No More Tiers

With all the recent buzz about the Archbishop of Canterbury starting to apply his principles of a two tiered approach to thinking about an Anglican Communion, I had the image of a wedding cake come to mind.



The Archbishop is not looking at things through a broad enough perspective. He should realize that there are endless possibilities when making a tiered structure. Simply dividing things into two levels seems rather arbitrary, and he might be limiting the potential of the communion. I am sorry if I am being facetious. Just imagine adding more tiers until you wind up with something like this,



Oops, too many tiers bring division don't they?

My point is that I think the Archbishop's two tiered approach to a communion of churches just ain't gonna cut it.

People's eyes are always drawn to the top of the cake. That's where the doll images of the bride and groom are usually found. The top of the cake bears the symbol of union and is usually reserved for the newlyweds. In this analogy, the dolls symbolize the union of Christ and the Church. But don't forget about the lower levels. Those are the ones that the guests get to eat.

The following was sent to me last month by the C.S. Lewis Institute. I saw some similarities between these cake tiers and Lewis' class structure. Lewis' piece stands on its own without the need for supporting comment, but I think there is plenty to chew on. I usually have to slow down and concentrate when reading his thoughts, so I have separated some of Lewis' writing into paragraphs which might help you to stay focused on his individual points. I have added emphasis as well to things that struck me.

h/t C.S. Lewis Institute.

"The first class is of those who live simply for their own sake and pleasure, regarding Man and Nature as so much raw material to be cut up into whatever shape may serve them.

In the second class are those who acknowledge some other claim upon them—the will of God, the categorical imperative, or the good of society—and honestly try to pursue their own interests no further than this claim will allow. They try to surrender to the higher claim as much as it demands, like men paying a tax, but hope, like other taxpayers, that what is left over will be enough for them to live on. Their life is divided, like a soldier’s or a schoolboy’s life, into time 'on parade' and 'off parade,' 'in school' and 'out of school.'

But the third class is of those who can say like St. Paul that for them “to live is Christ.” These people have got rid of the tiresome business of adjusting the rival claims of Self and God by the simple expedient of rejecting the claims of Self altogether. The old egoistic will has been turned round, reconditioned, and made into a new thing. The will of Christ no longer limits theirs; it is theirs. All their time, in belonging to Him, belongs also to them, for they are His.

And because there are three classes, any merely twofold division of the world into good and bad is disastrous. It overlooks the fact that the members of the second class (to which most of us belong) are always and necessarily unhappy. The tax which moral conscience levies on our desires does not in fact leave us enough to live on. As long as we are in this class we must either feel guilt because we have not paid the tax or penury because we have. The Christian doctrine that there is no 'salvation' by works done according to the moral law is a fact of daily experience. Back or on we must go. But there is no going on simply by our own efforts. .

If the new Self, the new Will, does not come at His own good pleasure to be born in us, we cannot produce Him synthetically.

The price of Christ is something, in a way, much easier than moral effort—it is to want Him. It is true that the wanting itself would be beyond our power but for one fact. The world is so built that, to help us desert our own satisfactions, they desert us. War and trouble and finally old age take from us one by one all those things that the natural Self hoped for at its setting out. Begging is our only wisdom, and want in the end makes it easier for us to be beggars. Even on those terms the Mercy will receive us."

C.S. Lewis, Present Concerns: Essays by C.S. Lewis, ed. Walter Hooper (Harcourt Bruce, 1986), p. 21-22.

If all those wants and desires of the natural self desert us in the end, why do we who live in that great second class continue to follow after them? Why can't we overcome our selves? What keeps us from being part of that third class?

Thankfully, God's mercy is not restricted to those in the third class or the top tier. There is plenty of work to be done in the second tier. We can't all be saints... can we?

The messy Church in which we live and pray is all too often stuck in the second tier at its best, and in the first tier at its worst. To be a force that instructs and incentivizes people to gain the bridal cake should be the Church's goal.

Begging to love Him with all my heart, all my mind, and all my soul, and that I might yield all those possessive "mys" unto Him...

So I won't have need for tiers...

So I can eat some cake!

U.P.

Spit Not, Hit Not

This week's sermon at ECOOS was an excellent example for newcomers to the Episcopal church to hear how the social gospel of justice, when applied to current issues, and projected by an unqualified speaker, can be twisted into a distasteful, tangled, political diatribe that in the end causes harm to the body of Christ.

Today's lengthy homily is blessedly fading from my memory, but to summarize, errors began right off the bat when the rector said that both Elijah and Jesus were prophets but failed to explain any differences between the two. This is very bad teaching because it might lead us simple pewsitters into the heresy of Arianism. I suspect most pewsitters let that pass without notice, but it seemed like a lost opportunity to examine the difference between a fully human prophet and the Son of God, and how important it is to our salvation that there is a difference between the two.

Later, the sermon deteriorated into a tirade against people who "hate the government." These people are bad because the government provides for the widows and orphans and pensioners through our wonderful social safety net and social security system. The rector, in an increasingly agitated state, vociferously said he wanted to "spit upon" those who hate the government. Hmmm...I seem to recall that he himself was in the government hating group during the years of the Bush administration. Is this "change we can believe in?" Next, the rector went on to bash the state of Arizona and its recent laws regarding how police should manage a certain category of law breakers. To top it off, he reiterated his desire to spit on people once again.

I am trying to remember that new fangled baptismal covenant thingy that people like to throw at me...Let's see...Oh yes, p. 305,

Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?

Throughout the ages, being spat upon has been a powerful act of degradation, an act contrary to the principle of respect for human dignity.

And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. Matthew 27:30 (KJV)

Sometimes I picture myself in that crowd, spitting upon the Lord my God, I later kick myself, and then bow down in prayer for that same God to save me. Once I felt my feelings of indignation mount today, I made sure to confess those feelings before ascending the steps to the altar rail for communion. I was reminded during my confession of Article XXVI of the Articles of Religion that I should accept the bread of life from someone who is, after all, just another fallible face in the crowd.

Still, I can't shake the feeling that such preaching is not only degrading, but harmful to the body of Christ. It appeared that way to at least one visitor today who, like earlier visitors, left clutching his Bible on the way out the door.

"Let the Galled Jade Wince "

A little Shakespeare came to mind after studying the recent exchange of Pentecostal letters: the first letter was from the Archbishop of Canterbury who indicated his advice to remove the Episcopal Church from certain councils because of the continued ordination of non celibate homosexuals, and his advice for members of the Anglican Communion to agree to the "Anglican Covenant," and the second letter was from the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church who claims to be going with the Holy Spirit while ignoring her catechism:

Q. How do we recognize the truths taught by the Holy
Spirit?
A. We recognize truths to be taught by the Holy Spirit
when they are in accord with the Scriptures. (BCP p. 853)

Okay, I promised you a little Shakespeare, so here it comes,

Ham. Madam, how like you this play?

Queen. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Ham. O! but she’ll keep her word.

King. Have you heard the argument? Is there no offence in ’t?

Ham. No, no, they do but jest, poison in jest; no offence i’ the world.

King. What do you call the play?

Ham. The Mouse-trap. Marry, how? Tropically. This play is the image of a murder done in Vienna: Gonzago is the duke’s name; his wife, Baptista. You shall see anon; ’tis a knavish piece of work: but what of that? your majesty and we that have free souls, it touches us not: let the galled jade wince, our withers are unwrung.

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act III. Scene II. William Shakespeare (1564–1616). The Oxford Shakespeare. 1914.

There are so many fitting lines in Act III that I lost count and settled on my first impression from the play within a play. Pick your favorite and see the parallels between Hamlet and Rowan and Katherine.

Some readers might not be familiar with the earlier Acts or the players in the modern tragic play that we might call "T.E.Churchlet." The play itself is part of a series of tragedies from the same author (another puzzle for you to solve). As some comments in the above links have noted, the author uses the human tendency to sin to full advantage in shaping his characters and their actions. Even though I am familiar with the plot, I remain puzzled as to why the lady doth protest too much. Is she doing this out of anger at the great Archbishop? Is she hurt? Is she merely trying to appease her minions? Is she trying to place the blame elsewhere, or is she revealing her own guilt?

"'Let the galled jade winch, our withers are unwrung:' i.e., let the one who has a guilty conscience wince; not us, who don't have guilty consciences. A 'jade' is a bad horse, one that is hard to control. A horse that is galled has a sore, caused by the chafing of its saddle or other tack. If the sore is on the withers (the ridge between a horses shoulders), the withers are wrung, rubbed sore."(from notes)

The Archbishop's "action" might start to marginalize the Episcopal Church on the Aoc's "second track," but that alone should not stop the lady from continuing in her spirit (little "s") led path. That path will lead to several sequels for our viewing pleasure, the first of which will be the "liturgization" of blessings for same sex relationships. The background resources for these "blessings" are currently being gathered by a task force on which our young curate has been selected to serve. This task force was authorized by the passage of resolution CO56 by the 2009 General Convention of the Episcopal church, and the task force is to report the materials it has gathered to the 2012 General Convention.

Unfortunately, we pewsitters have roles in the tragedy as well. It is we who are financing the next installment in the tragic series. Our pledges, which were made with the intention of building God's Church, will buy us tickets to its destruction.

Alas, poor church! I knew it, Horatio, a church of infinite
patience, of most excellent fancy. It hath bore me on its back a
thousand times, and now how abhorr'd in my imagination it is!
My gorge rises at it.

A Lily's Last Stand?

Landsford Canal State Park is one of South Carolina's secret destinations this time of year. A 20 minute drive from Rock Hill, the park is home to a huge stand of "Rocky Shoals Spider Lilies." These interesting plants live in the middle of the Catawba river and thrive in the shallow, running waters at the site of a early 19th century canal project. May is the season for these flowers to bloom and I am reminded of part of today's lectionary reading from Ecclesiastes 3:1-15,

For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:
a time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
a time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to break down, and a time to build up;
a time to weep, and a time to laugh;
a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
a time to seek, and a time to lose;
a time to keep, and a time to throw away;
a time to tear, and a time to sew;
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
a time to love, and a time to hate;
a time for war, and a time for peace.

There was an time for canal building in America. That time has past, and as the writer of Ecclesiastes might say, "All was vanity." The canal itself no longer exists, but the stone ruins of its guard locks can be viewed just a short walk from the park entrance.



Taking the nature trail for another half mile would lead to a lookout area to view the spider lilies,



but the canal trail looked quiet and inviting.



Maybe next time. This was May 29th and the lilies were in bloom. I am afraid that my pictures don't do the vista justice.



Lilies have been associated with funerals which I suppose is because they symbolize the purity and innocence of the redeemed Christian soul.



These lilies, constantly bathed by the flowing waters of the Catawba seem especially appropriate symbols of our eternal life and the means of our redemption.



Another way to see the lilies is by canoe or kayak. Just put in at the park picnic area, float downstream, and take out at the lower parking area. Because the waters are shallow and rocky, (hence the need for the canal) it is best to use an older vessel for your voyage. Next year I am going to bring the kayak I bought at a city auction a few years back, the one with "Rock Hill Rocks" printed on the side and plenty of dings in its bottom.

The spider lilies also can be found in Columbia,



but the "wow" factor at Landsford Canal State Park is worth the trip. See you next May!

(Click on the pictures to enlarge them).

Trinity Flower

Today is "Trinity Sunday." Instead of a sermon where the doctrine of the Trinity was discussed, our sermon took a more down to earth approach by examining a recent triad of funerals in our extended family. I don't know if the number (three) was chance or not, but the coincidence did get me thinking about all of those little trinities that go past unnoticed.

Just yesterday, I was on a hike in the woods, and my attention was drawn to several Trinity flowers. I stopped and took a photo, but was unable to get a good image of the small flower. Here is one from Finegardening.com


Trillium pusillum
Also known as the Dwarf wakerobin, or Wood lily.

There is always something more to reflect upon, and the picture above was no exception.



The little worm hanging onto the Trinity flower's leaf reminded me of our place around the beauty of the Holy Trinity. Much like the worm, we hang onto the Trinity, and in a way, we are nourished by both the doctrine and the deeper meaning of the Trinity. Oh yes, the Trinity flower does bear fruit, but that is an unseen hope of the flower in this image.

One of today's readings was Romans 5:1-5, and hidden therin lay another little trinity flower:

"...suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope..."

To all who hang on to the tip of the leaf, the hope of the flower awaits.

____________________________________________________________________________

As part of our ongoing series on "missing verses," I noticed that the Revised Common Lectionary omitted parts of the O.T. reading today. This time omitted was Proverbs 8:5-21 (for some reason the reading was Proverbs 8:1-4,22-31).

5 O simple ones, learn prudence;
acquire intelligence, you who lack it.
6 Hear, for I will speak noble things,
and from my lips will come what is right;
7 for my mouth will utter truth;
wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
8 All the words of my mouth are righteous;
there is nothing twisted or crooked in them.
9 They are all straight to one who understands
and right to those who find knowledge.
10 Take my instruction instead of silver,
and knowledge rather than choice gold;
11 for wisdom is better than jewels,
and all that you may desire cannot compare with her.
12 I, wisdom, live with prudence,
and I attain knowledge and discretion.
13 The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil.
Pride and arrogance and the way of evil
and perverted speech I hate.
14 I have good advice and sound wisdom;
I have insight, I have strength.
15 By me kings reign,
and rulers decree what is just;
16 by me rulers rule,
and nobles, all who govern rightly.
17 I love those who love me,
and those who seek me diligently find me.
18 Riches and honour are with me,
enduring wealth and prosperity.
19 My fruit is better than gold, even fine gold,
and my yield than choice silver.
20 I walk in the way of righteousness,
along the paths of justice,
21 endowing with wealth those who love me,
and filling their treasuries.

From one character to another, the fruit that is better than gold awaits the one who hangs on to the end.

Chastity Redefined

Roman coin, (Pvdicitia- Modesty, virtue or chastity from "Reverse Personifications" at celatorsart.com)

The control over the meaning of words is a little recognized bit of gamesmanship that goes on at all levels of our society. In religion, he who writes the definitions can use redefinition as a means of supporting a new innovation. This week, I witnessed a good example over at T19.

Canon Kendall Harmon posted an excellent response to a posting at the Episcopal Cafe entitled "Chastity, now" by Richard Helmer+ the rector of the Church of Our Saviour in Mill Valley California. Before you head to Kendall's blog, read a little sample of the Rev. Helmer's post:

"In starting discernment to become a member of a spiritual community of The Episcopal Church, I have been invited in recent months to study the three classic evangelical counsels as they have been articulated as vows beginning with the mendicant orders in the twelfth century: poverty, chastity, and obedience.

As a parish priest, husband, father, and ever aspiring pianist, the one counsel that has captivated me most recently has been the vow of chastity. It has spoken most deeply to my perfectionistic desire to control outcomes in every relationship in my life -- far beyond its often narrow interpretation regarding fidelity in sexual conduct.

Chastity means setting aside dominance and control and seeking instead a new way to relate to the world and to God."

Aren't there other terms to use to describe that? Now why would anyone try to redefine chastity?

You have to wade through the rest of the post before we see where he is headed,

"But there is good news. Chastity has been in evidence in the increasing number of voices of those who recognize our disagreements as a Communion, but yet insist that costly communion in Christ is far more valuable than agreement.
Chastity has long been in evidence by those courageous, oft-threatened 'firsts' of our faith who inhabit dangerous positions not for power or the quixotic pursuit of perfection, but simply by being who they are and following God's call as best they can. The consecrations in the Diocese of Los Angeles are some of the most recent examples of this form of chastity."

Consecrating a partnered lesbian as bishop is the antithesis of chastity even as Helmer defines it. That action is all about exercising control and power over us pewsitters by imposing a radical new thang totally unsupported by apostolic tradition and scripture.

Little did I know when I first responded to Kendall's post that The Rev. Helmer would stop by and contribute to the comments. I had an interesting exchange with him, but some of the best written comments came from others. For example, a certain commenter, Billy, was far better able to put down in words what many of us were trying to examine in our earlier comments,

"I appreciate Mr. Helmer's defense on this thread, but I have to say that what he is saying is really nothing more than, "I'm OK, You're OK," with all the concomitant easing and changing of standards of conduct and civilization that book helped to bring about in the 70s. His is the same redefining of a word, "chastity," because the traditional definition of that word carries a standard of behavior that does not fit into the current world of homosexual conduct (or much heterosexual conduct, for that matter).
A few years ago, a reappraising priest explained to me, when I asked him his definition of "fornication during a discussion of homosexual conduct," that it was sexual relations outside the order of life-long giving, sacrifice, and commitment. So for him, reservation of sexual relations for heterosexual marriage was irrelevant. He expanded the traditional definition of fornication to a much broader definition because the standard of conduct for the traditional definition did not fit into homosexual "committed" relationships. Mr. Helmer similarly expands and changes the definition of "chastity" to include Ms Glasspool's conduct. For otherwise, under traditional historic understood definitions, how could she remain a priest, much less be consecrated a bishop. Additionally, I would note that if chastity is giving up dominance and control, as he defines it, then it follows that sexual relations are maintaining dominance and control. In some instances that may be true, but as Kendall points out, that is only partial truth, which goes further to show that the definition is unworkable for the word attempting to be used. This partiality of truth, also, gives further evidence that the definition is being changed for a specific reason, that is to try to zero in on the claim that calling others, especially homosexuals, to chastity is just trying to dominate and control them - that is the how and why, as Kendall points out, but has nothing to do with the what, the sexual conduct, itself. But note, also, that Mr. Helmer admits in his new definition of chastity, that it requires one to adopt a new way to relate to the world and to God ... and when he specifically applies it to Ms Glasspool and her sexual relationship with her partner, he is specifically saying that acceptance of this requires a new way to relate to her AND TO GOD. Certainly it does require a new way to relate to her ... that is the I'm OK, You're OK acceptance of a different and, according to my traditional understanding, immoral standard of conduct. But to require a new way of relating to God, that's a lot to swallow and provides increased evidence that Mr. Helmer is changing the definition of this word for the specific purpose of requiring our church members to accept homosexual conduct as blessed and holy - which is, ironically, the exact opposite of his own made-up definition. For he is attempting, in his article, as an authority in the church - a priest - to "dominate and control" those of us who cling to the traditional definition of the word, in the same way any priest dominates and controls the laity by his/her interpretation of how we are to relate to God and to each other."

Now run on over to Kendall Harmon's response and don't miss the comments where you will find at least two alternative words that others proposed which might be a better fit for the Rev. Helmer's definition: love and humility.

Where's the Fire?

Someone asked me what I was doing yesterday in lieu of attending the consecration of Bishop Waldo. I responded quite honestly that I was gathering firewood for the winter. In fact, I left home just as the webcast started. It was terribly hot and humid as I hauled logs from a ridiculous hollow on our property where those sweet and kindly Duke Power crewmen had left them. Thinking of the people in Greenville listening to all that wonderful music made me feel a little bit like the fabled ant. Returning home I listened to the reports about the pomp, circumstance, as well as the pickin and fiddling. One thing Episcopalians can do, and that is put on a good show, and I am afraid that much of what we do is just that, all show. Episcopalians can also put on some very bad shows. The recent disgraceful consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles for example (see Fr. Matt Kennedy's post, Mother Earth, Pagan Rituals, Ancestor Worship, Dancing Girls—the Consecration of Mary Glasspool, at StandFirm in Faith, but I warn you the video is just as Fr. Matt has labeled).

Speaking about fiddling as the city burns, today at ECOOS we had a report from the Finance Committee on the state of the budget. Facing a shortfall in pledge payments and plate offerings as we start the dry months of summer, the vestry is faced with the option of dipping into reserves or taking out a line of credit to cover expenses, and this is after withholding our diocesan pledge. As the largest church in our convocation, will that kind of report get bishop Andy to lay down his fiddle, or will he just blame the fires on the Christians.

Is there a spirit of fear and anxiety in ECOOS over the budget deficit? I think not, after all, summertime deficits are nothing new. A few years back during another crisis, one parishioner told me that he was not going to increase his pledge because it was good for the church to be hungry.

Today's sermon began with an self admitted diversion into 60's psychology. In the words of our rector, we are suffering from the "four demons of the apocalypse, fear, anxiety, guilt, and shame." He was flashing too far back into the sixties for me when he tried to explain away shame and guilt, but I could think back to several Bible verses to understand that there is no need to have fear or anxiety.

"Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness." Isaiah 41:10

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world."
John 16:33

"God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea."
Psalm 46:1-2

"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." 2 Tim 1:7

"Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you." 1 Peter 5:7

The rector did not quote any of these verses, but instead gave us a general message that the Holy Spirit was "all about peace," and I guess from that we are supposed to take comfort. When he focused on the peace of the Holy Spirit, my mind flashed back to the reading from Acts 2:1-2 with its images of tongues of flaming fire, and portents in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire, and smoky mist, the sun turned to darkness and the moon turned to blood. As the rector went on and on about the peace that the Holy Spirit brings, I could not help but think of Matthew 10:19-28,

"But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

A student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the student to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebub, how much more the members of his household!

So do not be afraid of them. There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

Yes, the Holy Spirit fills us with peace, but doesn't it also fill us with a burning fire as well? The fiery passion to spread His word, to evangelise, come heck or high water? The Episcopal church is not good at spreading the Good News, (the Episcopal church's statistics prove the point) because of that, we should be ashamed and feel guilty for our failures to spread the Holy Spirit.

How do we turn it around? It is not going to be through expensive fancy pomp and circumstance. I have a suggestion for Bishop Andy, get back to fundamentals, and as the new sheriff in town, get your whacked out ex-hippy priests to remember their foundation, their strength, and where they find His Word. Then they can sing with you about not having fear,




And I would be negligent if I did not point out the missing verses from the RCL's choice for the Gospel reading which was John 14:8-17, 25-27. I present to you verses 18-24 in part because it is the right thing to do and in part because it contains important portents of the Pentecost, and how we should keep that flame alive,

"‘I will not leave you orphaned; I am coming to you. In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me; because I live, you also will live. On that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. They who have my commandments and keep them are those who love me; and those who love me will be loved by my Father, and I will love them and reveal myself to them.’ Judas (not Iscariot) said to him, ‘Lord, how is it that you will reveal yourself to us, and not to the world?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. Whoever does not love me does not keep my words; and the word that you hear is not mine, but is from the Father who sent me.'"