Monastic Life in a Lay World ... Sort of

This reflection comes on the heels of the Christmas rush. Just a preview, I arrived at the Cathedral at 2 PM on Christmas Eve to assist with preparing the altar, and to prepare dinner for the clergy and choir, feeding the clergy and choir beginning about 7:45 PM to about 10:30 PM. Taking small breaks in between to say a quickie Vespers and complete the Service of Preparation for Holy Communion (which is truly a beautiful Eastern practice). Midnight Mass at 11 PM, and this goes on. The next morning I arise early (after a 2 1/2 hour nap) to say the Matins of Christmas and to feed the homeless, and the list goes on. Today was the first day I really had "off" per se.

The point isn't to regale you with "110 degrees up hill in 2 feet of snow", but it has caused me reflection on my life, which I consider to be semi-monastic. Those who know me well, know that I spend a lot of time at Church and reading theology and doing church things. Only recently have I taken up a secular-ish hobby (calligraphy - but then that leaps into church things too), hiking (which I do on occasion), but I spend a lot of my free time in prayer, service, or something similar. Now I'm contemplating starting the discipline of the Divine Office again and step by step (if I've learned anything it's not to just go full throttle into the whole thing), that is to say as many of the seven canonical hours each day as I can and build up. Some people call me intense, but this is something that makes me calm and gives me great insight. People wonder why I do what I do and why I'm so dedicated.

I feel very much connected and somehow fulfilled after these four days of service, and would love to do more. People ask if I ought to be a monastic, but I don't think so. As the Lord chooses to reveal more and more refined shades of what I'm called to do, I feel called to both as weird as that seems. I feel called to be a monastic, yet be of the world. That is, I feel called to minister to people around me, especially to the gay culture. I feel a call to a life fully dedicated to God, yet in that life also work in the public arena with regular people. I'm happy to be where I am on my journey and I think I'll keep going that direction, however, perhaps as time goes on my direction will be much more precise than it is now.

Pax Domini

Orthodoxy, Postmodernism and Missions

I know that this is a weird reflection given the festive nature of the Nativity season. But, I think it's something that's important that the Church needs to explore and wrestle with especially as we are faced with declining church attendance, lower preference for religious activity and with the potential death of the churches we call home. I don't mean to be the harbinger of doom, or to overly criticize what we do in a mean-spirited way. However, I do think there are many serious flaws in the way that we do mission and the way that we engage the culture around us and present a voice of hope, the same voice of hope that the Church has been (or at least should have been) for the past 2,000 or so years.
Right now, our society is in the midst of a fundamental change and indeed I can see this. Postmodernism is becoming more and more part of the fabric of our culture and our thought. We are seeing the shift from meta-narrative to mini-narrative. We can see this even in the context of modern theology. We see the importance of seeing how the mini-narrative theologies of different cultures and sub-groups (i.e. feminist theology, Latin-American theology, Asian theology, gay theology, and so on) help give us a bigger picture of God and how people interpret God. In modern culture, postmodern people are focused on that mini-narrative, their local story, their local issue. Of course, I don't pretend to be an expert on postmodernism or culture in general, but I can see what is changing. People of my generation don't respond to the same evangelism that their parents' generation did. As the concept of "relative truth" or subjective truth begins to prevail, it seemingly becomes more and more difficult for Josh McDowell style evangelists to succeed. Aside from that, many of the liberal / mainline approaches to evangelism are becoming less and less successful. Those which are, in my opinion, tend to offer freedom without the characteristic prophetic and redeeming voice of God's church. Some Churches offer freedom of belief without responsibility, they offer surface-level discipleship, or at worst they offer a country club style setting for the local elite on Sunday mornings.
We are now at a veritable fork in the road. Just a little sampling of what we're faced with - roughly 10% of those children raised in the church are staying in the Church beyond 9th grade. Up to 80% of college students have never attended a Church service or been members of a church. The attitude towards Christians is an attitude of disdain, and sometimes outright hate. We as the faithful are now paying the price for remaining silent as deceitful heretics like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and D. James Kennedy were allowed to spew their hateful rhetoric and stoke the fires of fundamentalism in our country. So what do we do? What can we do to reverse the trend? Well, this is by no means a working model, but definitely a start. Because what needs to happen is not choosing a new program or using a new manual for what we do, but rather a change in our understanding of the mission field and how we as Christians ought view the culture and society around us.
First and foremost, the Church needs to cast off the excesses of modernistic and philosophical theology brought to us by the likes of Rudolf Bultmann, John Shelby Spong, Marcus Borg, and other figures like them. The Church needs to return to some form of orthodoxy in faith and practice. It needs to once again elevate scripture and tradition and demote reason back to a place where it is equal to scripture and tradition and not in a position of superiority. Christians need to realize that theology is not an individual exercise, rather it is an exercise that should be done in the context of community. Orthodoxy has been able to weather the paradigm shifts in to medieval society, the renaissance, and into the enlightenment and it has been able to re-express itself in a way that makes sense to the society in which it existed. The solution to our missional woes is not in tearing down the proverbial house of the Church and taking out its foundation and moving it to what I consider sandy ground. Rather, we simply need to remodel. We need to find ways to express and be who we are while remaining committed to the same foundation of dogma and doctrine as established by the Fathers and our ancestors in the faith.
Second, Christians must be willing to change for the sake of continuing Christ's work on earth for posterity. Bishop Kirk Smith made a comment that some people find it difficult to make changes and stubbornly won't, even though they need to in order to grow and become a growing group of people again. The Church that ceases to evangelize loses its scriptural warrant to exist. Some have said that they would have contemporary music in their churches over their dead bodies, others have said that they don't want to evangelize for fear of having the "wrong kind of people" in the church, well unfortunately these people may have to die in order for the Church to grow. It is a harsh statement, I grant, but it is true. Similarly, the Church must re-discover its connection to the Fathers and find a way to express the timeless teachings of the Church in a way that makes sense to people who bear the hallmarks of a postmodern outlook. In other words, the Church must embody Christ's teaching of "I have become all things to all people". If we cease to be relevant, we cease to exist.

Just some musings, by no means a complete thought.

The Evangelical Speaks ... EfM - the Undoing of the Church

I thought that coming out gay to Episcopalians was daunting ... it was really a non event, a "so what" kind of deal. But come out to them as an Evangelical and the effect is roughly the same as a gay person would receive in a run-of-the-mill evangelical church. People look in amazement when I tell them that I believe Jesus was resurrected on Easter Sunday, and that the Bible is inerrant. Those doctrines are so last century ... I mean now we have Marcus Borg, Shelby Spong, and all these people to tell us that original sin is a lie and that the Bible was all a political power play. Hmm ... well, I think that's all popycock
I have to say that I am highly disappointed in the Education for Ministry program, and in many ways thankful that this is my last year. Don't get me wrong, I love my community of EfMers and I love each and every one of them, but the program is really getting on my nerves, and I mean really. The books take a decidedly anti-orthodox stance. I spend half my week arguing with the text about some interpretation of Church history. My question to the EfM authors is ... if the early Church was so bad, and was involved in all this political power playing and mysogyny, why is God's church still standing today? More importantly, how could they still claim to be Christian or yet Episcopalian? My EfM mentor has said that it's meant to open up our minds. But I asked what about opening people's minds to orthodoxy? To that there was no response. Many in the group think that I'm evangelical because I'm 22 and just going through that young adult revolutionary angst rebellion thing. Well, that's odd considering that I'm actually quite the conformist ... I mean, I'm trying to shape my Christian practice according to Scripture and Tradition and all that.
Fortunately, the Presiding Bishop has taken a stance to defend the diversity of theology in the Episcopal Church, and she has fired folks who have openly said they want conservatives out of the Church. Thank God! Hopefully the Presiding Bishop will also soon realize that although we are not a confessional Church in any sense, we are still a Church that must subscribe to a minimum of doctrine to remain in fellowship with other Christians and to strictly preserve that subscription for the sake of maintaining communion.

Just had to get that off my chest ...

It's Finally Here - The "Alternative" Province

Well what a wonderful and glorious day it is, not really. Today it was announced that the Common Cause Partnership has established an "alternate" province of Anglicans in the United States. Hmm ... quite interesting. They make no secret of the fact that they seek to supplant the Episcopal Church as the sole recognized province of the Anglican Communion in the States. Curious.
But nonetheless, this, I believe is doomed to failure. Why? Well, first of all we have a mish-mash of organizations with radically different ecclesiologies. The constitution is hardly solid and steadfast. It permits for secession even from within its own ranks and enshrines congregational authority ... this is certainly puzzling given their desire to be united with each other and so on. This is enshrined in its provisional constitution. They can't even agree on the ordination of women. The document states:

"1. The member dioceses, clusters or networks (whether regional or affinity-based) and those dioceses banded together as jurisdictions shall each maintain all authority they do not yield to the Province by their own consent. The powers not delegated to the Province by this constitution nor prohibited by this Constitution to these dioceses or jurisdictions, are reserved to these dioceses or jurisdictions respectively
2. The Province shall make no canon abridging the authority of any member dioceses, clusters or networks (whether regional or affinity-based) and those dioceses banded together as jurisdictions with respect to its practice regarding the ordination of women to the diaconate or presbyterate." (Common Cause Partnership, Provisional Constitution Article VIII)."

I don't know about y'all but this sounds like Episcopal Congregationalism to me. In the context of the catholic ecclesiology of the global Anglican communion, this is clearly Congregationalist thinking and hardly meets the classical Episcopal governance of members of the Anglican Communion. I'm surprised that they didn't try to put all properties in trust. Tsk tsk! I thought we were supposed to be one Church here.

"All church property, both real and personal, owned by each member congregation now and in the future is and shall be solely and exclusively owned by each member congregation and shall not be subject to any trust interest or any other claim of ownership arising out of the canon law of this Province. Where property is held in a different manner by any diocese or grouping, such ownership shall be preserved." (Common Cause Partnership Provisional Constitution, Art. XIII)

Are we planning for some doctrinal or ecclesiological dispute? Or was this a compromise to satisfy the more protestant quasi-jurisdictions (more specifically the REC)?

Their Canons are equally scant. Both Constitutions and Canons make up no more than five written MS Word pages I think. Scant when compared to the Books of Order of the Presbyterian Churches or the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.

As misguided as I think these efforts are, I do wish the people who are participating in this peace and success in their journey and that God will lead them into all truth and knowledge of Him. I hope that this was done not out of reactionism, factionalism, or a spirit of divisiveness but out of a genuine and conscientious objection to the actions of the Episcopal Church and some of its global partners.

Cantuar's Video on World Aids Day

First, the following message from Rowan Cantuar:






Now, Lord Archbishop, although I appreciate the sentiment and the powerful message of your video, and it was a good one at that, there are some glaring omissions that you need to pay attention to. AIDS in Africa is especially important, but what about the growing AIDS rate in your own country (UK) and the western world, especially in the GLBTQ community? What about pastoring AIDS victims in your own community? What about listening to people from your own part of the world?

Rowan ... wake up!

Restoring the Scandal of Christmas - The Advent Conspiracy

Advent is here! Wow - it's come very fast this year. But it is perhaps one of the most misunderstood seasons of the Church Year. This is from the Advent Conspiracy's website:

The story of Christ's birth is a story of promise, hope, and a revolutionary love.

So, what happened? What was once a time to celebrate the birth of a savior has somehow turned into a season of stress, traffic jams, and shopping lists.

And when it's all over, many of us are left with presents to return, looming debt that will take months to pay off, and this empty feeling of missed purpose. Is this what we really want out of Christmas?

What if Christmas became a world-changing event again?

Welcome to Advent Conspiracy.

Worship Fully

Spend Less

Give More

Love All

And now for a nice video

Eat this Borg, Crossan and Ehrman!

I just read The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel. This was an excellent, well reasoned and sound critique of the debasement of the divinity of Jesus and the power of his earthly life by such figures as Borg, Crossan, the Jesus Seminar and Bart Ehrman. Check out this video.




Even better, search it out on Amazon and get your copy. Wonderful!

Share the Gospel in Three Minutes?

If someone asked you to share the fundamental tenets of Christianity, how would you do it? Well, James Choung's Big Story is perhaps the best way to do it. It's succinct, easy to remember, and really powerful. No, not proof verses from the Bible, just a reasonable explanation. Check it out:

Article XXV and the Holy Communion

Many of my Anglo-Catholic friends are worried about my recent turn to the Articles of Religion as a formulary for Anglican doctrine and belief. One cause often brought up is the infamous Article XXV which reads in part:

" The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon or to be carried about, but we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same they have a wholesome effect or operation: but they that receive them unworthily purchase to themselves damnation as Saint Paul saith."

I'm guessing the part that the Anglo-Catholics bristle at is the part that says that the Sacraments were not ordained to be gazed upon or to be carried about. Well, in fact, they weren't were they? Indeed we, as Catholic Christians, do indeed worship Christ as present in the elements, and in the Eucharistic Adoration we adore Christ, not the Sacrament itself. I would say that Eucharistic Adoration is but hollow unless there is a true devotion to the Christ present. Also, I would say that processing about with the Blessed Sacrament is but an acknowledgment of the power of that singular Sacrament on all who partake of it worthily.

He who worthily partakes of the Sacrament with a humble and contrite heart will receive blessing from God, and will manifest the fruit of his salvation in his own living. When such a person participates in the Eucharistic Adoration he is not worshiping the cookie, he is worshiping Christ. The Blessed Sacrament provides a visual image and point of focus for our worship.

More on the Articles later.

Article IX, Holocaust and a difficult foreboding

Ugh ... this is going to be a very difficult weekend. Tomorrow is a rally for equal rights for same-sex couples, a monastery (my favorite monastery) has been destroyed, people are very sick, and I just watched a movie that made me cry a lot (no ... not that femmy emotional romance movie cry). I saw Boy in the Striped Pajamas today. It's a very difficult film ... a German boy meets a Jewish concentration camp prisoner who is the same age through the barb-wire fence. I won't spoil the plot, but it makes me wonder how humanity could be so vile, and could so dehumanize another group of people. Well, I had my 1662 Prayer Book along so I peeked at it at dinner. Article IX of the Articles of Religion provided some clarity:

"ORIGINAL sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the fault and corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit;"

I won't go any further, because I'm still processing the film at the moment. But suffice it to say, many difficulties have come to the fore this weekend. I'm just hoping that God will be so graceful as to help me through.

On the election

As you are all probably aware by now Proposition 102 has passed. This means that Arizona's constitution is now amended to ban same-sex marriage in our state. It is a rather unfortunate and sad day in the history of our state and our country, and our church to have allowed such amendments to pass. The Episcopal Church has strong legislation supporting civil unions and same sex marriage, and yet the Diocese of Arizona, nor TEC stepped up to do anything. Sure, Bishop Kirk sent out a note asking us to vote no, but that wasn't enough.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints ("Mormons") spent millions of dollars in California and Arizona to get these propositions passed. They ordered members to give time, talent and treasure to this cause. What did we do? Send out a note. But it's not just us, its everybody. Prop 102's YES campaign began months before the elction. The opposition No campaign began 2 ½ weeks before the election, and was hardly substantive. The only argument they could offer was "vote no again". We (the GLBTQ community, the supportive Churches, etc.) just didn't get our stuff together this year, to our detriment.

However, I would like to turn this negative into a positive. This amendment does not block us from seeking civil unions for GLBTQ couples that will provide rights quite similar to marriage. Hopefully we can now work towards protecting visitation rights, probate rights and more. Although we were dealt with a defeat, it's not as bad as the defeat suffered by the GLBTQ community in Florida. In that state, a measure similar to Arizona's Prop 107 in 2006 (banning not only same-sex marriage, but also civil unions and any recognition of same-sex partnerships) passed. They will be having a much harder time than we will.

In the final analysis, let us pray for each other. Those who voted yes, and those who voted no. I know we're angry, we're sad. But we can all take consolation in the fact that God loves us so very much, and that one day, we will have equal rights, and one day we will be able to marry, but it just takes time. Now, let's take it one day at a time, and one step at a time and redouble our efforts to invite people into dialogue, to educate them about who we are, and to share the love of God with them every day.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with all of us evermore.

Ian

The Pot Calling the Kettle Black

Today I just learned (albeit later than most), that the Archdiocese of Sydney in Australia has authorized lay presidency for the Eucharist. That's right folks, now deacons of the Diocese of Sydney are permitted to celebrate and consecrate the Eucharist. Who'd have thought that this day would come in Anglicanism. It's like a liberal Episcopalian's dream - everyone's included - no more special priestly class - everyone can remember Jesus' special meal! Ironically, the archdiocese that has authorized this is perhaps one of the world's most conservative. It is one of GAFCONs biggest members ...
So, now, I think that this action falls under the Gene Robinson faux-pas doesn't it? Did Sydney consult with the wider Australian Church let alone the rest of the world's bishops before they did this? I mean this is contrary to the grain of everything catholic and Anglican. Even the most evangelical low-church Anglican would maintain that a Priest needs to officiate at the Eucharist (even in clam-diggers and shorts). I join other centrist bloggers out there in asking GAFCON to react with the same anger towards Sydney as they did towards TEC when it consecrated Gene Robinson. Also, those Anglican Covenant folk ought well be able to address Sydney's damaging mistake of judgment if they're going to address the legitimate election and consecration of Gene Robinson.

Peace Out!

Ian

Enriching our Worship: Creating Easy Worthless Faith?

I was in Palm Springs this weekend, attending the Church I usually do when I'm there. They used the Enriching Our Worship eucharistic prayer (Normally they're Rite II, Prayer A - Right up my alley). During the eucharistic prayer there were some very disturbing replacements of words. As I also heard in the readings of the New Testament, there was lots of what I call "interpretive" changes. I've probably hashed over this before, but I wonder if folks are aware of the true consequence of what they're doing. A lot of folks are now trying to teach a Christianity that is dried up, worthless, and extremely easy. Reaks of the infomercial phrases - free trial, nothing to lose, no risk to you, no contracts, no commitments.
But then again, that is the general flavor of society today. I think that a lot of people aren't really into intentional community building anymore. N.T. Wright in his book The Last Word remarked that there is a growing new gnosticism in our churches that tells people that self-discovery and self-actualization is the actual important achievement. Simply put it's unscriptural, un-Christian, and un- a lot of things. But there's also something more disturbing afoot here. The modifications in the Enriching Our Worship are disturbing to say the least.
In Enriching our Worship, Jesus broke bread and gave it to his friends ... whereas in the Books of Common Prayer and in virtually (99.9%) of all Christian liturgies, the word disciples is used. Using English semantics, we see a vast chasm of difference between these two words and their meanings. Greek similarly also shows a big difference. Disciple and friend (in Greek: mathetai and adelphoi) are not synonymous, even moderately so. Understandably, this is some effort to be inclusive, or to be welcoming, but wait a minute, what is our theology of the Holy Eucharist? Regardless if you're a memorialist, or a die-hard transsubstantiationalist, or anywhere in between this is a big deal. Homosexuality is not a creedal or dogmatic debate, ordination of women is not a dogmatic or creedal debate, but this, I would argue is. Holy Eucharist, I think, represents a lot more than just a symbolic meal. For if it was, I don't think that the tradition would die out and be replaced by wafers and wine. As an example, the Sikhs have a communal meal called Langar which they established when the religion was established over 500 years ago. It has not been reduced to a token sharing of food, it is still sharing food (a full meal). This is why the whole friends versus disciples debate is one that I take very seriously and one where I think we ought to opt for the latter.
At the risk of sounding exclusive, I do believe that this is where we must draw the line between Christians and non-Christians. Even a super-inclusive, gay-friendly Church like the one I go to in Palm Springs prints prominently on its bulletin that: all baptized Christians are welcome to come forward to receive communion - if you are not baptized, still come forward for a blessing. My non-Christian friends never take communion if they come to Church with me. I asked them specifically if they felt excluded. They said that they were excluded, but they said that it's something that only Christians would understand and something that Christians take very seriously. They didn't want to disresepect what for us is a very sacred moment.
It's a very sinister thing to make a small change from disciples (students, who may be friends of Jesus, but nonetheless committed to Him), to friends (people you know, but not necessarily those who you have promised your life to). If all we needed to be Christian was to be friends with Jesus, we would lose the uniqueness and power of our faith. It becomes worthless. Jesus becomes nothing more than an ethical teacher. He then will have been stripped of his authority. Christianity is not humanistic, neither is it all-affirming. It is all-inclusive: everyone has sinned and is in need of God's redemption. It's that simple. Everyone is welcome to God's redemption. Being a Christian comes with consequences and will force you to make decisions that you may not want to make. Everything is not alright for Christians. The Confession of Sin at the Eucharist is not your license to sin freely. Lest we all forget, Jesus not only forgave the harlot of her sin, but he also admonished her to go and sin no more. That's when Christianity gets hard - the go and sin no more part. The part where we have to continually refine ourselves to conform to the will of God.

Seismic Shift Time

If you've followed along, you've noticed that this summer has been one of seismic shifts for me. It's almost like I experienced conversion again, not just in any small way, but a seismic move of the Spirit like I experienced in Germany when I finally repented of my sin of being in the closet and denying myself before God. I haven't felt the Holy Spirit moving so strongly in me since that time. I have noticed that I am coming into my own as a disciple again. As I do reading, books that don't come from any particular reading list, just ones that pop out at me from various suggestions from friends, or things that draw me at the bookshop, I feel like it is a providential revelation.
As I've said before, I've noticed now that I don't jive with the "liberal" establishment of the Church, the Spongs, the Borgs, the Crossans of the Church. Neither do I jive with the fundamentalists. I find that my faith jives with John Stott, N.T. Wright, the so called "open evangelicals". As I've read and studied, I also can more comfortably identify as an evangelical (to the horror of some of my friends). I've come to a place where I can trust God's Word and God's will for my life and the life of the Church. As I have grown in my trust of God, my worship and prayer has become deeper and more powerful. As I agonize in prayer for the gay community and for those who are hurting, I feel ever closer to God.

These words only barely express the tip of the iceberg of the transformation that I'm experiencing because of the Gospel. As I write this, I'm almost crying in thanks to God for the wonderful work He is doing. Praise the Lord! Praise God from whom all blessings flow!

Address to General Convention Delegates

This is addressed to all GC delegates. My heart has been so troubled by all of the mudslinging and partisanship in the Church, and this is one way of letting that out. Keep in mind I also issued this statement as an Integrity, Inc. official

TO: General Convention Delegates for the Diocese of Arizona

Dear Delegates,

First, I hope you all understand the significance and the historic nature of the upcoming Convention. At this Convention, we have many resolutions, which will be presented to you that deal with the issues of the GLBTQ population in the Episcopal Church. We will be questioning whether or not to go on with the moratoria legislated as part of Resolution B033 of the 2006 General Convention. Various parties will be presenting a variety of resolutions regarding the blessings of same-sex unions, and perhaps even one resolution to modify the Book of Common Prayer to delete all gender pronouns in the Solemnization of Marriage and other parts of the Book of Common Prayer. The decisions you make on behalf of parishioners in the Diocese of Arizona will make a history. It is with this in mind that I offer these thoughts on your work at Convention in 2009.

With Regard to The Current Situation in The Church

Today, there is a threat in our church that is as real as could be. We are threatened with the prospect of a major schism, which in the unfortunate cases of the Dioceses of San Joaquin and Pittsburgh has occurred and soon will occur in the Diocese of Fort Worth. This schism threatens to destroy the unity of the Church, which Christ prayed for in the Gospel of John (John 17:20). It also threatens the unique philosophy and approach of Anglicanism in the Episcopal Church, where we are united in the essentials of the faith and in the non-essentials we practice diversity and charity. What is even more unfortunate is that this schism is occurring because of something that I would not regard as an essential point of the Christian faith as has been delineated in our Creeds and historically in the Articles of Religion. We are getting to a point in our Church life where both liberals and conservatives will no longer engage in dialogue with one another, creating a “my way or the highway” approach to communal life in the Body of Christ.
I hope that as General Convention delegates you will do everything in your power to work for unity in the Church and to foster dialogue between disagreeing parties and points of view. This is the only way we can begin to heal the partisan thinking that has so poisoned our Church and our society. In so doing, we also respond to the needs of the community and not so much the individuals. Both sides, liberal and conservative, must be willing to cede ground in order to bring about true reconciliation and unity in this Church. Now you may ask me: “Well such side has not ceded ground, why should we?” Well, we must be the first to cede ground and offer an olive branch. The scriptures tell us: “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I say to you, do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39ff). If we fail at this, we may never be the same again. It is my hope that Convention not devolve into a partisan quagmire of endless debate without practical solutions for the reconciliation of our fractured communities.

Implications of Our Stance on GLBTQ Issues

As I previously said, you will encounter many resolutions that will affect the life of GLBTQ people not only in this diocese but in the entire Episcopal Church. Some of the proposed resolutions are radical in nature and seek to effect rash and hurried progress towards full inclusion, which in turn may result in more damage to our already fragile communion in the Episcopal Church and in the Anglican Communion. These resolutions are being proposed by people within the organization I represent, Integrity, Inc. However, from conversations with GLBTQ people and their friends in the diocese, I have not heard much support for rash moves towards inclusion and blessing of same-sex unions. Instead I have heard much support for measured progress that is mindful of the needs of various parishes and dioceses as well as the human concerns of all members of the Church.
In summary, we do not support resolutions which would unduly jeopardize the unity of the Church and force anyone to make a decision to leave the Episcopal Church on the basis of such a resolution. At this time, we do not support resolutions to modify the Book of Common Prayer in any way, or to force dioceses in any way to bless or sanctify in any way the blessing of same-sex relationships under the umbrella of a national policy or rite. In view of the progress achieved by the GLBTQ community in the Diocese of Arizona over the past year, we believe that the best option is to support resolutions that give the discretion and authority over the administration and regulation of such blessings and rites to diocesan Bishops and the option of offering or not offering such blessings and rites to individual parishes.
Having stated that, we also strongly support making progress in the inclusion of GLBTQ people throughout the Church through education and dialogue (Windsor Report §145-146) and by instituting the listening process supported by the Windsor Report. We also support the enforcement of current national non-discriminatory Canons with respect to allowing all qualified people equal access to the life, worship and governance of the Church to include the discernment process. (Constitution & Canons Canon I.17§5, III.1§2 et seq.)

Things to Keep in Mind

In conclusion, I ask you delegates to work for reconciliation and peace in our Church so that we may fulfill what Christ prayed for us: “that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me” (John 17:23). By doing so, you will help share the Gospel message not just in our Church, but also in a world that is in need of God’s transforming love.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with all of you as you prepare for General Convention.

Peace be with all of you

On the Inhibition of Ann Holmes

According to Episcopal News Service reports (story: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/81803_101582_ENG_HTM.htm), Bishop Geralyn Wolf of Rhode Island has formally deposed Ann Holmes from her post as a Priest. Former Rev. Ann Holmes had formally recited the shahada or the formal profession of conversion to Islam. She was convicted of abandoning the communion of the Episcopal Church by the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Rhode Island, and the Bishop reaffirmed that decision.

Before You Read On (The Disclaimer)
This post will get a bit polemic and harsh, because frankly the doctrine of the Church is harsh towards this kind of behavior. I will be highlighting how Islam is incompatible with the discipleship and priesthood life of a Christian. This is not intended in any way to disrespect Muslims. It is intended to highlight what I think are grave issues of discussion that affect the doctrinal life of our Church and ones that ought to be discussed openly. Also, I do not regard Ann Holmes as a Priest nor as a fellow Christian, being that I believe conversion to another religion is automatic self-excommunication from the Christian fellowship of believers, therefore I will not refer to her as Reverend in any part of this post.

The Story of Ann Holmes
The ENS story records Ms. Holmes's comments as follows:

While serving at St. Mark’s, said Redding in an interview, “I was facing a personal crisis and I needed to surrender. I did know that the word ‘Islam’ means ‘surrender,” but I was surprised when I received what I believe is one of the few invitations I’ve received from God in my life, and that unexpected invitation was to surrender by taking my Shahadah.

“It’s still a mystery as to why, on March 25, 2006, which happens to be my ordination date and the annunciation, I felt called to say the Shahadah with the intention of becoming a Muslim. I’m continuing to explore what it means to be both a Muslim and a Christian, and I expect to be the rest of my life. Being a Muslim makes me a much better Christian, and being a Christian makes me the kind of Muslim I want to be. I see as my calling and privilege witnessing the deep reality of one God.”

So that's the basis of this whole debate and discussion. Now, let's get into the heart of it.

What is the Shahada?
The word as-shahada (roughly: testimony) refers to the act of bearing testimony to and affirming the principal tenets of Islam. An English translation of the profession is: There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet. However, according to Islamic practice, the Shahada must be recited in Arabic. The recitation of this fulfills the first Pillar of Islam. The Shahada must be recited honestly and in the presence of two Muslims to be considered valid. In addition there are six conditions required. This single act, completes the act of conversion and abandonment of the Christian faith (this point to be explored later).

Did Ann Holmes intend to become a Muslim? Was her Shahada valid?
Those who would question the intentionality of the statement or whether this was merely an act of solidarity must consider the circumstances in which the act was done. Although I am unsure if there were two Muslims present, Ms. Holmes herself states that she intended to become a Muslim. Regardless of whether the Shahada itself was valid in the eyes of Muslim law, the intent and commission of the act is what applies with regard to Christian considerations as to what she actually did. The mere act itself shows an abandonment of Christian principles, if it were actually valid, it would provide administrative proof to that effect.

Why is this so serious?
Unlike simply expressing a preference for a certain theological outlook, or saying that one believes in an alternative interpretation of scripture is not the same as professing to have converted to another religion. By converting to Islam, the convert is to assume that Muhammad is the last prophet and the Al Qur'an is the final and absolute word. Furthermore, as Ms. Holmes so succinctly put it herself, Islam means surrender, surrender to the principles of Islam, the loss of one's cultural identity, one's previous religious identity, in exchange for the identity of Islam.
The meaning of the Shahada and the consequences of the act are in direct contradiction to essential principles of Christian doctrine that Ms. Holmes agreed to upon her ordination. It is in contradiction to our belief that the Old and New Testaments hold all that is necessary for salvation. Furthermore, Muhammad is not accepted as a prophet in our tradition. We are, unlike Muslims, not obliged to follow his teachings. Furthermore, Islam, unlike Christianity, does not affirm grace and forgiveness for all people. God will judge all people, including Muslims. This contradicts the Christian affirmation that those who choose will be saved by grace and the atoning death of Christ on the Cross. On another point, Islam rejects the divinity of Christ, which is considered an essential doctrine of Christianity. Islam refers to Jesus as only a mere prophet or teacher.

The Seriousness of the Act and the Compatibility of Such Act with Christian and Islamic Jurisprudence.
Christianity and Islam, as Bishop Wolf rightly put it, are incompatible. Actually they are mutually exclusive. As Episcopalians, we have covenanted with the Lord at our Baptism that we accept Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior. We also pledge to continue in the Apostles' teaching and in the breaking of the bread together. (Book of Common Prayer p. 304ff). Being a practicing Muslim, one would naturally reject Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and subjugate His royal position into that of a mere teacher or prophet. Now, while I have problems with this particular type of thinking, it would not be as serious of Ms. Holmes simply stated that she agreed with multiple points of Islamic theology and attempted to somehow integrate that into the larger Christian corpus of theology (as problematic as that may seem).
It is also eminently clear that the act committed (and the stance continued to be held) by Ms. Holmes is incompatible and indeed constitutes an offense in both Episcopal and Islamic jurisprudence. The step she has taken is to publicly identify her self as a Non-Christian. From a Sharia (Islamic Law) and Qur'anic perspective, when one converts to Islam, it is to the exclusion of all other religions including Christianity. According to Sharia, her profession of still being Christian would be a form of the legal offense of Shirk (Qur'an 9:1-15, et seq.), associating Lordship with something other than Allah. From the perspective Episcopal jurisprudence, she also is in a state incompatible with her role as Priest. The Priesthood Ordination Vow (Constitutions & Canons, Art. VIII) and the Baptismal Covenant would both be breached in this case.
From the jurisprudential and theological perspectives, it would be impossible for Ann Holmes to be both an Episcopal Priest (let alone Episcopalian layperson) and a practicing Muslim at the same time. It is clearly not the case, that Ann Holmes gives any regard to this when she states: "I’m continuing to explore what it means to be both a Muslim and a Christian, and I expect to be the rest of my life. Being a Muslim makes me a much better Christian, and being a Christian makes me the kind of Muslim I want to be."

What of Her Personal Identity and Rights?
In a pluralistic and open democratic society of ours, it is not outside of the norm that one can be whatever they want. They can self-identify as they wish without consequence and practice their belief openly. So, if she wishes to be a Muslim-Christian or Christian-Muslim, she is free to do so as long as she wishes, from my perspective as a citizen of the United States towards another citizen of the United States. However, from my perspective as an Episcopalian Christian and being mindful of our tradition, our theology and our practices I must remind everyone that membership in the Church and possession of the authority of Priesthood is not a right but a privilege (albeit one that is laxly enforced). She does not have the right to hold the Priesthood if she insists on being in constant non-compliance with Canon Law. It is a shame that Ms. Holmes was not deposed sooner.
If Ms. Holmes wishes to be a layperson in the Episcopal Church, like all others she would certainly be welcome, I am sure. But, it is a totally different thing when she assumed the role of Minister of Word and Sacrament and Priest. She is then no longer her own self. She belongs to the people of the Church. She is obliged to them to teach them the Word of God as contained in the Bible and to maintain the Doctrine, Discipline and Practice of the Episcopal Church. If she wants to share her vision of Muslim-Christian identity, she is certainly welcome to do so, but the Episcopal Church is NOT the right context for her activities, and she should not be using her Priesthood Collar to lend credence to her theology or way of thought.

The ESV Study Bible is coming!

Hey friends! I'm excited to tell you that the ESV Study Bible is only 3 days away from publication! Wow! Let me tell you, from what I've seen of this Study Bible, I pre-ordered it. It contains a wealth of resources for study and interpretation and the ESV translation is unparalleled. I like the ESV because it is readable, and it is accurate with respect to the original languages. Check out this Bible for yourself, see the video I've embedded. Oh, and by the way, I haven't been paid for this endorsement.

My God Isn't a Stepford God

Have any of you seen the movie Stepford Wives where the men of the community of Stepford transform their wives in to placating, compliant women? Well, in my current reading, I'm reading The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Timothy Keller. He made a good analogy on a Stepford God. Sometimes, the God that we conceive for ourselves placates us and lets go whatever it is that we do wrong. We have sometimes built for ourselves a Stepford God, one that doesn't care and is just there to fulfill our desires and keep us in our comfort zones.
Well, let me tell you that I enjoy the fact that God and His Word challenge me every day to be better, and to obey His will more closely. I find that my faith is fulfilled not in building a bastion of theological comfort, but in trailblazing and finding a faith that really changes lives. So do you have a Stepford God?

AIG - Thank God I Still Have a Job ...

Many friends have been worried about me, especially since I work for AIG. But thank God, I still have a job for now. What happened was nothing short of scary. Basically (and this is oversimplifying), AIG insured a lot of bad mortgages. They insured payment of a bond if there was a default. Well with the recent credit crisis, this all went down the tubes. Part of the reason is that AIG is as an insurer required to use "mark to market" accounting. What this means is illustrated with this analogy: Suppose you have a home that is worth $250,000, but no one will buy it, so it's market value becomes $0 because no one can or will buy your asset. So, if you were using "mark to market" accounting, you would have to list the value of your house as $ 0 not $ 250,000. So a bunch of AIG assets that had value had to be rescued because their mark to market value was going down rapidly.
What would have happened had AIG gone bankrupt was that they would have to sell all of their assets (including Property & Casualty Insurance) at a deep discount. So we would have been sold off. Actually, the part of the business where I work is over capitalized and last year made a profit of about $2 billion. We have more than we need to do business as a property casualty insurer. But fortunately for us we aren't going anywhere for a while because we are one of AIG's core assets. We're OK! Thank God!

A Little Rant on the COM

Coincidences, - I met a member of the COM (that's Commission on Ministry) while on retreat at Mt. Calvary. I shared that I was getting ready to go to Fuller to start my M. Div., at which she said rather curtly (she's a nice lady though) - "The COM takes a dim view of anyone who goes to seminary without letting COM know". If I weren't at the monastery and the Holy Spirit wasn't doing His magic, I would have just lost it.

Actually, I probably would have said something to the effect of - well where else am I supposed to go for rigorous Christian formation? Don't get me wrong, Trinity Cathedral is an awesome place and sometimes has great formation programs. I'm privileged to be part of one of the best - EfM. This is a great program, and there have been others. However, given my call to really minister to people and a strong avocation for theoretical theology, I wanted to go somewhere where these needs could be met.

It just bugs me that in the Episcopal Church and some other mainline churches that Seminary is supposed to be one big secret accessible only to the vetted elite. All of the big books about hermeneutics, exegesis, theology and all that are locked up so Priests will have an unending source for useless, pedantic, innane humor in their sermons (sorry, that was a cheap shot ...).

The point of the matter is that some of us (yes few, but some) want a theological education to make us better ministers of the Gospel in our own context as laity. For example, as I relayed to my parish priest, my call is to teach and counsel, not so much to do work at the altar. COM doesn't really want anything to do with people like me (that is people who aren't gunning for the Priesthood or Diaconate), and yet they would take a dim view of the fact that I want to learn about my faith and a discipleship life in an academic context? (Or actually, do they take a dim view of me going to a Seminary that rejects the Bultmannian approaches to a de-mythologized theology that makes Christianity so watered down that it's useless?)

Monastic Menagerie

For the past three days I've been staying at Mt. Calvary Monastery in Santa Barbara. It's a beautiful place aesthetically, but spiritually, it is even more beautiful. I know that the Lord reveals things to us when we need them. That has been especially true during my time here at Mt. Calvary. This place is really Church as it perhaps ought to be. Here I've encountered liberal Episcopalians, non-Christians, conservative evangelicals, Lutherans, and all manner of people, but they all pray together and eat together. I've had some of really awesome conversations here. I learned lots from people and people learned from me, especially because many of the mainliners haven't really encountered someone like me - that is a gay evangelical anglo-catholic. It's a bit perplexing to them, but once they realize that I'm not a seething fundamentalist, things smooth a bit.

I've had lots of time to ponder, and special times with the monastics as well as others who also happened to be on private retreat during this time. Indeed it is an awesome ministry to be able to work in your own context (for example, I had a goal of reading 3 books, which I did in three days, actually I came out ahead of schedule), yet there is also time to sit and enjoy the beautiful sunrise or sunset, and time to talk with others. This is another one of those times when I am reassured of the existence of the Holy Spirit because of what happens here. This morning, apparently, a crew from Westmont College, an evangelical liberal arts college, come for Friday Lauds and Eucharist and have breakfast (at an Episcopal monastery nonetheless). Something's afoot in the world and I'm glad to be part of it.

Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum

Ian

Vacation / Retreat Reflection Day 1

The vacation isn't off to a very promising start. Barry hurt his back this week, so he's laid up. I've decided to hang around the valley until Sunday after Church. I'll go off to Los Angeles after brunch with the friends. But I am starting my reading and reflection on time. This week is going to be a time for sabbath and discernment. Normally I'm very busy and doing all kinds of stuff over the weekend. But this weekend is a bit of a change - a little time off.

So this vacation, like I said is a reading retreat, and a time to just read, pray, meditate and encounter some different thoughts and take time to listen to God. The reading program is pretty strenuous, but definitely manageable and not taxing. Right now I'm finishing up True Story: A Christianity Worth Believing In by James Choung. Some of you would be surprised at what Evangelicals have to teach crusty Episcopalians like us about preaching the Gospel. This isn't the typical bridge diagram:



It's something a lot more. It really reflects a Gospel we can believe it. It is a gospel that emphasizes conversion as well as living out the call to discipleship. It's about understanding what really happened. It's a great read. As I read it, it is a great narrative of the basic message of the Gospel. It isn't high theology, it isn't philosophical, but it's a great "get down to basics". We Episcopalians sometimes get stuck in our ivory towers and forget to come down. This helps us do that.

I am reflecting on this right now as I'm discerning more and more of how to direct the Integrity ministry at Trinity Cathedral and working with Young Adults in general. I see a lot of apathy, I see a lot of people just waiting to get out of this world, when that's not the point. Disciples are meant to get their hands dirty and work in the trenches. Recently, I was reading some information about the social work career, and their little advertising thing was "on any given day, a Social Workers is helping ..."

What if we put out something like that ... on any given day a Christian is feeding the homeless, helping a single mother raise her child, helping someone overcome addiction, ... . There's a lot of nasty stuff that's going on not just out there in the secular world, but also in here, in our little Church world. What are we doing to change it? When many of our young adults lose interest and leave the Church only to become an asset for someone else? Anglicanism has a great message for the world, and taught correctly could serve to heal a lot of what's going on in our country.

People call me conservative, strict, evangelical, whatever ... but the point is we are dealing with a dying Church and no one is listening, absolutely no one! When confronted with the fact that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life, most Episcopalians shudder in disgust at such an "evangelical" or "fundamentalist" statement. When confronted with the fact that Jesus demands absolute surrender from us, we shudder again at the thought of not being able to do what we want when we want. Anytime someone wants to get a fire underneath the belly of Episcopalians for evangelism, we're called infiltrators from the fundamentalists.

Positioned correctly, the Episcopal Church is in the best position to grow right now and what are we doing about it? We're putting out ridiculously stupid and innane commercials about cutting carrots. We're letting people like John Shelby Spong teach a Christianity so watered down that anyone that believes in it might as well be a member of every religion. We're driving out Christians who want to take a stand on traditional doctrine and faith in exchange for a faith that means nothing and changes no lives.

If this is the way that the Episcopal Church is going, we will soon lose our scriptural warrant to exist. We will no longer have the warrant of a Church because we are no longer following the Great Commission, we will no longer have the warrant of disciples of Christ because we are not making a change and doing what we need to do to build God's Kingdom here on earth.

The Product Recommendation ...

I rarely do this ... that is publicly recommend or endorse something. But I saw the previews of the upcoming ESV Study Bible (yes - I get book previews), and I have to say it is a really impressive Study Bible. It uses the English Standard Version translation which is an excellent word-for-word literal translation. Even though it is very literal it is also very understandable. It is also a lot less clunky that the NRSV translation that we use in the Episcopal Church. Plus, the study notes look like a good mix of historical information and practical application. I've pre-ordered a copy for myself. Check it out!

Forgiving the Word: Learning to Love God's Word Again

Forgiving the Word:
Healing the Hurt and Learning to Love God’s Word Again

The Bible is the world’s best selling book. In fact, contrary to common Episcopal thinking, the Bible is the ultimate authority in our faith, not the Book of Common Prayer (which also happens to be a heavily Bible based book). Billions of people around the world use the Bible to help them understand what is going on in their lives, how they can overcome problems, and how they can better love their neighbor. The early scriptural authors also thought a great deal about what they knew then as scripture. In Timothy’s letter, we read:

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” 2 Timothy 3:16-17, ESV

The New Testament often quotes passages from the Old Testament, and our Book of Common Prayer draws many of its texts and responses from scripture. But for some of us, it’s not so easy to respect the Bible or hold it in high esteem, or even to pick it up and read it. Some of us have been hurt by the very book which is supposed to help us on our journey as followers of Jesus.

Just as the Bible can and has been used to inspire, to teach, and to train people in righteousness, it has also been used to hurt people. Not just gays and lesbians, but countless others have been hurt by the Bible. Some use the Bible as if it were God’s proverbial stick with which the righteous strike others. You’ve perhaps been at the receiving end of such abuse. Let’s call it just what it is – abuse. In our personal histories, we have perhaps seen the Bible used in horrendous ways. In these days, we see televangelists and other public figures use the Bible to justify their political outlooks, or to justify their hatred of people who are not like them. For gay and lesbian people, the Bible has been used to tell us that we aren’t part of God’s kingdom, and that we aren’t worthy of the blood that was spilled by Christ to save us. We’ve been told that we are an abomination, a perversion, and not even worthy of the flesh and bones of which we’ve been made. I acknowledge that, I’ve felt that, and I know you have too.

This kind of abuse causes a lot of hurt. I know it does because I’ve seen it. I’ve seen countless Christian young men lose their faith on the basis of two or three Bible verses. I have personal experience of how deep and how painful that abuse can be. But this is where we reach a crossing point. What do we do with that pain, with that abuse, with that hurt that lies deep within our hearts? Many choose to simply ignore the problem by either excising those difficult passages from their reading of Scripture, some simply choose to throw their Bibles in the trash (proverbially if not physically). But do we have to do that? Well, let me offer some reasons why you and I need to process this.

The Anger that Poisons

A lot of us have a deep-seated anger that I believe is misdirected. We often direct our anger at the abuse we have received towards the book and not the person using the Book. We often wonder how the Bible could contain something that says God doesn’t love us. We think that the Bible must be wrong because it says such and such. But is it? Or is it the person who is telling you wrong? This kind of anger exists in all of us. I know this and I acknowledge the anger that I have. The problem is a lot of us have not let God have this anger.

Just as in any situation, when we leave anger to its devices it poisons us. It poisons our thinking and our perspective. For many of us, the stories of the Bible used to evoke awe and wonder. When we heard about Noah’s ark and how Noah got all those animals into the boat. Wasn’t that a wonderful story? Nowadays in our anger towards the Bible, we often take extraordinary steps to deconstruct and demythologize it until that feeling of awe goes away. We try to dismantle the beauty of it to unearth its hidden wrongs. This isn’t to say that critical study of the Bible is not a good thing. This is to say that sometimes we go so far out of our anger and our own spite, not out of a desire to understand what God is saying to us. So, we need to let go of our anger. We need to let go of any pain and suffering.

Doing the Business of Forgiveness …

Forgiveness is one of the central virtues of Christian faith. God so loved the world that he forgave our sins by sending his Son Jesus to die on the Cross. We as his disciples are expected to forgive others just as we are forgiven. But forgiveness is hard because of the business required. Forgiveness means nothing to us or the offender if the offender doesn’t know that he or she did something wrong. I urge you to find out if you can associate a name of someone who hurt you with scripture and do business with this person. Tell them that you feel you have been wronged and that you were hurt by what they did. They may not respect that, they may try to argue, but you’ve done your business. Forgive, give it to God and don’t take it back. If you can’t do this, maybe you can write down some of the ways you’ve been abused by scripture and burn the paper as a symbol of letting it go. The point is you need to do something to let it go and start again.

Once you’ve done this, it’s time to get reacquainted with the Book that has been used to hurt you the most and begin again to journey in the depths of its wisdom. The business of forgiveness helps us to revitalize ourselves and refresh our understanding. We can again pick up the Bible and get benefits from it and allow God to speak anew in our lives. We can engage its wonderful stories with awe again and appreciate the wisdom that God has to share with us. Doesn’t that sound good? Doesn’t encountering God’s word preserved for us sound like an awesome adventure? Well it’s about time.

Getting Back to What the Word Is …

First, let’s get back to what the Bible is, what it really is. No I’m not going to talk about history or anything like that. I am going to talk about the significance of the Bible. What it means that it exists, and what we believe about it. Let’s go back to our Anglican roots. The Articles of Religion say:

“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.”
Articles of Religion VI (Book of Common Prayer Page 869)

Also, let’s read what the 1979 Book of Common Prayer Catechism says:

“Q. Why do we call the Holy Scriptures the Word of God?
A. We call them the Word of God because God inspired their human authors and because God still speaks to us through the Bible.
Q. How do we understand the meaning of the Bible?
A. We understand the meaning of the Bible by the help of the Holy Spirit, who guides the Church in the true interpretation of the Scriptures.”
Book of Common Prayer, Page 853 – 854

There are some important nuggets of information here. First of all, the Holy Bible is the Word of God. This is not to say that it is the literal, hand written word of God, but it is an acknowledgment of the fact that God inspired the authors of the scriptures. Second, we understand that the Bible is the ultimate rule of faith for a Christian. The Articles of Faith say: “Holy Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation”, Article VI. Third, we also understand that the Bible is one of God’s ways of speaking to us today. So the Bible is very significant to us as Anglicans.

Our tradition emphasizes that the Bible needs to be interpreted. We have to remember that the Bible is not a mere collection of 31,101 handy and nifty proverbs and legal proofs for why you should do this or that in your life organized into 66 handy little books. We have to remember that the Bible is our Church’s accepted record of God’s interactions with his chosen people from the perspective of His people. We often find that some of the interactions we read about in the Bible closely mimic those that we have in our own lives. We find that the Bible has some nugget of wisdom for us in the form of a story, a proverb, or a song when we interpret it and understand it. But the first step is to pick up the Bible and to look at its pages again, not as a disinterested scholar, or a rabid critic, but as a Christian. So let’s talk about how we can do that.

Getting Your Feet Wet

The first question is do you have a Bible that is accessible to you? Is there one you can pull off your shelf and dust off? Not sure if this is not going to work and don’t want to spend money on a Bible? There are plenty of resources to get a free Bible. It’s time for you to read the Bible again.

It’s important to get your feet wet and to just encounter the stories again. It’s like catching up with an old friend you haven’t seen for a while. You just have to listen to the stories again, and learn about that friend slowly but surely. So, it’s my suggestion that after you read this article, you go get your closest Bible and read the Gospel of Mark (that’s the second book of the New Testament). It’s a quick read and if you’re a voracious reader, there’s nothing that prevents you from reading this in a couple of hours. Don’t analyze, don’t criticize, just read it. Get to know Jesus again, or if you don’t know him – for the very first time. After this, you might try another Gospel or the Acts of the Apostles. Later on, we’ll have an article of how you can study the Bible easily and some ways you can think about the wisdom that the Bible shares.

In Closing …

I hope that this article has been an exercise in understanding, forgiveness, and healing for all of us. I hope that you can begin the healing process and truly begin to love the word of God again. It’s such a precious resource for us in our lives and Disciples. We are meant to use it, to peer into its pages for insight and to hear the Lord speak to us. Many blessings on your journey with Jesus. May God bless you!

Taking the Plunge for the Lord

This week is one of those weeks ... the Lord is back at it again and is tugging on the strings of my heart. Now, it's harder and stronger than ever before. There seems to be a lot of resistance to me going to Fuller Seminary from different places. Some people are hesitant because it is a conservative seminary, others because it's not an ivory tower Episcopal seminary. But you know, when the Lord calls you to serve, you can do nothing but. The Lord is calling me to discernment and to prayer about me. I've spent a lot of time praying for others and their welfare, but now it's time for me to really reach back inside and listen to the Lord. So it's happening. I just wrote another six essays for the Fuller admissions process and this caused some serious reflection to happen again, especially because one of the questions was about my call to the ministry.
And here comes the crux of the dilemma (and unfortunately, this is something that would almost be unique to the Episcopalians) ... I discern that I am called to pastor but not necessarily to be a Priest. I don't expect anyone to really understand this, because even for Episcopalians this seems paradoxical. Nonetheless - it's my question now. Ugh, sometimes you wonder about the risks and about all the time and money this is going to cost, but then I hearken back to what the Lord says "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." (Mt. 16:24). I have to remember that as a Disciple, the Lord demands nothing less than total obedience to Him. So, I did it.
Yesterday, applications were submitted to Fuller Theological Seminary and we are just pending one more recommendation letter, and the transcripts are on their way from the colleges I went to. Now I'm writing my Cohort application. I can do no less. Yes, this is not complying with the bureaucracy of the Commission on Ministry, nor is this a hoity toity Episcopal seminary, but the Lord calls and I can do nothing but answer the Call to Serve. I sense that my calling is to pastor GLBT people and witness to them of the redeeming and transforming power of the Gospel. I can't help but cry in adoration and worship the Lord when I hear God's call on such an unworthy sinful servant like me.

Hearing the Lord ... (reflections on Summer)

You know, God really is an interesting character, especially in the lives of those he has called out to serve Him and His people. The reason I say this is that the last three months have really been an experiment in surrender. I left EfM (that's my Education for Ministry class at Trinity) in May thinking that I would just get through my summer reading and go back to another fruitful and enjoyable year at EfM with friends. I had picked out a set largely composed of Benedict XVI's theology and some other mixed theological books. I managed to finish one, N.T. Wright's Surprised by Hope (incidentally, this is a great book!).

Well, things changed ... a lot. I was off to pick up Barry at the Airport. I realized that I might have to wait a bit because his flight was delayed. So I went to Borders and picked up a Christianity Today. For me, this was an odd choice at the time, but I figured I needed reading material. So I read it and things really started to move. My interest piqued in Evangelical theology and in going to Seminary. That familiar tug came again from God for me to really listen up because He's up to something. Well, as it turns out, He is. After reading the magazine, I saw an ad for Seminary and that I needed to find out about doing some of this online.

Don't get me wrong, my EfM group is something that I value and consists of people that I love and care for, but it isn't providing me with the academic rigor I need. I wanted to go somewhere where I would be challenged, indeed pushed to learn Greek and Hebrew and to do exegesis and learn Systematics and really be pushed to understand my faith and how I might articulate it to a hurting world. But I didn't want to attend a prototypical "Episcopal Seminary". I understand that folks are finding new approaches to faith, but that's not me. The prototypical Episcopalian loves John Spong and Living the Questions, worshiping Mother Earth and all this Enriching our Worship business. That's not me. No, I'm more of a John Stott, N.T. Wright with an Oxford Movement twist. I'm willing to be part of a big tent, but I'm not willing to trash what I consider fundamental values.

So, the Lord shines the light onto Fuller Seminary, which incidentally has a Southwest campus here in Phoenix that I can go to. Oy ... well it looks like based on the research that Fuller has a good reputation among all denominations although it does scare the living sh*t out of mainliners. Which is a good thing, because I scare the living sh*t out of mainliners anyway. Why? Well it's that whole evangelical business, no I'm not some crazy fundamentalist out with "God hates progressives" signs, no, it's that I am really conversionistic, crucicentric and biblicentric. That is I preach and believe in a theology of the Cross - that Jesus died for our sins and that we are washed in his blood. Also I believe in the authority of scripture, something that is now passé among modern theologians. Also my conversionism bugs people, because I believe that real Christian faith shows in people, and that conversion is a natural and indeed necessary part of Christian conversion.

So the Lord speaks and I listen ... and the call just gets stronger. I have a call to preach to and serve young adults and gays and lesbians ... wow. I sometimes feel like I don't know how I'm supposed to do all these things, when I remember that really, that's the Holy Spirit's business. So I'm just going with the flow, learning Biblical Greek and Hebrew, and getting ready for my admissions essays. This experience of letting God take the reins is really scary, yet it is surprisingly comforting. It really is being someplace on "the Way". Lord Jesus, only you know where I am on the Way, help me to know your Will and serve you and only you Jesus.

Just a Prayer

I know, it's off genre, but it just came to me


Heavenly Father,
I know you're there and you're listening. I thank you for everything you've done for me.
I know you love me, but I don't have the slightest idea why. All that I know is that I'm loved. You're so crazy in love with your people, so much so that you sent your only son to die on the cross for us. Lord, let us never forget that fact, let us dwell in that image of your love, a love that is so boundless and encompassing that we couldn't conceive of it ourselves. In your love and mercy, guide us your disciples through these troubled times and help us to discern Your will, help us to walk always humbly with you. Let your Word be a lamp for our path.

Hear us today, and bless us with your mercy

I pray Lord in the greatest name that is ab ove all names,
Jesus

Amen.

Conversion is just as important as Inclusion

Fortunately, my parish is blessed with priests who have values and have experienced in some way the transforming power of the Gospel. Sure I quibble and tease about little ritual issues, but in truth I really respect them. However, in my sojourn across many so called "inclusive" churches, there appears to be a liberal inquisition afoot (thank you Eric for this little phrase). This includes some Episcopal Churches unfortunately. The Liberal Inquisition is all about getting people through the door, into the Church and getting them to be part of their ministry. In striving to provide a spiritual home for marginalized people, we often forget the task of spiritually feeding them and inviting them to experience the transformative and redeeming power of the Gospel.

In these places they tolerate every new wind of doctrine and heresy. In these churches, it is not uncommon for priests and other leaders to deny the divinity of Christ, or perhaps to reject the authority of scripture. Sermons are not evangelical, not life-changing, just boring discourses about arcane theology or the newest rage in New Age. I may not agree with some folks interpretations of the so called "clobber" scriptures against homosexuality, but I haven't thrown my Bible into the garbage. Folks like John Crossan and Shelby Spong often relegate Jesus to be some kind of benign Bolshevik revolutionary: hardly scriptural, hardly historical, hardly reality. They relegate Paul to the position of irrelevant obsolete teacher of Christianity and revile him for some of the very hard things he says. This is hardly life-changing stuff.

In our desire to include and accept everyone, we forget that Christianity also has a teaching mission. We take people where they are and we're supposed to make them better disciples, not leave them in the pig trough. It's a great thing to share the love of God, don't get me wrong. It's a great thing that we want to provide a spiritual home for gays and lesbians who can't find a home elsewhere. However it's also our responsibility as we adopt these wayward children who have been cast off by other Christian communities, to form them in scripture and the ways of discipleship, because they will be our future. If we fail, our Church will die. If we neglect this task, our Church will die. As I wrote previously: either the Episcopal Church shows its relevance for today's society or it is time to simply let it pass into the mores of history.

Purity is Gaining Ground

Today I was reading the August issue of Christianity Today and there was an article that particularly interested me. It was an article on discussing sexuality on the college campus. It's something that is surprising to me, but also a "thank you Lord" moment. The article was actually an interview with the author of a book that studied sexuality on college campuses and compared evangelical Christian with secular campuses. As usual, these articles are focused on heterosexual relations only, which is fine given the audience they're shooting for. The key point of this was that the "hookup" culture is beginning to lose ground on secular campuses. Students (even the most liberal of them) are beginning to come to the realization of their unhappiness of the hookup culture which objectifies people. For Christians, the hookup culture is naturally contrary to the teachings of Christ. For to objectify someone and not treat them like we would treat Jesus is indeed sin.
In the Gay community, fortunately, the hookup culture is also losing ground. Young gay adults are beginning to realize that hooking-up is detrimental to one's spirit and one's own self. They are figuring out that the dangers are much more than getting HIV or an STD (which in and of themselves are life threatening). They are figuring out that hooking up is hurtful. The gay community has too long been marred by the image that we are sexual perverts who engage in relations without regard for who it is we are "doing". Fortunately this is losing ground, but not soon enough, and not fast enough. Unfortunately, this culture has infected the Church as well (both in straight and gay populations ... no pots calling the kettle black here!).
So here is where I commit political suicide, or something rather close to it. The liberal end of mainline denominations have not done enough to teach sexual ethics according to scriptural expectations. When the Diocese of California announced that they would be providing pastorally for those same-sex couples in the Church who wished to get married, I was overjoyed. Yet where was the message reminding them of the expectations of a disciple? Where was the statement that it is the expectation of the Church that sexual relations occur only within the context of a committed relationship (preferably lifetime)? It's one thing to talk about societal ethics and norms, it's quite another to talk about the norms and expectations for someone who claims to be a disciple. In becoming disciples we have laid down our rights and given up our pride. So there is no "I have the right to sleep with whom I choose when I choose" in the Church, absolutely not. There is a huge difference between trying to live the Gospel as best as we can and throwing it in the trash altogether. This goes both ways, the Mainliners have been so busy policing the bedrooms of their gay parishioners that they have not had time to teach straight people about the moral expectations of discipleship.
It is with great thanks that this news comes to me, that is that purity is gaining ground. The new generation is turning out to be much more conservative than their parents, albeit in different ways. A church leader said that this new generation is marked by a selfless faith that is also engaging. The Holy Spirit is working! Thank you Lord!

I know this sounds "ranty" but that's the state of mind I'm in at the moment :)

A Gay Man on Surrender ...

I was worshiping yesterday evening at Vineyard North Phoenix at their YA service. This was such a great service to attend. It was emergent in every sense of the word (except doctrinally of course). Everyone was seated on the floor, and the theme of the night was different postures of worship (the previous meeting's theme being worshiping God through our lifestyle). The music was typically Vineyard, but still their songs are powerful expressions of worship.

One of the songs hit me yesterday night - it is called "Surrender"

I'm giving you my dreams, I'm Laying down my rights / I'm giving up my pride / for the promise of New Life / and I surrender all to you / all to you / all to you.

Being a gay person, the words "laying down my rights and giving up my pride" have special meaning considering that they're two very big buzz-words in the community. Just a wow moment. Especially as I wonder about those who call themselves "gay Christians" - I myself being one of them. But especially for those folks who have stiff upper lips like I did towards anyone who disagreed. - wouldn't our Christian community be a bit better we just took a moment and laid down our rights and gave up our pride?

Needless to say this goes both ways. We spend too much time demonizing and de-humanizing the other. We spend too much time preparing our next carefully planned canon blast against the other side's arguments. Don't we? So what if we were the bigger people, the people who would be willing to cast aside our pride for a moment and engage the other authentically? What if we laid down our rights for a moment and just engaged each other as we are? Wouldn't we then experience the healing and reconciliation that Christ promised?

I know that I get a lot of glares from the gay community, and that's ok. Even though I'm gay, that doesn't mean that for a second I need to give up on who I am first and foremost, a disciple of Jesus, my Master. Oh Master, be my teacher, be my savior, be my God!

The Spirit of the Lord ... How incredible ...

A lot of you know that I make a habit of studying over the summer (mostly stuff that people think is boring). The Spirit has moved me off of what I thought I was going to read this summer (mostly Pope Benedict XVI's theology, ...). So instead, I get inspired to start reading Millard Erickson's Christian Theology and to start studying Greek. On this track, I was also inspired to apply to Seminary - Fuller Southwest specifically. Things have eerily lined up together to show a path to seminary and to a theological education.

My Episcopal friends puzzle at the fact that I would attend Fuller, a decidedly NON Anglo-Catholic seminary, and certainly not liberal at all. During this summer, I've discovered that theologically, I'm a lot more conservative than I thought I was. After reading ample amounts of N.T. Wright and John Stott, along with one or two Oxford Movement tracts, I find a lot of affinity with conservative approaches to theology. This isn't to say that I'm not inclusive or a total fundamentalist. Unfortunately, Evangelical theology has too often been associated with fundamentalism. The book I'm currently chewing through is How to Be Evangelical Without Being Conservative by Roger Olson. It's actually confirming and further strengthening my decision to apply for (and if admitted attend) Fuller Seminary. I found affinity with the fact that my theology and approach to things is very Evangelical. Olson mentions that Evangelical Faith is built on four "isms": biblicism, conversionism, crucicentrism and activism, all four things resonate deeply within me and are parts of my faith that are invaluable and essential.

So needless to say, the Spirit has been moving, very strongly. Recently while attending a service at Phoenix First Assembly. Let me digress for a moment by saying - yes I do church hop, because sometimes I need a dose of contemporary music and charismatic worship. It is the time I use to spend with God in a less structured worship setting. For the first time in years I broke down in tears and worshiped the Lord and began to pray aloud to Him and thanking Him for everything He's done for me. It was during a song called "Hosanna" by Hillsong - when these words were sung, I could do nothing but break down and cry and worship.

"Heal my heart and make it clean
Open up my eyes to the things unseen
Show me how to love like You have loved me

Break my heart for what brakes Yours
Everything I am for Your Kingdom's cause
As I walk from now into eternity"

God has broken my heart for what breaks his and that is why my passion for ministry to gays and lesbians is so strong. People wonder where I get the energy from, well, it's because it breaks God's heart to see people suffering and being rejected and shown not the love that he showed us by sending his Son to die on the cross, but the hate that comes from the devil. I feel strongly called to work in this area and to help heal the rifts and divisions that have been caused.

Weeding and Christian Discipleship

It's summer time in Arizona! As a teenager, I always wondered why weeds and grass would grow in this hot arid weather (mostly because I hated mowing the lawn and weeding the yard). We all get anxious about weeds in our yards. Not just because we’re concerned about the beauty of our lawns, but also because we’re concerned that our grass will survive. So I would dutifully, but begrudgingly pull weeds and mow the lawn in the summer. Luckily, I won’t be teaching about the character-building properties of pulling weeds. But what on earth does proper weeding have to do with the Gospel?
Well today, the lectionary invites us to ponder the parable of the weeds. That’s right, our dear Lord even talked about weeds. You can read the parable on your own. It can be found in Matthew 13:24-30. So what does this all mean? In some traditions of interpretation it is thought that the Lord will wipe out (and burn) all the unbelievers in the end times. I’m not so sure about this. Parables are interesting, quirky things that Jesus uses to teach. Some interpreters say that every detail has some theological significance and each parable is intricately coded to teach specific things in a secretive manner. Some are at the other extreme, believing that they are merely stories and have only one point to make. I tend to be towards the middle of these approaches (how Episcopalian). So now, let’s discuss how to properly dispose of weeds.
Jesus first attempts to illustrate the Kingdom of Heaven as someone who sows the good seeds of wheat. In the night, an enemy comes and sows weeds among the weeds. As we know from last week, wheat is an important crop because it provides the most food, so any problem with the crop could be devastating to the community, so having bad weeds is a big problem. So the servants come to the master and say: “Sir didn’t you sow good seed in the field? Where then did they come from?” (Mt. 13:27) Like any good farmer, the servants want to get rid of the weeds so that the wheat can grow healthily.
The reply from the master of the field is rather surprising. He says: “No … because while you are pulling the weeds you may root up the wheat with them” (Mt. 13:29). This is surprising and yet it’s not. It’s surprising because we would think that removal of the weeds would be an important part of ensuring a good crop. Yet it’s not so surprising because in the process of eliminating the weeds, we lose some of the vital wheat. This actually serves to teach us something very important about discipleship.
The Lord teaches us that in our world, there are folks of all kinds and just as the Lord has sown good seed, so the Devil has sown bad seeds as well. What we have to understand here is that it is not any business of ours who ought to get weeded out and sent to the fiery place. As we heard in the story, the Master forbade the weeding of his field. In the Christian Church today we get too busy deciding who’s part of the “tares” and who’s part of the “wheat”.
We can see a recent, stinging example of this in the recent Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). The stated position of this conference was in effect to sort the weeds from the wheat. It is this kind of thing that threatens the institution that the Lord set up in order to share His love with the whole world. We begin to look like bickering children instead of stepping up to do the work we ought to do. Instead of being the force for change, we become the forces of discord and hate.
Our task, rather, is to preach repentance and the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Lord gave us a spirit of frustration and discontent “in hope that the creation itself ill be liberated from bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God” (Rom. 8:20-21). This visible hope and this visible discontent and our actions to counter it through acting justly and mercifully towards a broken world are what attracts folks to the Gospel. Not flashy evangelism, not carefully planned invitations to Church, just our faith and our hope. As we wait we don’t just sit idly. We are called to serve and called to heal this broken world in any way we can in order that we can be free!
Finally, dear sisters and brothers in Christ, remember that we have nothing to fear. Paul teaches us: “those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship.” (Rom. 8:14-15). As the children of God, we have already been set free. All we must do is subject ourselves to the Spirit of God and allow God to work through us to make an impact and share His love with all people.

Amen

Ecumenism ... Loss of Identity?

With today's announcement that the Episcopal Church and the Presbyterian Church USA will be pursuing bilateral agreements to allow for some form of interdenominational exchange of clergy, this has caused me to reflect on ecumenism and what it really ought to be. I consider this one of those .5% moments, that is about only .5% of people who call themselves Christian actually think about these things.

So what is the point of ecumenism? I hope that it isn't to achieve one big amorphous blob of a Christian Church. Albeit Christ prayed that "we all may be one" (John 17:21), I don't know that he necessarily meant one church. The implications of current and future ecumenical agreements between the Episcopal Church and other denominations present very difficult challenges to the uniqueness of denominations.

Don't get me wrong, denominationalism can be ugly and indeed evil, but there is something to retaining different kinds of expressions of the one faith. The Episcopal Church is unique among the Protestant denominations in that we are perhaps the most closely linked with the ancient practices. We were affected by the Reform, but we were not radically changed by it. As Queen Elizabeth put it, we are a mildly reformed holy, catholic and apostolic Church. In addition, the Anglicans have taken great strides to maintain the validity of the apostolic succession of its ministers, and rightly require that those presiding at its services be ordained by a Bishop with apostolic succession.

You see, while it's is nice to have the touchy feely, loving intercommunion between denominations, these kinds of movements strike at the heart of individual denominations' distinctives. For example, the Episcopal Church is known for a high eucharistic theology in its mainstream. Mainstream Episcopalians maintain some form of the real-presence doctrine, with only fringe radicals on both sides (left and right) maintaining a memorialist approach to the Holy Eucharist. Furthermore, the ecclesiology of the Episcopal Church is much different that those of the other big-box mainline denominations. We believe in a threefold Priesthood and the effectiveness of lay ministry. The Canons set forth a clear wall of separation between the ministries of the Priesthood and those of laity. In other mainline denominations, these distinctions are either heavily blurred or have been eliminated altogether.

At this point, I hesitate to call it heresy as I don't know what all is behind this and what has been proposed, however I am leaning towards it. I am definitely in the camp that opposes full communion with any denomination which does not retain full apostolic succession or will not submit to the re-ordination and/or re-consecration of all its clergy in order to conform to this. This is not to say that I do not believe in ecumenism. I believe that interdenominational dialogue is not only healthy but necessary. It helps us to understand where other Christians come from ad appreciate and respect the traditions from which their particular expressions of Christianity came.

I tend to attribute this move towards blurring denominational lines to a loss of identity among the mainline churches. Mainline churches have been under so much pressure due to continually declining numbers (at least among the Episcopalians, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church and some wings of the Presbyterian Church USA) and the growing number of aging mainliners, that they feel compelled to pursue these interdenominational accords and agreements to keep the whole institution of mainline Christendom alive. Right now, it's barely that. It's in survival mode. Call me a pessimist, but this is like trying to use buckets to prevent a ship from sinking.

Instead of engaging in these identity-blurring exercises, denominations ought to strengthen their distinctives. Episcopalians should strengthen their focus on liturgy and theological diversity and commitment to orthodoxy, Presbyterians and Lutherans ought to focus more on the spirit of the Christian Reformers which made them what they are, Methodists ought to focus more on the spirit of the Wesleyan movement and its impact on wider society. In this context of strengthening their understanding of their distinctives, they should also engage in multi-denominational talks to seek understanding and mutual respect. If a mainline denomination does this and shows its relevance to society, it has then earned its right to survive. Otherwise, it's time to let it pass.