Please Lord, Send Billy Graham Back: Only 4% of Episcopalians consider that a personal relationship with God in Christ is the most important relationship in their life.

"RenewalWorks" claims to be,  

"a vital ministry serving the Episcopal Church in a time when commitment to spiritual growth needs to be renewed" 

Their revealing white paper contained at least one alarming result of their research on "the spiritual life of the Episcopal" organization:

Only 4% of Episcopalians surveyed consider that a personal relationship with God in Christ is the most important relationship in their life.

See the tiny part of the graphic near the bottom right below,

Billy Graham is rolling in his grave.

Upon hearing this, Pewsterspouse exclaimed,  "If they don't have that, what are they doing in church?"

My response, "It is not a church. It is an organization of like minded folks."

The white paper explains,

"...among Episcopalians, there is a limited correlation between the call to service and spiritual beliefs and practices, making the church not all that different from many nonprofit organizations." p 8

Since they are not truly Christ centered, the Episcopal organization is nothing more than a non profit social club dressed up in religious attire that occasionally does some community service (while at the same time trying to spread a false gospel).

The false gospel has at its root doctrinal laziness and/or unbelief. The survey seems to indicate that a large percentage of Episcopalians say the Nicene Creed with their fingers crossed.

"Fifty-seven percent of Episcopal respondents stated that they very strongly believe in the doctrine of the Trinity" 

The data is credible as it was obtained mostly from regular Sunday attendees,

"Seventy-five percent report that they attend Sunday service three to four times per month"

Those who keep coming back are the ones who were polled, and they naturally reported the following,

"Sixty percent are extremely or very satisfied with the Sunday service’s role in supporting their spiritual growth."

If they were not satisfied, they wouldn't come back, but in spite of the satisfaction, the majority sense that they are missing something,

 "Fifty-five percent of Episcopal congregations fit in an archetype described as troubled. It may be helpful to think of them as restless or hungry (rather than conflicted or in crisis). Basically, these congregations are marked by a desire for greater spiritual growth; they have a hankering for more from their church, and in particular, from their clergy. They are not satisfied with what they are receiving"

The problem is that the pewsitters can't know what they are missing because they don't do their homework, and they probably have never been told that they must do their homework,

"Overall, Episcopalians engage in daily spiritual practices at a much lower rate than people in other denominations. For instance, only 14 percent report they reflect on scripture daily." p 11

Having been born and raised as an Episcopalian, having lived a lifetime as a member of the Episcopal organization, and having studied the decline of the denomination for the past fifteen years, none of this comes as a shock to me.

All of this highlights the utter foolishness of having Presiding Bishop Curry lead Episcopal "revivals", because one can't evangelize if you yourself don't buy into the basic Christian beliefs on marriage, divorce, human sexuality, and sin.

Those of us who went through "A decade of Evangelism" in the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina back in the 1990's know that evangelism to an Episcopalian means setting up coffee hour or serving as a greeter or a chalice bearer on Sunday mornings.

The white paper concludes with what should be obvious,

"Until parishioners are comfortable in basic beliefs and value a personal relationship with Christ, an ability to evangelize may be diminished." p 13

"May be diminished", good grief.

Please Lord, send Billy Graham back! His job is not done!

Ouch! The Revised Common Lectionary Cut Out the Bits About Circumcision

For many churches, the Old Testament lesson this Sunday is Genesis 17:1-7,15-16. People will not get to hear verses 8-14 which contains a couple of important points. First, let's read Genesis 17:1-7,15-16 as presented,

1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said to him, ‘I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless.2 And I will make my covenant between me and you, and will make you exceedingly numerous.’3 Then Abram fell on his face; and God said to him,4 ‘As for me, this is my covenant with you: You shall be the ancestor of a multitude of nations.5 No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you the ancestor of a multitude of nations.6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you.7 I will establish my covenant between me and you, and your offspring after you throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you.
15 God said to Abraham, ‘As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name.16 I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall give rise to nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.’

The message conveyed to the pewsitters is that a covenant was made by God with Abram, and that a "multitude of nations" will be the result. He and Sarai are also given new names and will become fruitful.

But were there any strings attached?

Yes and got cut out today? Hear verses 8-14.

8 And I will give to you, and to your offspring after you, the land where you are now an alien, all the land of Canaan, for a perpetual holding; and I will be their God.’9 God said to Abraham, ‘As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations.10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised.11 You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you.12 Throughout your generations every male among you shall be circumcised when he is eight days old, including the slave born in your house and the one bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring.13 Both the slave born in your house and the one bought with your money must be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant.14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.’

Verses 12 and 13 with their mention of circumcising slaves (probably against their will) might offend modern Sunday pewsitters, so out they go.

I have a suspicion that verse 8 is also politically incorrect in this day and age. Doesn't it sound much nicer to present a pluralistic, multi-national, covenant than an exclusivist, "this land is yours" vision for Israel.  This certainly is in keeping with the Episcopal organization's view,

"The Episcopal Church has long advocated and legislated in support of a two-state solution in which a secure and universally recognized state of Israel lives alongside a secure, independent and viable Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as the shared capital of both states......Executive Council said at its June meeting that it voiced the church's 'unequivocal opposition to any action by either party that undermines progress toward negotiations' and urged all Episcopalians 'to pray for the peace of the Holy Land and advocate to their own governments for maximum international support for a negotiated two-state solution.'" Episcopal News Service

I cannot come up with a better explanation for the deletion of verse 8 other than a need for political correctness.

If you leave out the part of the covenant that involves circumcision, then you will have a difficult time understanding what all the fuss was about in the early Christian church as the Gospel
spread to the Gentiles. When I posted on this back in 1982 the best response I received was from Rob Eaton+,

"Circumcision is a critical part of the covenantal relationship between God and Abraham (and all following as his descendants).To read around it is theological cowardice and, dare I say, chilling censorship. Leaving out those verses would be offensive to any Jews hearing the lesson being read. And it seriously undermines the Christian education process by cloaking an essential foundation of the meaning of 'covenant.'
In Christianity the closest ritual we have to circumcision as an imperative of covenental relationship, both as sign and sacrament, is baptism. Can you imagine assigning the Gospel lesson of the baptism of Jesus where the actual verses specifically referring to water and baptism are excised? Would the rest of the story have any deeper sense to it at all?Can we talk about discipleship in TECUSA these days without any reference to 'the baptismal covenant?'Just ludicrous."

It is also somewhat ironic that the Revised Common Lectionary decided to cut out the bits about circumcision.

Dear Neil deGrasse Tyson and Joy Behar, Prayer Can Stop Bullets and God Does Speak

This past week, planetarium director and ersatz television science commentator Neil deGrasse Tyson responded to the recent school shooting in Florida with the following "tweet",

"Evidence collected over many years, obtained from many locations, indicates that the power of Prayer is insufficient to stop bullets from killing school children."

Having followed research in prayer and survival in medical illness for many years, a reasonable conclusion might be that prayers do not appear to change the usual course of disease, but this should not lead one to deny God's documented ability to do so (see the Acts of the Apostles). Likewise, one should not deny God's ability to stop a bullet or even an artillery shell in response to prayer. Just ask any soldier who has been in a situation in which they prayed for just that. The power of prayer is in the faith it shows to an almighty Lord, and faith can move mountains. By praying to God in the name of Jesus, we don't always get what we want. After all Jesus taught us to pray, "Thy will be done" and not, "My will be done."

The answers to our prayers may be miraculous healings, or rescue from peril, but clearly these things do not always happen. God's plans for us are mysterious.

But what about hearing a direct response from God when we pray?

I can recall several points in my life when I prayed for direction and God seemed to point me towards my career, my future spouse, my relocations, my church, my opportunities to serve, and starting and maintaining this blog.

And I distinctly remember a couple of occasions when I heard a voice in response to my prayers. Unfortunately, the voice was just one word, and that word was in a language that I could not understand.

So what does one make of "comedienne" Joy Behar who believes that anyone who listens for Jesus' voice and hears it is mentally ill?

“The View” co-hosts mocked Vice President Pence’s Christian faith last week, disrespecting the former governor of Indiana for speaking with Jesus and even suggesting he has a “mental illness.” the comments made by “The View” co-hosts Sunny Hostin and Joy Behar, according to the MRC.  Hostin said it’s “interesting” that former White House staffer Omarosa Manigault Newman recently said that Pence talks to Jesus and believes Jesus tells him things. Hostin said she is a “faithful” Catholic but doesn’t want her vice president “speaking in tongues.” Behar then said, “It’s one thing to talk to Jesus. It’s another thing when Jesus talks to you… that’s called mental illness.” “The View” addressed the controversy on Thursday and Behar didn’t exactly apologize.
“I don’t mean to offend people but apparently I keep doing it,” she said. “It was a joke.”

I am not sure if what Omarosa claims is actually what Vice President Pence believes, but the question for us is this, does Jesus speak to people directly at times, and what should we do with people who make such claims. It is no laughing matter as Ms. Behar would have us to believe. Should we label them as mentally ill, should we blindly accept their claims, or should we test their claims against the words of scripture?

For me, it is the latter.

Of course you probably won't be listening for God if you waste your time listening to Tyson or Behar.

The one thing these comments from Neil deGrasse Tyson and Joy Behar have in common is that they communicate to their audience a terrible sin, an all too common sin in this day and age, and that is the sin of denying God's omnipotence. Perhaps they should try praying for forgiveness. I know that if they do pray in the name of Jesus, their sins will be forgiven.

Washing SIn Out of Lent

It should come as no surprise to readers of this blog that the Revised Common Lectionary regularly chops up the Psalm selections for Sunday Eucharistic readings leaving out imprecatory verses or other lines that might make Sunday morning pewsitters uncomfortable. This Sunday is no exception. While repetition is one of the most important means of communication, the lectionary editors decided that for the first Sunday in Lent, the congregants would not hear the word "sin" referenced four times in the Psalm. Verses 1-9 were all that will be heard today in many churches.

Psalm 25 Ad te, Domine, levavi 

1 To you, O Lord, I lift up my soul;my God, I put my trust in you; *let me not be humiliated,nor let my enemies triumph over me.
2 Let none who look to you be put to shame; *let the treacherous be disappointed in their schemes.
3 Show me your ways, O Lord, *and teach me your paths.
4 Lead me in your truth and teach me, *for you are the God of my salvation;in you have I trusted all the day long.
5 Remember, O Lord, your compassion and love, *for they are from everlasting.
6 Remember not the sins of my youth and my transgressions; *remember me according to your loveand for the sake of your goodness, O Lord.
7 Gracious and upright is the Lord; *therefore he teaches sinners in his way.
8 He guides the humble in doing right *and teaches his way to the lowly.
9 All the paths of the Lord are love and faithfulness *to those who keep his covenant and his testimonies.

At least "sin" was mentioned once, but remember that it pertains only to the sins of youth, and "sinners" was in there but left the door open for people to not consider their own sins and only the sins of others.

In the verses that will not be heard today, we get a dose of things that might make some people feel bad,

10 For your Name's sake, O Lord, *forgive my sin, for it is great.
11 Who are they who fear the Lord? *he will teach them the way that they should choose.
12 They shall dwell in prosperity, *and their offspring shall inherit the land.
13 The Lord is a friend to those who fear him *and will show them his covenant.
14 My eyes are ever looking to the Lord, *for he shall pluck my feet out of the net.  
15 Turn to me and have pity on me, *for I am left alone and in misery.
16 The sorrows of my heart have increased; *bring me out of my troubles.
17 Look upon my adversity and misery *and forgive me all my sin.
18 Look upon my enemies, for they are many, *and they bear a violent hatred against me.
19 Protect my life and deliver me; *let me not be put to shame, for I have trusted in you.
20 Let integrity and uprightness preserve me, *for my hope has been in you.
21 Deliver Israel, O God, *out of all his troubles.

My sin is great, I am alone and in misery, sorrows, troubles, adversity, sin, I am hated, all which should be heard when reading this psalm that prays for deliverance from these things. 

I am troubled that they are not.

The Prayer Book Society and the UndergroundPewster: Part 3

Three weeks ago  it was my privilege to attend the Prayer Book Society USA's two and a half day 2018 Conference in historic Savannah Georgia. Part 1 and Part 2  of my brief reports can be found by clicking on the links.

Friday began at 8.30 a.m. with Morning Prayer in the Chapel.
The first session was presented by Dr. Stephen Blackwood, President of Ralston College and was titles,

“(Being) Made for Eternity: Liturgical Patterns and Habits of Soul”

My notes were as follows:
We are made in the image of God, and we are being made for eternity.
The experience of time = repetition, rhythm, recollection, memory
Moral and immoral character comes through repetition and memory
Aristotle: frequency becomes nature
Liturgy forms us through repetition and recollection
(As a certain pewster pointed out, that is why it is so important to get liturgy right)
Fatal flaw of the three year lectionary cycle is that there is no temporal rhythm.

Next  up was Dr. Jesse Billett, Trinity College, University of Toronto on,

“The Twentieth-Century Baptismal Revolution: Is the Classical Prayer Book Really Obsolete?”

He had a helpful handout but began with an apology for citing Ruth Meyers about how the 1979 Book of Common Prayer created a "Baptismal ecclesiology"which led to the demise of Confirmation, catechism, the ministry of all the baptized, and social activism among other things.

He then proceeded to give a history of how baptism has been interpreted in Anglican tradition through the ages including the Puritan attack on infant baptism and Confirmation in 1572 and Hooker's defense of both practices.

Next he discussed "baptismal regeneration"and "gifts of the Spirit" and how the 1662 Prayer Book dealt with those issues.

Finally he quoted Roland Palmer on infant baptism,

"Why baptize small children who cannot understand? Baptism is a gift from God, and you do not have to understand in order to receive a gift. No parent would say 'You cannot give my baby a hundred dollars because he does not understand money,' but rather, 'Thank you, we will take care of the gift and teach the child to use it as he has need of it.' Christian parents want their children to be in God's family from the start, not to wait until they have wandered away and fallen into great sin, and then win them back. They can receive the gift, and then can be taught that they possess that gift, and how to use it by repentance and faith." Roland F. Palmer, His Worthy Praise: On Worship According to the Book of Common Prayer (Canada 1959) (Toronto: Anglican Church of Canada, 1959; rev. 1963), 106-107

The afternoon sessions began with The Revd. Dr. Paul Avis  of the Universities of Exeter and Durham presenting,

“ ‘Not a Synod, only a Conference’: The Lambeth Conference and the Councils of the Church”

Concilliatory is ancient and goes on forever
1. Representation: who should speak for the church
2. Constitutionality
3. Consent: all must agree to accept the rules
4. Eucharistic Communion

Next up was Dr. Michael Hurley of Cambridge University

‘On the Virtues of Re-Reading’

Dr Michael Hurley first gave us an exercise which was to read a poem. He then asked for our impressions and he then listed some of his student's critiques when they first read it. Most panned it, but at least one appreciated it more after re-reading it several times. We then re-read it, and with his guidance we all got more out of it. A good Prayer Book should bear re-reading just like the Bible bears re-reading. Good literature or good poetry should make you want to re-read it. This could present a problem for new or novel liturgies which if they turn out like modern praise music will lack sufficient depth to draw people back.


We ended up the afternoon with a Breakout session called,

"The Plans for the “Comprehensive Revision” of the 1979 Prayer Book(An overview after the PBS Dallas Colloquium last Fall):

With Canon Alistair Macdonald-Radcliff, Dr. Jesse Billett, and William Murchison et al.

The Prayer Book Revision update predicted that there would be two major forces battling it out for a voice at General Convention 2018. One side feels that the task is too difficult and that alternative liturgies should just be added to existing extra-Prayer Book resources.
The other force is demanding total revision. Some representative sound bites of the arguments were read to us. These were quite pythonesque: funny in a frightening way.

That evening there was a  closing Conference Eucharist.

Thus endeth the third day.

On the fourth day, this pewster rested.

I would encourage more lay participation in meetings such as these. A Prayer Book Society gathering will not turn you into a "Conference Christian", but rather into a more grounded Anglican.

This is my Son, the Beloved; listen to him!

This Sunday's Gospel reading (Revised Common Lectionary) is from Mark 9:2-9. In it, we hear about the Transfiguration of Jesus.

 Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart, by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his clothes became dazzling white, such as no one on earth could bleach them. And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, who were talking with Jesus. Then Peter said to Jesus, ‘Rabbi, it is good for us to be here; let us make three dwellings, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ He did not know what to say, for they were terrified. Then a cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud there came a voice, ‘This is my Son, the Beloved; listen to him!’ Suddenly when they looked around, they saw no one with them any more, but only Jesus.As they were coming down the mountain, he ordered them to tell no one about what they had seen, until after the Son of Man had risen from the dead.

The seemingly simple instructions from God, "This is my Son, the Beloved; listen to him!" Seems to be the most difficult of God's commandments for humankind to accept and to follow.

What a different place the world would be if all the people would listen to Jesus.

Imagine all the people...  

The Prayer Book Society and the UndergroundPewster: Part 2

This is a continuation of my notes from the recent meeting of the Prayer Book Society USA. For Part 1 click here.

We began Thursday with Morning Prayer and Eucharist (in the Chapel) with the readings for the Feast of the Conversion of St Paul.

The morning sessions began with a brief introduction by Dean McKeachie as he reminisced about days of change in 1991 when after the Convention of the Diocese of Maryland rejected a resolution asking the diocese to affirm Jesus as the way, the truth, and the life, the "Baltimore Declaration" was penned. The path to that point might be in part due to prayer book innovations.

The first speaker of the day was The Very Revd. Dr. Laurie Thompson III, Dean of Trinity School for Ministry, Ambridge PA who presented,

"The Offertory & Pelagius: Did the Prayer Book Tradition protect us from an ancient heresy re-opened in the 1979 BCP? How can we maintain a right balance in our views of self-offering?"

He began by talking about Trinity School for Ministry and how, in a time of seminary decline, Trinity is having to expand because of high enrollment.

He started the main part of his paper by stating that the older Prayer Book protected us from heresy and that the 1979 Book of Common Prayer created openings for heresy to creep in.

He then suggested that in many Episcopal churches the bread and the wine are carried towards the altar by lay persons who are then given the collection plate(s) and who then proceed to collect the monetary offering. The problems with this are as follows: for one thing, the bread and the wine should not be considered gifts from us. "We" do not offer God the elements. Even though they have not been consecrated yet, the impression may be given that we are doing so. The Pelagian sin is "Me do it". Secondly, the collection of alms should have no relation to the bread and the wine, and lastly, we do not need redundant processions whose intent is just to encourage lay participation.

The offering is something that comes from God (the Doxology) and not from our own self idolatry.

So how do we offer up our selves? He suggested that the bow-tie is the way to resolve the polarities in life. Bow-ties fix the world if they are knotted with the knot of thanksgiving. I am not so sure about that one.

Laurie Thompson also related a story about the time he served on the Standing Committee for Liturgy and Music (SCLM) of the Episcopal organization. The scariest thing we learned was that 50% of the members of the SCLM had zero theological education at that time. (Is it any wonder that the SCLM came up with a liturgical resource for same-sex blessings).

 The next paper presented by The Revd. Dr. Paul Avis of the Universities of Exeter and Durham was,

“Knit together in one communion and fellowship: What does the liturgy tell us about the Church and its Unity?”

Liturgy is a source of doctrine: Christology, Salvation, Ecclesiology (?)
Liturgy is an expression of what the Church is.
Liturgy is the Epiphany of the Church.

Three ecclesiological axioms,
1. The fact that the Church celebrates its liturgy confirms that it is a worshiping community. Worship is a form of witness.
2. The fact that the Church celebrates its liturgy tells us that the Word and Sacrament are at the center of the Church's life.
3. The fact that the Church celebrates its liturgy tells us the mystery at the heart of the liturgy is Jesus Christ himself.

Why include the Psalms in liturgy? Jesus prayed the psalms; he died with the psalm on his lips.
What are the functions of Daily Morning and Evening Prayer?
1. Worship
2. Teaching: the Church as "school".
3. Intercession

The Eucharist: "The source and summit of the Church's work" (Vatican II). The one thing we should all agree on. At this point he touched on broken communion, and which he did not think could be easily justified.

The Conference "Luncheon break" was a comfortable two hours which allowed ample time to stroll to an oyster bar near the river and get back with time to spare for the afternoon session which started with,

 “Catholic apologetics: retrieving older precedents”.

Presented by Dr. Christopher Wells, Editor of the Living Church. My notes are sketchy at this point as he gave a history of Thomas Aquinas and his "Summa" in which the importance of argument was, shall I say, argued? The talk left me wondering if we can have Prayer Book revision when we live in an age on emotivism in which it appears that we have lost the ability to argue.

After a short break for tea we heard from Dr. Paul Julienne  of The Joint Quantum Institute, University of Maryland (retd.) on,

“Renewing the Christian Imagination: Inhabiting the City of God in a Secular Age”

He is referring to Augustine and "The City of God". Briefly, Dr. Julienne discussed God's city and the secular city. Two loves define the two cities. In God's city, there is love of God even to the contempt of self. In the secular city, there is love of self even to the contempt of God.

The last session.

"Being "Reasonably Anglican" and "Prayer Bookish": Religion without tears?"

Presented by The Revd. Canon Alistair Macdonald-Radcliff, International Advisor to the PBS pointed out the obvious, that you can't be Anglican without the historic Prayer book and its prayers of confession.

Following this we all went over to the church for a Festal Choral Evensong.  The sermon was delivered by The Rt. Revd. Michael Hawkins, Bishop of Saskatchewan. It was a lovely service.

This left plenty of time to get to our dinner reservation and more oysters!

Thus endeth the second day.  I'll finish up next week.

Giving it your all

This Sundays reading is from 1 Corinthians 9:16-23 in which St. Paul paints a picture of how he must be humble in his ministry,

"If I proclaim the gospel, this gives me no ground for boasting, for an obligation is laid on me, and woe betide me if I do not proclaim the gospel! For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward; but if not of my own will, I am entrusted with a commission. What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel.
For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) so that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law) so that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, so that I might by any means save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings."

Paul became all things to all people. Or did he? I don't think he became an idol worshiper to get along with idol worshipers. I don't think he became a fornicator in order to appease fornicators, and he certainly did not take on the appearance of a homosexual in order to convert the homosexuals. By becoming all things to all people, I think he meant that he was open to speaking and meeting with all sorts of people in the spirit of love, even to those in the grips of sin, his main intent was to proclaim the Gospel to as many people as possible so that some might be saved, and he did it free of charge. That is what we should mean today when we say we need to, "Meet people where they are at."

Shouldn't we all be reaching out to those who have not heard the Gospel and to those who hold it in contempt?