share them with you all:

1) If there is a ghost in your house it always thinks the house belongs to it and wants you out.

2) Don't try to get the house blessed because it only quiets things down for about one month and makes the ghosts more angry and annoyed.

3) Don't call a Wiccan practicioner to come and help you because that also only makes the ghosts more angry and annoyed.

4) Don't presume a Catholic priest can help you, because half the time they are just as scared as you and don't stick around to help.

5) Don't waste time and money on hiring a psychic, because in the end they never do anything except affirm that you are not crazy, and that these things are indeed happening in your house (well, duh).

6) Burning sage leaves does nothing to get rid of ghosts.

7) Basically you just have to move and eat the loss!

Love After Love

A very dear friend gave me this poem by Derrick Walcott a few years ago for my birthday, and recently I redisovered it in my desk drawer. It meant so much to me when she gave it to me. Now, I share with you all. Notice the "eucharistic" imagery.

Love After Love
By Derrick Walcott

The Time will come
When with elation,
You will greet yourself arriving
At your own door, in your own mirror,
And each will smile at the other's welcome,

And say, sit here. Eat.
You will love again the stranger who was your self.
Give wine. Give bread. Give back your heart
To itself, to the stranger who has loved you

All your life, whom you ignored
For another, who knows you by heart.
Take down the love letters from the bookshelf,

The photographs, the desperate notes,
Peel your own image from the mirror.
Sit. Feast on your life.

Once and Future Priest

This past Sunday Rev. Al Kimel of Pontifications was ordained as a priest of the Roman Catholic Church. I, for one, am happy for him and wish him a long and fruitful ministry in the Roman Church. It is a hard thing to leave behind the security of a ministry in one church and enter another church with the possibility of not being ordained in that new church. How does one make a living? How do you put food on the table for the family? It is all very risky, and one cannot help but admire someone like him who lives according to his conscience despite the difficulties that it can bring.

So on that note, I want to take this time to pay tribute to other priests who left ECUSA long before people like Al Kimel did. I want to remember the men who left to join the American Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Catholic Church, the APCK, and other continuing churches, who never received any recognition from anyone. These men were faithful to God and to their consciences. They were faithful catholics who understood the nature of the church as a communio, and that they could not be in communion with "womenpriests" and the bishops who ordained them. And they were faithful Anglicans, who recognized the catholicity of the English Reformation and the Book of Common Prayer, and who sought to preserve the great Anglican tradition. These men gave up rectories, secure livings, and pensions long before Gene Robinson, Barbara Harris, and all of the other yahoos came along, and long before these more recent people have. They saw the writing on the wall back in the late 60's. They were prophets, and like the prophets of old, they were often laughed at, and scorned by everyone else. But in the end, they were right... ECUSA ended up exactly where they said it would. Maybe one of the reasons continuing Anglicans are so maligned by others sometimes is because we were right about these things all along. And if these men were right about that, then maybe they were also right about the catholicity of Anglicanism, and how Anglicans always have been, and always will be a branch of Christ's one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We would do well to listen to their witness. May the sacrifice that these brave men made for the Kingdom of God never be forgotten. Who knows how their lives and ministries have borne fruit, and will continue to bear fruit for the glory of Jesus Christ until He comes again.

Strategic Planning and Continuing Anglicans

A friend who goes to my old parish is big into the importance of strategic planning. He has been using his expertise and training in that area to help the parish develop and hone its vision and mission, and to plan for the future for the glory of God. After working with him briefly on that, and doing some of my own thinking and reflection on the subject, I am more and more convinced that not only parishes, but also dioceses and provinces, need to take strategic planning more seriously. It is very simple: if there is no plan for anything - nothing will happen. Put another way, if you aim at nothing you will hit it. Making a strategic plan is saying: "This is where we want to be in X years, and this is how we are going to get there." Any serious business would have a plan, and let's face it: the church has a lot in common with a business.

I think one of the reasons continuing Anglicans have been so ineffective, maligned, and marginalized over the years is because of a lack of strategic planning and vision on the part of the leadership. Lofty but vague ideas such as "preserving orthodoxy" or "standing for tradition" are not good enough to serve as a strategic plan. A plan is more precise than that, and includes specific actions to be taken. Plans that need to be made, or concerns that need to be addressed with a plan, include: standards for parish catechesis; church planting and missions; ministrial credentialing; ecumenism and inter-church relations; development of educational and other resources (publications, etc.); fundraising; and the list could go on forever.

One of the things that mitigates against developing such strategies is a misunderstanding of our heirarchical form of church government. It is often wrongly assumed that a top-down form of government means that the bishop and the standing committee has to do everything, and have their hands in everything. When a diocese or province is small, that model works fairly well, and is probably essential. But as the church grows, those peoples' work loads soon become maxed out, so any further growth becomes impossible. Then things begin to grind to a halt, and no more progress is made. Establishing new committees to oversee particular initiatives, such as an education committee that would develop diocesan catechetical standards and resources, is a way to relieve the bishop and the standing committee from unneccesary work, and a way to make better use of our existing human resources. It is also a way to get more people (especially the laity) invovled in the church. Many hands make light work. This in no way undermines our biblical model of church government, but rather enriches it, and helps make us more faithful to St. Paul's teaching of the Church as a "body". The bishop, as chief pastor of the diocese, can be the figurehead, cheerleader, and facilitator of such a process.

I would like to see the bishops and standing committees of all continuing Anglican provinces develop a strategic five-year plan and vision for their Church so as to make better use of their time and resources, and to advance the Kingdom of God and spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is ultimately a question of stewardship - how are we going to spend our time and money? Are we going to get the most out of it, or very little out of it? A plan would help us be more effective. It would also help us focus on ministering to people instead of squabbling with each other.

Consecrations Performed by Bishops Outside of the Offical Anglican Communion

In his book A Guide to the Sacraments, John MacQuarrrie makes this comment in one of his chapters on ordination:

"Even in quite recent times, individuals who have at some time received episcopal ordination (or consecration) but who are not acting in the name of any church or with the consent of any church authority have ordained (or gone through the motions of ordaining) deacons, presbyters, and even other bishops. Whether their actions are valid must be considered doubtful, though I have said a number of times in the course of this book that the action of the Holy Spirit cannot be limited to what is permitted by ecclesiastical laws." (pp.200-201)

He seems to be condemning episcopi vagantes, or "wandering bishops", who were not part of established churches, and who sometimes ordained and consecrated men without flocks. But his remarks could possibly be construed as condemning Anglicans like we continuers, and others who had to take "extreme" measures to preserve and continue the orthodox faith. I do not want to put words in his mouth, but the thought did cross my mind.

All of this was in the back of my mind while doing research recently on Samuel Seabury for a talk I had to give at the local Scottish Society. I came across this insightful passage in the newly published Oxford Guide to the Book of Common Prayer:

"There he met with an obstacle: the establishment of the established church, and specifically the oath of allegience required of every new bishop. Seabury, no longer a British subject, could hardly take such an oath. The English bishops, though not unsympathetic, could not dispense with it on their own. The government, for largely political reasons, declined to cooperate. So it was that in November 1784 the service at which Dr. Seabury became Bishop Seabury took place in Aberdeen and the ordaining prelates were Nonjuring Scots, who themselves were not bound to the Anglican establishment." (pp.172-173; my emphasis)

The lesson here is that being outside of the "official Anglican establishment" doesn't necessarily unchurch anyone.

Look, a new jurisdiction! (and more blogs)

Raise that total number of continuing Anglican jurisdictions to 80! I just saw a CD in the record store by John Mayer called "Continuum". Since it has the word "continuum" it must be another one of those pesty "continuing Anglican" jurisdictions! Quick, alert VOL and Anglicans Online! And a google search on "continuum" reveals video games, and many other things that are also probably continuing Anglican jurisdictions!

Please note, I am being sarcastic here. This just goes to show you that not everything that says "continuing" or "continuum" is legitimate. On that note, I want to highlight four new blogs that have recently come to my attention:

Ecclesia Anglicana Continua - by the Very Rev'd Erich Zwingert, SSC (APA priest)
John One Five - by the Rev'd David Baumann, SSC (FiFNa priest)
Apology of Miscellanies - by Mr. Andrew Presler (APA postulant)
Apologetics Galore - by Mr. David H (APA layman)

The first one is especially helpful in light of recent discussion as to what is a legitmate "continuing" Anglican church. What a joy it is to see how alive and well traditional Anglicanism is! On "Apologetics Galore" there are some great pictures of the new building of St. Barnabas (APA) in Georgia. I look forward to seeing what these gentleman have to say about things, and encourgae everyone else to do the same.

Current Reading

After being interrupted by a million things, I have finally finished reading A Guide to the Sacraments by John MacQuarrie. I would not recommend this book as an introduction to the sacraments or to sacramental theology as it is not very detailed, but I do think that it would be good for someone immersed in a Ludwig Ott/Francis Hall approach to the sacraments to read, as it discusses them on more of broad, conceptual and philosophical level in the context of postmodernity. Like a lot of MacQuarrie's works, it is mind-expanding and quite thought-provoking. The older books like Hall and Ott have their place - one must know and master the traditional formulations and ideas - but they are unsuitable in and of themselves in today's postmodern situation.

My reading schedule, incidently, consists of short reads and long reads read concurrently. The sacraments book was a quick read, as it is short (200 pages) and the topic is familiar to me. My "long read" has been "Jesus and the Victory of God" by N.T. Wright. I plan on getting a few more short reads in while reading this long one.

So, my next "short read" is actually going to be a re-read: Creative Fidelity by Francis Sullivan, SJ. This book is required reading at many US Catholic seminaries. I had to read it as part of my Fundamental Theology class. The author was a professor at the Gregorian University (where many future bishops and theologians of the Church go) for many years. It is about how to weigh and interpret the documents of the magesterium. This book is so important because it shows that nothing can escape the need for interpretation and reinterpretation, not even papal documents. It discusses what dogma is; what magesterium in its various forms is; how to identify defined dogmas in papal documents; the disagreements Catholic theologians have on what these defined dogmas are and how the number of them has shrunk over the years; and it gives examples of interpretation in action. It is a very well-written and fascinating book that should be read by every Catholic and Anglican.

One of the most interesting parts about it is the afterward, where Sullivan (who, to my knowledge, is considered a centrist/conservative theologian) addresses Ordinatio Sacerdotalis by JPII, which is about the ordination of women. Sullivan does the "Catholic fudge" and says that the magesterium has not spoken infallibly on the issue, and that CDF's 11/18/1995 statement saying it has been infallibly taught, and that it is part of the Deposit of Faith is wrong. Hmmmmm. Fascinating. Then he writes: "The changes in church doctrine that have actually taken place in the course of history show that a tradition could hold firm until advances in human knowledge or culture obliged the church to look at the question in a new light. Through honest reexamination of its tradition in this new light, the church has sometimes come to see that the reasons for holding to its previous position were not decisive after all." (pp. 181-184)

Yikes.

Happy Birthday

November 7th was the two-year anniversary of this blog. I wish to thank everyone who reads and comments. You all have taught me a lot. Blogs are a lot of work to maintain - a monster that must constantly be fed. In that sense blogging is somewhat annoying. But all of the people that you "meet", and the interesting discussions that you have make it worthwhile. I like to think that this blog, those who comment, and those blogs which I link to, contribute something to peace, unity, and goodwill amongst traditional and continuing Anglicans.

When I first began this blog it was intended to be annonymous - a way for me to "vent". But as people began reading this thing (much to my surprise, I might add; I remember how shocked I was when I saw that someone had made a comment!), and then people figured out it was me, rather than shutting it down I decided to keep it going and tried to expand it some so as to increase the visibility of "continuing Anglicans" on the web. Prior to this blog there were no "continuing Anglican" blogs that I am aware of (please correct me if I am wrong), save for "Wanna Be Anglican", which, strictly speaking, was REC, and so predates the continuing movement. Now there are a number of good continuing blogs, a continuing Anglican blog ring (special thanks goes to Continuing Home for starting that), as well as more REC blogs. All of this shows that traditional Anglicanism is alive and well, and has successfully begun to move into the 21st century. May we traditional Anglicans go into this new century with a spirit of ministry and evangelism, and with our peculiar gifts and tradition, bring the Good News of Jesus Christ to a world that so desperately needs it. Blessings to all.

J. Gordon Anderson+

What are the 53?

People are fond of talking about the numerous "continuing churches". Just yesterday I read an article on VOL that mentions the "53 continuing churches". I would love to see a list of these. Anglicans Online has a "not in the communion" list, but I don't think it adds up to 53 different jurisdictions (e.g. the "No Way APA" site, which they have in that list, is not a jurisdiction, but an opinion site). The Wikipedia entry on continuing Anglicanism lists some jurisdictions too, but they do not add up to "53". So I don't know where people get this bizarre number from. Honestly, I think much of it is an attempt to discredit the legitimate jurisdictions out there which hold to catholic faith and order (traditional BCPs, a male-only priesthood, authority of the scriptures, etc.).

True, anyone can here in America, or just about anywhere else, can start his own church, hierarchy, etc. And it can be done in the context of any tradition. But that does not mean that all of these churches are "equal", or legitimate. If people are confused about "continuing" Anglicanism, and which jurisdictions are legitimate, they should look at the links in the "not in the communion" list. They will see that half of them are dead, some are "two parish - ten bishop" jurisdictions, and so on. In short, it is very easy to figure out which jurisdictions are legitimate. The legitimate ones have a fair number of established parishes, clear cut rules and laws, organization, and institutions. They are committed to evangelism and ecumenism. So, don't believe the hype. As my former spiritual director put it, "There are 'continuing churches' and then there are continuing churches." I think most people recognize this, and can see this, but still, it bears mentioning.

Take thou authority...

Recently I had the pleasure of attending the ordination of the Rev'd Tracy Smith to the sacred order of priests in the APA. The beautiful liturgy was held at St. Mary the Virgin Anglican Church in Delray Beach, Florida. You can see pictures on their website. This was the first time I have participated in the "holy huddle", or "laying on of hands", where all the priests present join the bishop in laying hands on the ordinand.

Priests ordained in the APA are of course ordained using the ordinal from 1928 BCP. In addition to what is in the ordinal, the following is added by the bishop:

As the stole is turned priest-wise, the bishop says:
"Take thou the yoke of the Lord, for his yoke is easy and his burden is light."

As the priest is vested in the chasuble, the bishop says:
"Receive this preistly garment which symbolizes charity; for God is well able to give thee an increase of charity and a perfect work."

As the priests hands are annointed and wrapped, and the instruments are presented, the bishop says:
"Take thou authority to offer sacrifice to God, and to celebrate Mass for both the quick and the dead. In the Name of the Lord."

I believe all of this comes originally from the old Sarum pontifical, and was adapted for modern use in the Anglican Service Book. It goes without saying, that excluding these elements from an ordination in no way invalidates the rite, or makes that person less of a catholic priest. Still, I am glad that we have this custom in the APA, as it does away with any misconceptions about what is going on at an ordination.

"The Monastery" - Great New TV Series

There is a great new program on Sunday nights on The Learning Channel called “The Monastery”. It is about five men who are at a crossroads in their lives who go to the Monastery of Christ in the Desert to live with the Benedictine monks there for forty days and forty nights. They are supposed to be looking for clarity, purpose, and meaning in life. The first episode was last night. One guy, an ex- Hollywood screenwriter, has been in recovery for 30 years; another is a 23-year old combat-wounded vet from Iraq; there’s a guy who is a former Satanist that came to know the Lord and now wants to be an Episcopal priest; there’s an ex-gang member who now helps kids get off the street in Massachusetts; and there’s a paramedic/ex-Marine. They are all at varying stages in their spirituality. Some believe in God, some do not. Two are lapsed Catholics, and two are “nothing”.

It is fascinating to see how they adjust to monastic life. They live just as the monks do and swear obedience to the abbot while there. The strict routine is very hard for them – even the ex-Marines. They cannot deal with the silence and stillness very well, either. One guy – the veteran – admits that he can’t sit still for more than two minutes, so obviously he has a hard time with the services. I wonder how their lives will change, if at all, after the forty days are up? The most interesting thing to me was seeing the incredible stupidity and arrogance of the two ex-Marines (no offence to anyone out there serving, or who has served, in the armed forces). The one guy is just a kid with no education, so his idiotic ramblings are to be expected. The older one (who now serves as a paramedic, and witnesses lots of death and violence that he is trying to come to grips with) is bitterly cynical about everyone and everything. All he does is insult everyone, and make sarcastic remarks every few minutes. They are constantly challenging the rules of the community in small ways, prompting the monks to have meetings with them, and get them back into line. All in all it is quite interesting, and I highly recommend it.

The thing about this new series that makes it near and dear to me, though, is that I took a weeklong retreat at this monastery back in 2000 when I was in seminary. Many of the people on the show I met – the abbot, Prior Christian, Brother Andre, Father Joseph (he was just visiting the monastery for the first time when I was there, actually) etc. In fact, I still support the monastery when they send out their letters asking for financial help. That period when I visited the monastery was a very difficult time in my life. I was alienated from everyone and everything, abandoned by all but a few friends, and to a large extent by my family, who didn’t want me to be in seminary preparing for the priesthood. I was an outsider at the seminary, and an outsider at work. My girlfriend dumped me at a bar a few months earlier. I was dirt poor… so poor I could barely afford to eat and buy the most basic supplies I needed to get by (I was so poor I had to sometimes steal rolls of toilet paper form work because I couldn’t afford to buy any!). Top all of that off with living alone, and having to read and write papers all the time for seminary, and you have the recipe for serious and major funk. My life had become like a Hank Williams song. So it was under those circumstances that I decided to take a cleansing pilgrimage/roadtrip/retreat to Christ in the Desert. I drove with friend from Baltimore to Abiquiu New Mexico in my old beat-up 1986 Buick century sedan (the radio didn’t work, neither did the dashlights, so we sang songs to each other on the trip out and back). I chain-smoked to occupy the time. On the way out, we swung through Oklahoma City to see the destruction from and memorial of the infamous bombing. When we finally arrived at the monastery we were warmly received by the brothers. There was no direction or guided retreat from the brothers, and guests were not required to go to the services. You literally just make reservations, and show up, and then you’re on your own. We were, however, required to help do work around the grounds. In my week there, in addition to cleaning, I dug a trench and laid some electrical conduit, and helped pour the foundation for their refectory. And of course you have to eat with the monks since it takes an hour to drive out to the main road, and another hour or so to get anywhere near civilization. The atmosphere at the monastry was beautiful and serene. There was no electricity, no noise allowed… no nothing. Just God, and the chanting of the Psalms and prayers ascending up through the canyon to Him in the vastness of the sky. The liturgies were beautiful – in fact, that was where I first learned to read chant notation. The long road trip out and back; the solemn prayers, chants, and liturgy; the hot sun and dry desert; the cold nights; the hard physical labor; eating joint meals in silence with the brothers; and the quiet and lack of technology cleansed and healed me. It made me see that somehow God was bigger than all of my problems, and that His love was like a vast ocean washing over me, and through me. My life was changed by going there; I hope that happens with these guys on the cable TV show. When I returned home from the monastery, the troubles in church and life were only just beginning, and I went through another dark night of the soul. But I am convinced that had I not been to Christ in the Desert I would not have survived that difficult time to come.

Bad Vicar Video

Go to Remnant Anglican and check out this hilarious video from YouTube. It wouldn't be so funny if it weren't true! As one comment noted, it makes fun of obnoxious, angry, stand-offish priests, and also loosy-goosy new-ager/"spiritual" people.

Biretta Tip: Jeffrey Baus

ACA Votes to Join FACA

The Anglican Church in America voted recently to join the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas. Read about it here. Soon, by the grace of almighty God, the corporate disunity of the continuum will be a thing of the past. Thanks be to God.

On a slightly related subject, the bishops of the APA and REC have issued a wonderful pastoral letter on unity in the Church. The official title is: True Unity by the Cross of Christ For the Spread of the Gospel. I invite you all to read it here. My own bishop, the Most. Rev. Walter Grundorf had this to say about it on the APA wesbite:

Feast of St. Michael and All Angels
September 29, 2006

To: Clergy and Leadership of the Anglican Province of America
From: Bishops of the REC/APA

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

Enclosed for you to read, mark, learn and inwardly digest is the recent Pastoral Letter issued jointly by the Bishops of the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America. I hope that you will not only carefully read and consider this letter yourself, but will share it with your parishes. It is critical that those of us who call ourselves Traditional or Classical Anglicans come together for the cause of the Gospel and take seriously our Lord's words about being one. Our Lord did not offer unity as a suggestion, but as part and parcel of the Gospel. We must logically begin with unity among fellow Traditional Anglicans with whom we share much in common. Overcoming fear in dealing with other Anglicans seems to be the most difficult part of this process. We must work our way through our unfortunate experiences of past failed unions, trusting in the healing of the Holy Spirit to move us on in the power of Christ's Love (II Tim. 2:7).

We are in the midst of a battle for the heart and soul of Anglicanism as we have received it. There is much heartbreak and confusion among so many who are disillusioned by the established church and are looking for safe harbor. People who are searching are further confused by the plethora of churches on the internet that claim to be Anglican. How does one choose when all continuing churches appear to be the same?

By forging relationships with legitimate Anglican bodies, we hope that those who are in searach of a faithful jurisdiction will find us. I pray that the Lord will lay it upon all of our hearts to consider well the responsibiity we have in attaining unity among our fellow orthodox Anglican breothers and sisters. May we find in the Cross of our Lord Jesus that perfect unity.

Faithfully yours,

(Signed)+Walter H. Grundorf

The Most Rev. Walter H. Grundorf, D.D. Bishop of the Diocese of the Eastern US, Presiding Bishop APA

Jesus Christ - The Exemplar of the Sacraments

I am reading John MacQuarrie's fun little book A Guide to the Sacraments, and in it he makes an interesting point on how Jesus Christ is not only the author and minister of the sacraments, but is also the exemplar of them. That is to say, he posseses annd exemplifies the grace which they bring about in whoever receives them.

Building on the work of Kenan Osbourne, he comes up with a chart to show what he means:

The Baptized One/Baptism - Jesus - Faith
The Confirmed One/Confirmation - Jesus - Perserverence
The Really Present One/Eucharist - Jesus - Self-Giving
The Reconciler/Penance - Jesus - Penitence
The Priest/Orders - Jesus - Service
The Lover/Marriage - Jesus - Love
The Healer/Unction - Jesus - Wholeness

In reference to baptism, for example, MacQuarrie writes: "Just as Jesus understood his own baptism as that solemn moment when he must embark on the high mission to which the Father had called him, fortified by the Holy Spirit that now rested upon him, so one who receives Christian baptism is called to follow in the way of Jesus and receives the same spirit"

Regarding penance, we understand that, as representative man, the new Adam, Jesus is the reconciled. He writes: "If we try to get away from our all-too-individualistic ways of thinking and see Jesus Christ in solidarity with the whole of humanity, then it will not seem strange to us that even as he justifies the whole race by realizing God's intention of humanity, so he also takes the sins of the race upon himself and repents of them."

One gets the idea of where MacQuarrie would go with the rest of the sacraments. This is just an amazing concept to me - Christ being not only the author and minister, but also the exemplar of the sacraments. So obvious, but something I had never even thought of or heard articulated before.

Great New Blog

Here is a link to the one of the best and most useful Anglican blogs I have seen to date:

http://anglicaneucharistictheology.blogspot.com/

I highly recommend that everyone who has an interest in Anglican eucharistic theology read this blog.

(Biretta tip: Jeffrey Steel)

Deep Theoogical Reflection of the Day

I was watching a rerun of the Dukes of Hazzard the other day and noticed that there is an uncanny resemblance between Boss Hogg and the pope.

The pope dresses in all white and wears a fancy hat; so does Boss Hogg.

The pope rules over the Vatican City; Boss Hogg rules over Hazzard County.

The pope has the Vatican as his HQ; Boss Hogg has the Boar's Nest.

The pope has a fancy car - the popemobile; Boss Hogg has his white convertible with the steer horns on the front of it.

The pope has a fancy chair - the throne of St. Peter; Boss Hogg has a fancy chair - his barber chair

The pope is surrounded by smoke - incense; Boss Hogg is surrounded by smoke - cigars

The pope has his doctrinal enforcer/watchdog - the head of the CDF; Boss Hogg has his - Sheriff Roscoe Pete Coltrane

The pope speaks English with a heavy accent - so does Boss Hogg

The pope has people that cause him a great deal of trouble and try to usurp his authority - schismatics, heretic, etc.; Boss Hogg has the Duke boys.

The pope is sort of friends with the ABC, who has a big bushy beard and a big church/communion that he can barely keep together. The two go way back, but the pope would really like to see the ABC and his communion submit to papal authority; Boss Hogg has a similar relationship with Uncle Jesse (who has a big bushy beard). He is always scheming to take over Uncle Jesse's farm, which is constantly teetering on the brink of financial disaster, and lock up the Duke Boys.

Is this a coincidence? Could the Dukes of Hazzard serve as a metaphor for the church in an even larger way? What about Daisy Duke, Cooter, and the General Lee? What about Roscoe's pet basset hound that rides around with him? The possibilities for theological reflection are endless. Hmmmm, I think I know what I am going to do my ph.d about. Yee haw!

My New Hero - 81 Year Old Man Building a Cathedral

There is very little that I read in the news that takes me by surprise, and that I think about for days and days after I've read it. Like most Americans I suppose I have been desensitized to all of the violence and disaster that most news programs focus on, so I read a news story and forget it the next day. This story is different, though. When I read it I thought, "This guy is my new hero."

The man, an ex-Trappist monk in Spain (who is 81), is building his own cathedral. He's been working on it with friends, family, and other helpers for around 45 years. He has no architect, no construction experience, no money for such a huge undertaking, no building permits, no permission from the Church (but also no prohibitions). He just started building a cathedral. It is made out of whatever he can find and get - old tires, bicycle parts, leftover construction material, etc. He didn't have enough money to rent a crane to lift the frame for the dome into place, so he and his six nephews hoisted it up using pulleys made from old bicycles. It looks pretty good so far... actually it looks amazing considering all of this.

Visionaries like this blow my mind. It shows just how amazing the human spirit is, and what a man devoted to God can do, or will try to do. This man is a saint, and a true artist. Maybe someday I too will build a cathedral.

Good Scripture Scholarship

I am almost finished reading The New Testament and the People of God by N.T. Wright. I can't wait to read the next two books in the series, and then see where he takes the the whole project (it is supposed to be a total of five volumes). This book, and his whole method, is so refreshing after spending years at the "brainwash center" (i.e. the "tepid and centrist" Roman Catholic seminary that I attended) being force fed warmed-over Bultmann with a big greasy slab of J.P. Meier of "A Marginal Jew" fame, thrown in on the side.

One of the reasons that I like N.T. Wright so much is that he really seems to take the texts themselves seriously and as essentially reliable historical documents. And even though he does this, he also pays attention to the fact that they are biased "interpretations", so it is a very balanced approach overall. He sets the NT in its historical context - where it came from, and what it lead to - instead of spending page after page going over the intricacies of "Markan priority", or some other obscure feature of NT studies. In other words, he gives the reader a big picture of the worldview of an ancient Jew and Christian, and so brings the sacred texts to life in a new way. He also corrects some faulty notions along the way, such as Bultmann and others' understanding of "apocalypse", seeing it as something that is very this-worldy rather than as a cataclysmic destruction of the universe (alien to Jewish thought). Needless to say he backs up everything he says with immense erudition and scholarship.

It seems to me that other NT scholars focus on the wrong things in their work a lot of the time (Meier, for example). While they purport to believe in the texts as "powerful theological stories" they never seem to get around to talking about the stories themselves and what the stories are trying to teach. They spend too much time deciding what "did and didn't actually happen", and rehashing and rexplaining old theories like the "messianic secret" for the millionenth time. That stuff does have its place, and should be studied by students and scholars, but all too often that becomes the end goal in biblical studies rather than the story that is being told.

So if you are tired of how biblical studies have been done for so long, do not despair. Read N.T. Wright. You will be plesantly surprised.

I'm not a web designer, but....

Here is the website for my new parish:

www.stmarksvero.org

Alphabet Soup

I am reading Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell, which is the story of his involvement in the Spanish Civil War. It is a great little book. Last night I read a passage that reminded me of continuing Anglicanism. He wrote:

"The revolutionary atmosphere of Barcelona had attracted me deeply, but I made no attempt to understand it. As for the kaleidoscope of political parties and trade unions, with their tiresome names - PSUC, POUM, FAI, CNT, UGT, JCI, JSU, AIT, - they merely exasperated me. It looked at first site as though Spain were suffering from a plague of initials. I knew that I was serving in something called the POUM (I had only joined the POUM militia rather than any others because I happened to arrive in Barcelona with ILP papers), but I did not realize that there were serious differences between the political parties. At Monte Pocero, when they pointed to the position on our left and said: 'Those are the Socialists' (meaning the PSUC), I was puzzled and said: 'Aren't we all Socialists?' I thought it idiotic that people fighting for their lives should have seperate parties; my attitude always was, 'Why can't we drop this political nonsense and get on with the war?'"

He goes on in the same vein. This passage instantly reminded me not only of the alphabet soup of traditional Anglican groups, but also how distracting it all is from our mission to fulfill the Great Commission of Our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.

Our Plans vs. God's Plans

Many people going into full time Christian service present God with a little list explaining to Him exactly what kind of ministry they will be doing at the various points in their lives. They tell God that they are going to serve as a missionary for three years, and then pastor a parish for five years, then go to grad school and do a research degree in something, etc. They have it all figured out and are "informing God" of the way things are "going to be."

It can be rather comical, then, when we realize that God will have His way with us no matter what we have planned. One might think that he is going to go into a full time teaching ministry, for example, when all of sudden God calls him to go and serve a parish... even if he is scared to death of parish work. Or one might think that she is called to be a homemaker and administrative assistant, when all of a sudden God calls her to the mission field. God will have His way with us no matter what, as the stories of the bible - from Joseph to Saul of Tarsus - teach us.

The point is to always be open to where and how God is calling us to serve. Just because we may not have opportunities in the area of ministry that we have imagined we'd serve in doesn't mean that God cannot or will not use us in some other way. He may intend for us to doing something very different than we've imagined. Just as He called Moses, who had speech impediment or something like that, to be His spokesman before pharoah, so He may be calling each of us to serve Him in some previously unimagined way.

Buildings

It is a great joy to serve as curate in as beautiful a parish church as St. Mark's APA. Many, but by no means all, continuing church buildings are rather modest to say the least, and I have worshipped in a lot of these "modest" buildings. But honestly, it never bothered me that much. Worshipping the Lord in a small, rented building, basement, etc. is as wonderful and as valid as worshipping the Lord in a cathedral. As long as there is a valid sacrament, and the word of God is truly preached, I am fine. Everyone has to start somewhere. St. Mark's once met in a metal shed-like structure out by the Vero Beach airport!

I truly believe that many (not all) people do not consider joining "continuing" churches because the buildings are often very modest. Yes, people today are that shallow. They are more concerned with externals, and are not willing to go help start a new church with their time, presence, or money. One wonders if people of this mindset would have become Christians in ancient times, when there were no fancy buildings, organs, vestments, and you could possibly be killed for being a believer. Probably not.

Picasso in the Vatican?

Here is an article from Zenit on how a curator is trying to find a suitable to Picasso to add to the Vatican art collection. The rub is this: why would the Vatican want art by someone who painted hardly any religious art, and basically completely objected to the moral dictates of the Christian faith? If you ask me, though, that should not be an issue. The collection should hold great art that has Christian themes as its subject matter.

I suspect, though, that many people would object to a Picasso being placed in the collection because of his abstract style of painting, which they wrongly assume is contrary to Christianity in some way. But really they should not think this way, as it was Aristotle who thought that the best art was that which imitated nature perfectly. Abstract art is not anti-Christian in any way in and of itself. In fact, some of the best Christian art is abstract (e.g. icons), that is to say it is an abstraction of something in nature (abstraction in art is different from non-objectivity in art). Medieval art is also very abstract and out of proportion. So the idea that the best Christian art is that which best represents the natural world simply doesn't fly. In fact, we have no way of knowing how well men such as Leonardo, Strozzi, Poussin, and others really represented what they were painting, as we do not possess photos of those who sat for them.

The Vatican collection (which I have been to) has wonderful examples of art by artists such as Bernard Buffet and Ben Shahn (not even a Christian) who painted in a very abstract manner. So why not add a Picasso to this collection, if a good one can found?

Reappraisal of the AMiA's Policy of Ordaining Women to the Deaconate

Here is a link to an article written by the Rev'd J.S.S. Patterson regarding this important issue. The article is on the side bar of his parish's website in .pdf format.

(Biretta tip: Fr. Chandler Holder Jones, SSC)

Update and New CD

Sorry I have not posted anything recently. We just arrived in Vero Beach, Florida on Monday. After going through seven straight days of moving "hell" (packing, unpacking, etc.) things are finally beginning to calm down a bit. There is no internet connection where we are staying, so I have to drive a few miles to Panera Bread to use their free wi-fi network. I hope to go back to regular posting soon.

I will leave you all with this. Just before moving I bought a new CD by the Choir of King's College called "Gregorian Chant". It consists of the Sarum mass for the Octave of the Nativity of the BVM, and first vespers for the same. It is a gorgeous recording (I think they do Gregorian Chant very well), and it contains the entire service, including the chanted Epistles, Gospel, preface, etc. I recommend it!

School's Been Blown to Pieces

Someone stole my most recent copy of New Oxford Review from the mail (theft of mail is big problem in my experience in Baltimore ), so I had them send me another. And I am so glad I did, because in this issue is an article in it on the sorry state of Catholic Schools here in the U.S. As a former Catholic school teacher myself, it really hit a nerve. The man's basic point is that the schools are not teaching "official" Catholic theology.

The Archdiocese of Baltimore's policy is that anyone can teach in a Catholic, so long as it is not the religion class, which must be taught by a "practicing" Catholic. So at my school, me, and two other students were the only Catholics. The science teacher was an armchair Buddhist. The English teacher was some kind of Baptist (a woman) who was also an "ordained minister". The principal was a Lutheran - which officially was in violation of archdiocesan policy (the principal must be Catholic, so they just gave her a different title). The other teachers didn't even go to church. So it was a real grab bag.

The problem with this approach is that it assumes faith and "religion" doesn't have any impact on other fields of study. It seperates faith and life. But religions are always part of a larger worldview, and the different elements in a worldview build on and interact with each other. One need only watch the evening news to see how the scientific establishment and the Catholic Church go at it over issues like embryonic stem cell research and so on. How important, then, for the science teacher to be in tune with Church's teaching. So, the archdiocese's "open" policy is really not very wise in my opinion (unless of course they want to continue to ruin the Catholic Church, which maybe they do). It undermines the wholistic mission of the Catholic Church. Conservative Protestant/Reformed schools are much better in my opinion in hiring people who "tow the party line". Why the Catholics don't do that, and don't see the benefits in it is beyond me.

Church Insurance Program

Does anyone know which continuing Anglican jurisdictions have insurance programs for clergy and other employees? The APA and REC do not. I think the ACC had one at some point. What about the others (APCK, DHC, ACA, etc.)? I have been doing some research on this and would like to know. Thanks!

The Anglican Federation

Here is a link to the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas which is an umbrella group to promote communication, fellowship, and cooperation among the various Anglican bodies in the states. I would encourage everyone to have look at this.

On another note, I was looking at 'members' section, and went to the AMiA's website, and it is very nice looking. Why do so many other Anglican jurisdictions have such bad looking websites? The best that I have seen so far are the AMiA's and APCK's (a big improvement over their last one). The APA's, REC's, ACC's, and ACA's are really bad and unprofessional looking. They reflect badly on our churches. The continuing churches might not be able to errect a bunch of stately new parish churches everywhere, but we could at least hire professional web designers to make a nice looking websites for the national church instead of all of this "mom and pop" stuff.

Resurrection Window

This past weekend I had the privledge of celebrating the Holy Eucharist at St. Mark's Church, Vero Beach, where I will soon be serving as curate. St. Mark's has a gorgeous set of windows by artist Lyn Durham who is one of the top painters in the American stained glass field. I will be posting pictures of the various windows for everyone to see them. Here is the "Resurrection" window. This is only the center lancet. It is actually a tryptych.

You would be surprised at how many people in churches never look at what is in their church building. When I was in the stained glass field, I would point out details of windows to vestrymen and pastors, and they would be amazed at what I'd show them. Of course, if they only took a few minutes to actually look at the art up close they'd see those things too. It is like people never taking time to ponder a doctrine of the faith, like the resurrection, or the afterlife. They have in their mind a set idea of what the doctrine is all about, but because they never actually think about it beyond what is already in their own mind, they often have erroneous ideas (like "heaven" being a big golden main street with lots of mansions on it), or they don't fully appeciate whatever doctrine it may be.

May God grant us eyes to see, and ears to hear, and the grace to always be looking.

Add Your Parish to this Map

Go to this site and add your continuing Anglican parish to this map. It takes just a second.

New Mindset for Evangelism

I have written before that it is sometimes frustrating to be Anglican in the sense that Anglicanism can be hard for the outsider to understand. People don't know if it is protestant, or catholic, both, or neither. And then if they do know something about it, one must go through and explain how "episcopal" and "Anglican" are the same thing, but really they're not, and so on. So the whole thing can be very frustrating and confusing at times.

Well, now I have decided to change my mindset regarding this, and turn frustration into opportunity. Instead of being mildy annoyed at always having to explain the Anglican way (since people know so little about it) I try to see it as an opportunity to get in protracted conversation with someone about the Lord Jesus Christ. This is especially good with the unchurched. They might not have any interest in Jesus, or in going to church, but they always seem to have a curiosity about "something new" that they haven't heard of before (like Paul on Mars Hill in the Acts of the Apostles). Already this mindset as yielded some good conversations where I was able to present the claims of Jesus Christ clearly and unequivocally. And naturally the convesation turns to the doctrines of the faith, such as sacraments, the scriptures, etc., so a whole variety of topics can be discussed all based on the question, "Anglican? What's that?" So I would definitely encourage us all to use the fact that people know so little about Anglicanism as a springboard for a conversation about Jesus. The same can be done with the current Episcopal Church crisis.

I don't think we do enough one-on-one evangelism, where we actually sit down with someone and tell them who Jesus Christ is, that He died for them, and that the church is the ark of salvation, and so on. Who says that only Baptists or whomever can evangelize one on one. We can do it too, and we should, as we're all called to bear witness to Our Lord.