Well, after 2.5 hours on Thursday, 9.5 hours on Friday, and an hour or so today, I finally am done the solution set for this week's problem set. Yes, you guessed it. I now am a member of that lowest cadre of academic life: the teaching assistant. Fortunately, I have two colleagues and the class is less than thirty students, but I never realized how much time this job requires. No wonder even the best of my TAs have been cranky sometimes.
The most interesting part of this class is that it is a required course for graduate students in my field who are not in my particular sub-field. Therefore, I am now a vague authority figure for several of my friends/colleagues. Of course, I have been in the reverse position several times with both TAs and professors, but it's still weird.
In other news, I'm thinking about getting a mohawk on Holy Saturday. It depends how much time I have between the all-night vigil on Friday night and Easter Vigil proper on Saturday evening. This means that I will have a mohawk for the second straight degree ceremony. I think I might be making a habit of this.
I am a fan of intercessory prayer. Rationally, I know it doesn't work. Faithfully, I think it works quite well. For the last year I've been praying for a friend of mine who has been out of work for the last year. Well, the just Judge decided to play a nice trick on me yesterday when I found out that my friend now has some steady employment consonant with her gifts. It's not perfect. It's not miraculous. But it's what she needed. Thanks be to God.
The Monastery hasn't sold many buttons and t-shirts, but we have sold a few (including to complete strangers.) If you're interested in a button for Easter, this would be a good time to order. While I do like how they turned out, I'm afraid they may be a little too small for their purpose. At church on Sunday, one person noticed my name button. I am in some sense named Caelius after all. One friend of mine saw the other button and said, "I support Changing Attitude Nigeria. Well, OK." Indeed.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
A Strange Poem For A Feast Day
When I think of Donne, I think of this poem .
I once wrote the lines below (part of a much longer work). They're a slight misreading, because I quite suspect now that Donne meant Mistress in the sense of wife, which is not to say that my reading is utterly irrelevant. The poem linked above is deeply erotic and deeply intellectual in the best sense of the word.
I once wrote the lines below (part of a much longer work). They're a slight misreading, because I quite suspect now that Donne meant Mistress in the sense of wife, which is not to say that my reading is utterly irrelevant. The poem linked above is deeply erotic and deeply intellectual in the best sense of the word.
Of all the things that created are, nothing is subtler than love
As if to balance the Love Begotten and ever o’erflowing.
There was sent into the worlds a man named Donne who, before he
Testified to the truth of the Savior and His redemptive love,
Discovered America to be the height of ecstasy.
One did not see him in Jamestown, stooped over by the pains of plague
But nevertheless he planted himself in the artisanal
Womankind of London-town and afterwards smoked some tobacco.
So if e’en the similitude of colonization licence
Sweetens, surely the act itself prefigures some dirty doings.
But Donne was not the first to conflate new land with woman newer.
From the first did Aeneas seek Lavinia’s shores, reached Italy
Took the woman from whose name was Latium, from whose womb were Latins.
Moreo’er, waylaid by the fates near Syrtean sands, the hero saw
How her peerage’s slavish jealousies burned a queen to ashes.
Blame it upon Juno’s ire against Troy’s children for Tyre’s,
But long before Hesiod drank, soil and rock were named female
As men who learned the facts of life and of agriculture conquered
Rather than stoop to foison’s producers—(somewhere is Eden).
So much would stand on fair Tellus but would it remain on Mars?
If you change the gender of the world, do you remake the rules
Which govern its denizens and do new acts of love thus arise
Unbidden from the warm dunite that undergirds the regolith?
Yet somewhere still there is Eden with questions of human nature:
Whether land’s pollution is twinned with pollution of relations?
They resist these questions, those bound to the loins of Earth, and do fear
The answers, considering it but fantasy to speculate.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
The Latest Entry in Carioca Confessions Is Interesting
I'm especially intrigued by the note to Phil, which isn't too far from what I proposed after the House of Bishops finished their latest meeting. I'll, however, risk the lawyers if catholic unity is to be built on church-backed state-sponsored violence and gross distortion of the word of God (begone ye Westminster Confession!). In other words, I've read Nigeria's report on the Listening Process. We are not amused. A few other Provinces say little better. All involved are in our prayers.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Into Great Silence
In the middle of Into Great Silence , the Carthusian monks of the Monastery of the Grand Chartreuse are having a rare meal together. One among them chants the 22nd Chapter of the Statutes of the Order, which among other things, provides that if the monks walk through a town or village on their occasional gadabouts, they are not to enter the houses of seculars. Considering the various things I have read today on the Internet, I think Saint Bruno may have been onto something there. When priests are threatening violence against one another, it was rather refreshing to hear the monks debate one aspect of the Statute in the next scene, maintaining a profound seriousness toward the importance of ritual action while simultaneously cracking jokes.
The Carthusians in some ways are the Amish of the Roman Catholic Church. Their motto is "the cross stands firm as the world turns" and they try to act as if the world has turned very slightly since their foundation. Unlike the Benedictines, they never have had a reform movement. They have electricity and the Prior uses an IBM laptop to manage the monastery's famous liqueur business, but in many other respects it is clear that they would prefer to be untouched by time, especially since they have been twice driven out of their monastery by the French government.
The movie itself is quite strange. It is interspersed with strange title frames such as, "You have seduced me, O God, and I was seduced." The cinematography is fascinated by the faces of the monks and the presence candle in their church. In fact, I would not be surprised if this is intentional: as if the posing monks are being compared with the icon of God in the silence of their house of prayer. Some might say the movie drags. I thought it was slow but generally well-paced. Particularly interesting are the scenes associated with a young novice, Marie-Pierre, an African. You first see him after you have watched the handiest of the lay brothers measure out fabric for his habit. The lay brother fits Marie-Pierre with a silent affection, especially charming as Marie-Pierre draws the black cloak of his novitiate about him. We next see Marie-Pierre being admitted as a novice before the Prior and being embraced by each member of the community in a very awkward and formal manner, but look closely and most of the monks are smiling widely. We next see the monks install Marie-Pierre in his cell, which is slightly larger than my apartment. And later, we hear Marie-Pierre chant in choir a portion of Basil's treatise on the Holy Spirit. Throughout the movie, you receive the impression that Marie-Pierre may be in a snowy realm far from the land of his birth (though that could be France for all I know) but he is finally home.
Unfortunately, this movie is likely to remain in limited release. Hopefully, the DVD will be easier to get when it comes out.
The Carthusians in some ways are the Amish of the Roman Catholic Church. Their motto is "the cross stands firm as the world turns" and they try to act as if the world has turned very slightly since their foundation. Unlike the Benedictines, they never have had a reform movement. They have electricity and the Prior uses an IBM laptop to manage the monastery's famous liqueur business, but in many other respects it is clear that they would prefer to be untouched by time, especially since they have been twice driven out of their monastery by the French government.
The movie itself is quite strange. It is interspersed with strange title frames such as, "You have seduced me, O God, and I was seduced." The cinematography is fascinated by the faces of the monks and the presence candle in their church. In fact, I would not be surprised if this is intentional: as if the posing monks are being compared with the icon of God in the silence of their house of prayer. Some might say the movie drags. I thought it was slow but generally well-paced. Particularly interesting are the scenes associated with a young novice, Marie-Pierre, an African. You first see him after you have watched the handiest of the lay brothers measure out fabric for his habit. The lay brother fits Marie-Pierre with a silent affection, especially charming as Marie-Pierre draws the black cloak of his novitiate about him. We next see Marie-Pierre being admitted as a novice before the Prior and being embraced by each member of the community in a very awkward and formal manner, but look closely and most of the monks are smiling widely. We next see the monks install Marie-Pierre in his cell, which is slightly larger than my apartment. And later, we hear Marie-Pierre chant in choir a portion of Basil's treatise on the Holy Spirit. Throughout the movie, you receive the impression that Marie-Pierre may be in a snowy realm far from the land of his birth (though that could be France for all I know) but he is finally home.
Unfortunately, this movie is likely to remain in limited release. Hopefully, the DVD will be easier to get when it comes out.
Replying to My Hard Question
Father AKMA graciously has pointed me to some commentary on his work that might interest you. Bls often says that some of the best theology is being done on the blogs, but I am heartened to see one among the relatively small number of theologians in our church trying to engage the church on this issue. I am sure there are others. I wonder if and why they have been shut out of the debate.
The first piece is an essay on the last chapter of Faithful Interpretation like a fascinating essay, very resonant with many of the conversations that go on in our particular neighborhood. I, of course, have been reading Romans lately, so I think one solution to the issue of our privy members is that the virtuous and godly manner of life is the one in which they are offered to God: either directly in the kenotic signs present in matrimony and fratrimony/sororimony or indirectly in which we forgo their use for a time or maybe even permanently in order that our other members may praise God all the more. The common critique of the mystical understanding of sexually intimate human relationships is that it is dismissive of the bodies God created. But we are likewise dismissive of the invisible things which God also made when we restrict our use of our members only to visible ends: a key failing of the natural law tradition.
He also sent me another link, but it's tricky to load. The only solution I suppose is to give myself Faithful Interpretation as an Easter present.
The first piece is an essay on the last chapter of Faithful Interpretation like a fascinating essay, very resonant with many of the conversations that go on in our particular neighborhood. I, of course, have been reading Romans lately, so I think one solution to the issue of our privy members is that the virtuous and godly manner of life is the one in which they are offered to God: either directly in the kenotic signs present in matrimony and fratrimony/sororimony or indirectly in which we forgo their use for a time or maybe even permanently in order that our other members may praise God all the more. The common critique of the mystical understanding of sexually intimate human relationships is that it is dismissive of the bodies God created. But we are likewise dismissive of the invisible things which God also made when we restrict our use of our members only to visible ends: a key failing of the natural law tradition.
He also sent me another link, but it's tricky to load. The only solution I suppose is to give myself Faithful Interpretation as an Easter present.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Sundry Matters
Graduate school is very quickly heating up again. I have two classes next term. Furthermore, I have two ongoing research projects, which really don't seem to be coming to a gracious close very soon. As you can tell from the various series on this blog, I very rarely finish anything. Indeed, I have profound trouble with completion generally. On top of that, I have two conference papers due Easter Wednesday. I'm TAing a course and volunteered to guest lecture on Easter Friday. Holy Week is my favorite week of the year, but it looks like it will be a rather unbalanced mix of work and prayer.
Tomorrow, however, I will be seeing Die Grosse Stille . If you're lucky, you may get a review.
If you get a chance, read AKMA's latest piece. It's very much in the vein of a lot of writing these days about "polity," but he makes it a bit more palatable than other dishes. I've asked him a hard question through his e-mail comment system. He also will have a piece in the Christian Century that will go online fairly soon, which he fears will lose him friends. Knowing many clergy in his Diocese, it is my profound hope that his friends there will keep an open mind. Because I suspect that there's an astonishing secret behind AKMA's life. That seven years after Rowan Williams was born, AKMA was formed by God to act as an American analog to Williams, so that one could divine Williams' thoughts by asking Adam. Some would say they are simpatico .
Well, that's a strange thought for the night. I guess the nightly phantasms came early.
Tomorrow, however, I will be seeing Die Grosse Stille . If you're lucky, you may get a review.
If you get a chance, read AKMA's latest piece. It's very much in the vein of a lot of writing these days about "polity," but he makes it a bit more palatable than other dishes. I've asked him a hard question through his e-mail comment system. He also will have a piece in the Christian Century that will go online fairly soon, which he fears will lose him friends. Knowing many clergy in his Diocese, it is my profound hope that his friends there will keep an open mind. Because I suspect that there's an astonishing secret behind AKMA's life. That seven years after Rowan Williams was born, AKMA was formed by God to act as an American analog to Williams, so that one could divine Williams' thoughts by asking Adam. Some would say they are simpatico .
Well, that's a strange thought for the night. I guess the nightly phantasms came early.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Bishops to Primates: Drop Dead (No, Scratch That)
What the House of Bishops really seems to have said to the Primates is: We propose. You dispose. We're tired of it. Your latest plan is utterly unacceptable. Oh, you seem to have the idea that you can use violation of provincial boundaries as a bargaining chip. This is illegal. This always has been illegal. Cut it out. (And in light of the Primates' Communique, they implicitly say that there's equivalence between border crossing and TEC's contribution to the dysfunction.) Send representatives to us soon for a few days. We'll pay. We'll read the Bible and roast wieners.
The major fudge of the piece concerned the desire of the Bishops to remain in Communion relationships. While I think they are right to hope that TEC might be able to maintain some important partnerships outside the Communion structure, +Rowan and Rowan's ecclesiology pretty much will not like these resolutions. He will not sacrifice the unity of the Church of England, nor the more centralized ecclesiastical structure he is letting others build about his ears. Formally, it may take some time, but a General Convention fairly near to us will have to consider whether it's truthful to say TEC is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion, because, as the Bishops tell us, General Convention has discretion over what that means.
One really hopes the Presiding Bishop did not make any extravagant promises about her influence, because if she did, she made them in vain. It appears that a coalition formed in the House between the angry moderates and the angrier liberals. Expect a minority report fairly soon. I am sure that many of the so-called "Camp Allen Bishops" do not want to be associated with this document. Collegiality be darned! The irony of this meeting is that it was held at Camp Allen. I guess there's nothing in the air or water that swings one to the right there.
But the Primates do not receive the harshest rebuke. Instead, this appears reserved for the proponents of schismatic relativity. These are the folks on the right who claim that they didn't land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on them. Well, no. But if you substitute TEC for Plymouth Rock and "split from" for "land on," you get the general idea. Examine the heart of the entire Statement,
In other words, the ACN/CANA etc. hath said unto us that we have married ourselves to the godlessness of Western culture, which shall destroy the patriarchal family ordained by Almighty God, but we say unto them that they are no less guilty and even guiltier than we are, for they bring the same dysfunction to the Church, which they claim we shall bring unto the family. In combination with the dig at border crossing, this is a direct and crushing rebuke. Moreover, the House even further marginalizes them by claiming their numbers are small.
I did not need to go to David Virtue or Kendall Harmon or StandFirm to get an idea of the response of the conservative reasserters (that's not redundant either). I just can read my favorite deacon, Texanglican, "I have difficulty imagining a scenario now that includes the possibility of the orthodox remaining within the Episcopal church a year from now."
And I am fairly sure the Bishops know this. I am fairly sure Bishops of much different opinions were there as well. The Bishops were warned, but they felt that:
Sounds great, doesn't it? Well, read a little more carefully. On one hand, there seems to be a subtle dig at +PJA about the obscene legislation he endorses. On the other hand, they talk about violence against women and children? Where? Zimbabwe? From what I can tell, the Primates are not as a whole likely to be in favor of violence against women and children. The Bishops really should have targeted their critiques at particular Primates. How dare they sit in judgment against us for our splinters, while they walk around with entire forests? But without specifics, it's fairly weak.
What the Bishops have done here is to call us and the Communion to a stability in controversy, to theology in tension. This is possible. But it requires a very difficult compromise from us all. On one hand, we need to give the conservative reasserters a place to stand. We stack the debate when we do not allow them places to cultivate virtue as they see fit in the same way they stack the debate by not allowing those who disagree with them a place to stand. I really do not think it is possible for the Diocese of San Joaquin and the Diocese of California to live together if they insist on remaking one another in their own image. At the same time, I sympathize with the discontents in both Dioceses.
The hard solution I would pose is to encourage both sides to return to compliance with law but allow some tolerance for scandal. I see Father Haller's house blessings or Christopher's wilderness rites as the proper orientation of liberal dioceses to the blessing issue. The liberals are not on the ball theologically, though the liberal reasserters might be getting there. There will be no more gay bishops for the time being, because a bishop belongs to the whole church. As the Candidate says, bishops should not be a focus for division, but that principle should apply to bishops generally. In conservative dioceses, there will be no openly/actively/whatevery clergy. Many will not like this. But reception of the Eucharist by those in exclusive, permanent, and faithful relationships will be a matter of conscience for the communicant etc. This will be an improvement in some places. Certain dioceses will not like this, but they are those dioceses likely to leave anyway. Individual parishes also will be given space, provided they are willing to let their bishop visit and contribute to the Diocese in time and talent. Where the bishop is, there is the catholic church.
What must stop is our constant threats to leave one another, our contempt for the order of Common Prayer, and the disrespect so many of us show for the kergyma contained in the Creeds. The kerygmal heresy and anomie (!) I constantly hear is becoming tiresome. Bls calls me the future of the church. Well, I'm only one man. If we change the basic truths we teach every decade or vacuously exposit the heart of our liturgy, few in my generation or the next will be there to keep me company. If all religions are equally favored by God, God reserves no punishment for those who disdain Him and hurt and destroy his creatures, and Jesus Christ does not save us from our sins, as a certain Verulam in these parts asserts, he will appear laughable as he condemns "illegal wars" or even genocide. Already I read people who say of religion that it was useful to organize societies in the past but those times have passed. If we continue to make fatuous truth claims (as Christians of many theological stripes do), people will prefer to play World of Warcraft . (Yes, I know Fr. AKMA plays World of Warcraft , it's just an example of the many endeavors that could absorb one besides Christian practice.) The level of our faith diagnoses very well the faith we have in one another. What we should do is pray, think, work, and talk, not with a view to gather the pedarii of General Convention or whatever other body to our side but with a view to explain ourselves to those we gather to Christ. Newcomers should come to us and hear, "Yes, we're having a bit of a fight with one another. And these matters are important. But what is more important is that Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, was revealed among us in flesh, taught us how to live, and saved us from our sins on the Cross. And on that Cross, none of his bones were broken. This was to remind us that we should not want to break them, that there are very few disagreements that should break the family of God apart.
The Button
I received my button in the mail today. It looks great. I will be wearing my button a little early in order to encourage interest.
The major fudge of the piece concerned the desire of the Bishops to remain in Communion relationships. While I think they are right to hope that TEC might be able to maintain some important partnerships outside the Communion structure, +Rowan and Rowan's ecclesiology pretty much will not like these resolutions. He will not sacrifice the unity of the Church of England, nor the more centralized ecclesiastical structure he is letting others build about his ears. Formally, it may take some time, but a General Convention fairly near to us will have to consider whether it's truthful to say TEC is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion, because, as the Bishops tell us, General Convention has discretion over what that means.
One really hopes the Presiding Bishop did not make any extravagant promises about her influence, because if she did, she made them in vain. It appears that a coalition formed in the House between the angry moderates and the angrier liberals. Expect a minority report fairly soon. I am sure that many of the so-called "Camp Allen Bishops" do not want to be associated with this document. Collegiality be darned! The irony of this meeting is that it was held at Camp Allen. I guess there's nothing in the air or water that swings one to the right there.
But the Primates do not receive the harshest rebuke. Instead, this appears reserved for the proponents of schismatic relativity. These are the folks on the right who claim that they didn't land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on them. Well, no. But if you substitute TEC for Plymouth Rock and "split from" for "land on," you get the general idea. Examine the heart of the entire Statement,
"Most important of all [the Primatial Vicar scheme] is spiritually unsound. The pastoral scheme encourages one of the worst tendencies of our Western culture, which is to break relationships when we find them difficult instead of doing the hard work necessary to repair them and be instruments of reconciliation. The real cultural phenomenon that threatens the spiritual life of our people, including marriage and family life, is the ease with which we choose to break our relationships and the vows that established them rather than seek the transformative power of the Gospel in them. We cannot accept what would be injurious to this Church and could well lead to its permanent division."
In other words, the ACN/CANA etc. hath said unto us that we have married ourselves to the godlessness of Western culture, which shall destroy the patriarchal family ordained by Almighty God, but we say unto them that they are no less guilty and even guiltier than we are, for they bring the same dysfunction to the Church, which they claim we shall bring unto the family. In combination with the dig at border crossing, this is a direct and crushing rebuke. Moreover, the House even further marginalizes them by claiming their numbers are small.
I did not need to go to David Virtue or Kendall Harmon or StandFirm to get an idea of the response of the conservative reasserters (that's not redundant either). I just can read my favorite deacon, Texanglican, "I have difficulty imagining a scenario now that includes the possibility of the orthodox remaining within the Episcopal church a year from now."
And I am fairly sure the Bishops know this. I am fairly sure Bishops of much different opinions were there as well. The Bishops were warned, but they felt that:
"It is incumbent upon us as disciples to do our best to follow Jesus in the increasing experience of the leading of the Holy Spirit. We fully understand that others in the Communion believe the same, but we do not believe that Jesus leads us to break our relationships. We proclaim the Gospel of what God has done and is doing in Christ, of the dignity of every human being, and of justice, compassion, and peace. We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ there is no Jew or Greek, no male or female, no slave or free. We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God's children, including women, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ's Church. We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God's children, including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ's Church. We proclaim the Gospel that stands against any violence, including violence done to women and children as well as those who are persecuted because of their differences, often in the name of God. The Dar es Salaam Communiqué is distressingly silent on this subject. And, contrary to the way the Anglican Communion Network and the American Anglican Council have represented us, we proclaim a Gospel that welcomes diversity of thought and encourages free and open theological debate as a way of seeking God's truth. If that means that others reject us and communion with us, as some have already done, we must with great regret and sorrow accept their decision."
Sounds great, doesn't it? Well, read a little more carefully. On one hand, there seems to be a subtle dig at +PJA about the obscene legislation he endorses. On the other hand, they talk about violence against women and children? Where? Zimbabwe? From what I can tell, the Primates are not as a whole likely to be in favor of violence against women and children. The Bishops really should have targeted their critiques at particular Primates. How dare they sit in judgment against us for our splinters, while they walk around with entire forests? But without specifics, it's fairly weak.
What the Bishops have done here is to call us and the Communion to a stability in controversy, to theology in tension. This is possible. But it requires a very difficult compromise from us all. On one hand, we need to give the conservative reasserters a place to stand. We stack the debate when we do not allow them places to cultivate virtue as they see fit in the same way they stack the debate by not allowing those who disagree with them a place to stand. I really do not think it is possible for the Diocese of San Joaquin and the Diocese of California to live together if they insist on remaking one another in their own image. At the same time, I sympathize with the discontents in both Dioceses.
The hard solution I would pose is to encourage both sides to return to compliance with law but allow some tolerance for scandal. I see Father Haller's house blessings or Christopher's wilderness rites as the proper orientation of liberal dioceses to the blessing issue. The liberals are not on the ball theologically, though the liberal reasserters might be getting there. There will be no more gay bishops for the time being, because a bishop belongs to the whole church. As the Candidate says, bishops should not be a focus for division, but that principle should apply to bishops generally. In conservative dioceses, there will be no openly/actively/whatevery clergy. Many will not like this. But reception of the Eucharist by those in exclusive, permanent, and faithful relationships will be a matter of conscience for the communicant etc. This will be an improvement in some places. Certain dioceses will not like this, but they are those dioceses likely to leave anyway. Individual parishes also will be given space, provided they are willing to let their bishop visit and contribute to the Diocese in time and talent. Where the bishop is, there is the catholic church.
What must stop is our constant threats to leave one another, our contempt for the order of Common Prayer, and the disrespect so many of us show for the kergyma contained in the Creeds. The kerygmal heresy and anomie (!) I constantly hear is becoming tiresome. Bls calls me the future of the church. Well, I'm only one man. If we change the basic truths we teach every decade or vacuously exposit the heart of our liturgy, few in my generation or the next will be there to keep me company. If all religions are equally favored by God, God reserves no punishment for those who disdain Him and hurt and destroy his creatures, and Jesus Christ does not save us from our sins, as a certain Verulam in these parts asserts, he will appear laughable as he condemns "illegal wars" or even genocide. Already I read people who say of religion that it was useful to organize societies in the past but those times have passed. If we continue to make fatuous truth claims (as Christians of many theological stripes do), people will prefer to play World of Warcraft . (Yes, I know Fr. AKMA plays World of Warcraft , it's just an example of the many endeavors that could absorb one besides Christian practice.) The level of our faith diagnoses very well the faith we have in one another. What we should do is pray, think, work, and talk, not with a view to gather the pedarii of General Convention or whatever other body to our side but with a view to explain ourselves to those we gather to Christ. Newcomers should come to us and hear, "Yes, we're having a bit of a fight with one another. And these matters are important. But what is more important is that Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, was revealed among us in flesh, taught us how to live, and saved us from our sins on the Cross. And on that Cross, none of his bones were broken. This was to remind us that we should not want to break them, that there are very few disagreements that should break the family of God apart.
The Button
I received my button in the mail today. It looks great. I will be wearing my button a little early in order to encourage interest.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
A Message from the Abbot
Beloved in Christ, I hope this Lenten season finds you both well and also greatly troubled. The wrath to come is never very far away and the time of trial always lies over the next horizon. And so may you be sorely tested by works of self-denial and deeply reflective on your sins. But also remember that this season also should be filled by works of mercy as the holy prophets command and likewise our holy mother Hilda. This is often difficult for us, especially for a certain ward of this house who is about to supplicate for his master's degree. How indeed shall a young man cleanse his way? It's easy to find time to meditate on our deep sinfulness, especially when we are young and the deceits of the world are so daily at our door. It is often difficult to find time for liberating the captive and minimizing our exploitation of the other.
In these last weeks, I have been thinking about the Northern Patriarchate in the 21st century to which this monastery is strangely bound by the mercies of God. I especially have been thinking about Changing Attitude Nigeria, an organization of gay and lesbian Anglicans in that country who meet together to reflect on the Word of God, praise His Holy Name, upbuild one another through prayer and fellowship, and consider the joys and obligations of their ordering by God and their place in their society. I was dismayed to learn that Changing Attitude Nigeria and similar organizations could be banned by legislation still pending in the Nigerian legislature. Worst of all, we have heard that the Primate of Nigeria, Peter Jasper Akinola, is a strong proponent of this legislation and may have initiated it himself. If this is so, we all should offer our prayers for this man, lest he place the godly among the lawless and become subject to the tribunal for the ill he wishes upon his brethren.
Here at the Monastery, we offer prayers daily for Davis Mac-Iyalla, the members of Changing Attitude Nigeria, and all gays and lesbians in Africa that the Lord may keep them in righteousness and preserve them in peace. But more can be done. In America on Tellus, there have been proposals that the Paschal feast is an opportunity for gays and lesbians to make public their presence in the churches by wearing the Arcus Imbri. Some have pointed out various difficulties with this, including the renowned BLS of the Topmost Apple. At her suggestion, our young ward has painted an icon in the ancient Powerpoint style in support of Changing Attitude Nigeria.
The figures are in the style of the famous Good News Illustrated Bible with a table pattern adapted from a tent hanging seen here . On the table lies the Holy Scriptures open to the verse of Psalm 118 that foretells gloriously the Resurrection of Jesus but also proclaims that victory over death is promised to all who declare the power of God. Note that the figures turn their head slightly toward Christ their Head, who opens the Scriptures to them.
You now can purchase this icon as a way of showing your support for Changing Attitude Nigeria, either on a t-shirt (for those who wear such things to Divine Service as is common in Laodicea) or as a button. at the Monastery's new online store. . Roughly 30% of the purchase price (all the profits) will go to Changing Attitude Nigeria. Wear them. Tell the story of Changing Attitude Nigeria. But also tell to those who do not know of the glorious resurrection unto vindication promised to those faithful to Christ Jesus.
Peace to you all in the Lord Jesus and to the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity be the glory world without end,
+Alfredus
In these last weeks, I have been thinking about the Northern Patriarchate in the 21st century to which this monastery is strangely bound by the mercies of God. I especially have been thinking about Changing Attitude Nigeria, an organization of gay and lesbian Anglicans in that country who meet together to reflect on the Word of God, praise His Holy Name, upbuild one another through prayer and fellowship, and consider the joys and obligations of their ordering by God and their place in their society. I was dismayed to learn that Changing Attitude Nigeria and similar organizations could be banned by legislation still pending in the Nigerian legislature. Worst of all, we have heard that the Primate of Nigeria, Peter Jasper Akinola, is a strong proponent of this legislation and may have initiated it himself. If this is so, we all should offer our prayers for this man, lest he place the godly among the lawless and become subject to the tribunal for the ill he wishes upon his brethren.
Here at the Monastery, we offer prayers daily for Davis Mac-Iyalla, the members of Changing Attitude Nigeria, and all gays and lesbians in Africa that the Lord may keep them in righteousness and preserve them in peace. But more can be done. In America on Tellus, there have been proposals that the Paschal feast is an opportunity for gays and lesbians to make public their presence in the churches by wearing the Arcus Imbri. Some have pointed out various difficulties with this, including the renowned BLS of the Topmost Apple. At her suggestion, our young ward has painted an icon in the ancient Powerpoint style in support of Changing Attitude Nigeria.
The figures are in the style of the famous Good News Illustrated Bible with a table pattern adapted from a tent hanging seen here . On the table lies the Holy Scriptures open to the verse of Psalm 118 that foretells gloriously the Resurrection of Jesus but also proclaims that victory over death is promised to all who declare the power of God. Note that the figures turn their head slightly toward Christ their Head, who opens the Scriptures to them.
You now can purchase this icon as a way of showing your support for Changing Attitude Nigeria, either on a t-shirt (for those who wear such things to Divine Service as is common in Laodicea) or as a button. at the Monastery's new online store. . Roughly 30% of the purchase price (all the profits) will go to Changing Attitude Nigeria. Wear them. Tell the story of Changing Attitude Nigeria. But also tell to those who do not know of the glorious resurrection unto vindication promised to those faithful to Christ Jesus.
Peace to you all in the Lord Jesus and to the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity be the glory world without end,
+Alfredus
Monday, March 05, 2007
More Canadian Humor (Lambeth I.10 Edition)
The Bishops of Qu'Apelle and Saskatoon Aren't Going To Be Happy About This I also think polygamy is illegal in Lebanon, too.
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Now That's What I Call Quality
I returned home this evening to find Robert Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance bookmarked with a green pamphlet: " 'Contraception': Abortion in Disguise." I wonder which one of my roommates is reading Pirsig at the moment.
And Now For Something Completely Different
Today, the Rector mentioned in his sermon that he was still mulling over why he received a standing ovation after last week's sermon. He then read a letter from a parishioner, a gay man who almost had been driven to suicide in his adolescence by his Baptist upbringing. Some time later, he found ILEOS and was baptized there last year. He presently was discerning whether he wanted to be confirmed, especially after the Primates' Meeting in Tanzania. But when he saw so many enthusiastically applauding the Rector's sermon last week, he felt that he would be welcome in the Episcopal Church. The crux of the sermon was that "four graces of ILEOS were under attack":
Problems abound here. The universalistic spin on common grace ignores that Jesus' point about common grace and God's providence in general was intended to demonstrate that we have no advantages before God in consequence of our birth. A Jew in isolation has no merit in himself just for being a Jew, nor a Muslim (likewise claiming descent from Abraham), nor an American, nor an Afrikaner, nor the countless other peoples that claimed being the chosen people of God made their injustice justice. The chosen people of God instead are those who do his will. And though I suspect this will not be a popular sentiment, a key part of His will is participation in Jesus Christ, which is not to say that there are not Jews and Muslims and Buddhists etc. who participate in his will revealed in nature or their scriptures. In fact, many seem to show the fruit of prevention by Christ far more clearly than some Christians, because Jesus is also the Wisdom of God at the heart of the world. But there remains something crucial about Christianity.
And, of course, let us not forget the third grace, which if universally implemented, would require a complete revolution in Christian identity. Wesley may have called the Eucharist the sacrament of conversion, but he preached in an era in which it was highly normative for people to be baptized as infants. Moreover, the Eucharist is the sacrament of conversion in that it is the visitation of Christ, the most fully of all human beings. It turns us to God in the most intimate way possible and reveals to us our imperfections. Despite a recent Salon article that suggests that it can convert the skeptical unbaptized, I still continue my objections to open communion. The inclusion of the Lord's dining fellowship should teach us not to wall ourselves from the evils of the world but live in hospitality with those with whom we differ. But we also should recall the table in the Upper Room, where Judas (as baptized as the rest of the Disciples) ate unworthily and was driven to great evil. An overly inclusive table could be a spiritual danger. And if that is what open communion is doing, it's bad hospitality.
As for the second grace, I doubt that this was really challenged in the Primates' Meeting. Many of the strident Global South Provinces ordain women to the priesthood. I understand that in Uganda the ordination of women seemed especially culturally appropriate. If certain conservative bishops and priests in their dioceses in ECUSA are as misogynistic as some liberal Episcopalians claim, they may find themselves quite uncomfortable in the future as their friends may continue to think that ordaining women is not a serious matter of doctrine or ontology but simply a matter of culture.
What the Primates' Meeting challenges is the fourth grace. Let us be clear. The Episcopal Church envisioned by the Primates in their pneumatological unity (a sort of average for theological purposes that smears much subtlety and disagreement) is one in which same sex unions are not blessed by the church (in public or in private or in Timbuktu, definitely not in Timbuktu) and those in such unions are not admitted to Holy Orders. Of course, some Primates would prefer far more repression, encouraging exclusion from lay leadership and reparative therapy. I still am unsure what Lambeth I.10 mandates for those ordained before they entered into same sex unions, but +VGR being degraded (though not deposed) follows fairly logically. But if they quote Lambeth I.10 to us as law, they have asked the letter of the law and no further. The Rector is right to see this as an attack. Complying with Lambeth I.10 would change the community he pastors radically. Even if much of the lay leadership weren't excluded, they would feel unwelcome.
So the sermon was a mixed bag. And so when much of the congregation rose around me in applause, I stayed seated and reflective. I do not applaud after sermons, not necessarily to follow Chrysostom's ban on applause in church, which could violate the Scriptural mandate to encourage one another at potentially appropriate times, but because God is the approver of the sermon. But the man who wrote to the Rector saw the incident as a measure of his dignity in that place, which is not something I want to deny him.
More Related
I still have no idea of what really is happening with the Nigerian legislation, but I am now a frequent (but very friendly) lurker here. This week I felt very frustrated with the whole issue. I have no influence with Martyn Minns or Peter Akinola. So I wrote the Archbishop of Canterbury's Press Officer an e-mail. I am afraid that no copy was saved for posterity, but I basically told the Archbishop of Canterbury that I thought it was obscene that the Anglican Church in Nigeria was promoting legislation that would prohibit the activities of Changing Attitude Nigeria, which just seemed like a bunch of Evangelical Anglicans who happen to be gay and have meetings very much Intervarsity Christian Fellowship (like the CU in the UK). I said that the legislation was analogous to the Conventicle Act. Good times. The Archbishop of Canterbury, of course, has not responded to me personally nor publicly on the issue, possibly because he has been too occupied with General Synod. But he may surprise us yet. Doesn't he know that liberal Episcopalians revere his words in this country. I barely heard anything specific about the Scriptures in today's sermon, but one of the Archbishop's essays was the central theme?
And Now For Something Completely Different
Today, the Rector mentioned in his sermon that he was still mulling over why he received a standing ovation after last week's sermon. He then read a letter from a parishioner, a gay man who almost had been driven to suicide in his adolescence by his Baptist upbringing. Some time later, he found ILEOS and was baptized there last year. He presently was discerning whether he wanted to be confirmed, especially after the Primates' Meeting in Tanzania. But when he saw so many enthusiastically applauding the Rector's sermon last week, he felt that he would be welcome in the Episcopal Church. The crux of the sermon was that "four graces of ILEOS were under attack":
However, there are four graces I want to hold up as graces that are being tested right now as severely as Jesus’ baptismal grace was tested in the desert. One is the grace of our knowing that Christians are not advantaged before God more than Jews, Muslims, and other people. The very theology of God's universal grace which makes the sun to shine on everyone alike, that very theology of grace is under attack by conservative forces in the Anglican communion. Another is the grace of women who are ordained as clergy. There are certain bishops who are interested in regressing to a time when we will not ordain women to the priesthood. Another is the grace of open communion – “whoever you are and wherever you find yourself on the journey of faith, you are welcome to receive the bread and wine made holy”. The fourth grace I want to bring to mind is the grace of blessing same-gender unions
publicly and joyfully.
Problems abound here. The universalistic spin on common grace ignores that Jesus' point about common grace and God's providence in general was intended to demonstrate that we have no advantages before God in consequence of our birth. A Jew in isolation has no merit in himself just for being a Jew, nor a Muslim (likewise claiming descent from Abraham), nor an American, nor an Afrikaner, nor the countless other peoples that claimed being the chosen people of God made their injustice justice. The chosen people of God instead are those who do his will. And though I suspect this will not be a popular sentiment, a key part of His will is participation in Jesus Christ, which is not to say that there are not Jews and Muslims and Buddhists etc. who participate in his will revealed in nature or their scriptures. In fact, many seem to show the fruit of prevention by Christ far more clearly than some Christians, because Jesus is also the Wisdom of God at the heart of the world. But there remains something crucial about Christianity.
And, of course, let us not forget the third grace, which if universally implemented, would require a complete revolution in Christian identity. Wesley may have called the Eucharist the sacrament of conversion, but he preached in an era in which it was highly normative for people to be baptized as infants. Moreover, the Eucharist is the sacrament of conversion in that it is the visitation of Christ, the most fully of all human beings. It turns us to God in the most intimate way possible and reveals to us our imperfections. Despite a recent Salon article that suggests that it can convert the skeptical unbaptized, I still continue my objections to open communion. The inclusion of the Lord's dining fellowship should teach us not to wall ourselves from the evils of the world but live in hospitality with those with whom we differ. But we also should recall the table in the Upper Room, where Judas (as baptized as the rest of the Disciples) ate unworthily and was driven to great evil. An overly inclusive table could be a spiritual danger. And if that is what open communion is doing, it's bad hospitality.
As for the second grace, I doubt that this was really challenged in the Primates' Meeting. Many of the strident Global South Provinces ordain women to the priesthood. I understand that in Uganda the ordination of women seemed especially culturally appropriate. If certain conservative bishops and priests in their dioceses in ECUSA are as misogynistic as some liberal Episcopalians claim, they may find themselves quite uncomfortable in the future as their friends may continue to think that ordaining women is not a serious matter of doctrine or ontology but simply a matter of culture.
What the Primates' Meeting challenges is the fourth grace. Let us be clear. The Episcopal Church envisioned by the Primates in their pneumatological unity (a sort of average for theological purposes that smears much subtlety and disagreement) is one in which same sex unions are not blessed by the church (in public or in private or in Timbuktu, definitely not in Timbuktu) and those in such unions are not admitted to Holy Orders. Of course, some Primates would prefer far more repression, encouraging exclusion from lay leadership and reparative therapy. I still am unsure what Lambeth I.10 mandates for those ordained before they entered into same sex unions, but +VGR being degraded (though not deposed) follows fairly logically. But if they quote Lambeth I.10 to us as law, they have asked the letter of the law and no further. The Rector is right to see this as an attack. Complying with Lambeth I.10 would change the community he pastors radically. Even if much of the lay leadership weren't excluded, they would feel unwelcome.
So the sermon was a mixed bag. And so when much of the congregation rose around me in applause, I stayed seated and reflective. I do not applaud after sermons, not necessarily to follow Chrysostom's ban on applause in church, which could violate the Scriptural mandate to encourage one another at potentially appropriate times, but because God is the approver of the sermon. But the man who wrote to the Rector saw the incident as a measure of his dignity in that place, which is not something I want to deny him.
More Related
I still have no idea of what really is happening with the Nigerian legislation, but I am now a frequent (but very friendly) lurker here. This week I felt very frustrated with the whole issue. I have no influence with Martyn Minns or Peter Akinola. So I wrote the Archbishop of Canterbury's Press Officer an e-mail. I am afraid that no copy was saved for posterity, but I basically told the Archbishop of Canterbury that I thought it was obscene that the Anglican Church in Nigeria was promoting legislation that would prohibit the activities of Changing Attitude Nigeria, which just seemed like a bunch of Evangelical Anglicans who happen to be gay and have meetings very much Intervarsity Christian Fellowship (like the CU in the UK). I said that the legislation was analogous to the Conventicle Act. Good times. The Archbishop of Canterbury, of course, has not responded to me personally nor publicly on the issue, possibly because he has been too occupied with General Synod. But he may surprise us yet. Doesn't he know that liberal Episcopalians revere his words in this country. I barely heard anything specific about the Scriptures in today's sermon, but one of the Archbishop's essays was the central theme?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)