felix hominum

what do you do with godparents?

Most of us in this branch of the Christian family have them.  Or we have asked people to be godparents to our children.  So we either choose godparents for our children, or perhaps we have been asked to be godparents, and then the connection is lost after the morning of the baptism.  So let me share just one little tradition which has grown up in the Felix clan over the past several years:  "godparent parties".  We had one this afternoon. 

Over the past several years we have had a number of godparent parties.  These get togethers are opportunities for us as a family, and as an extended Christian family ("church") to celebrate the goodness and love of God in the lives of each of our kids.  So this afternoon we had a celebration:  a big old feast, interspersed with prayer, and singing, and games, and fun.  We try to have one on an anniversary of a baptism, or as close to the date as possible. 

While families often have "rituals" and traditions which grow up or are inherited (there was always a certain kind of food when the playoffs came in our house), we should also find space for the spiritual traditions and rituals which remind us of Jesus' call on our lives, and of his love for each of our children.  If you are a parent or a godparent, I suggest that you give it a try.  Get together, pray, sing or do whatever it is that fits.  If you are a godparent, it is one simple way of starting to fulfill your promise that you would help this child grow up in faith.  And if you are a parent, let me know of any other such family traditions which you have used to hand on the faith.  I'd like to start collecting some resources around "Christian parenting."

Vital Church Planting

A conference in Toronto at the end of February.  Here's the site.

Two of us will be heading out from Edmonton. We expect folks I know in T.O. to give us the usual Upper Canadian hospitality.  We'll be staying at Wycliffe College (an alma mater mei) for a few days during the conference.

Do Anglicans plant churches?

will rural ministry die a long slow death?

Many years ago I had the privilege of doing some summer work in a rural parish.  The parish covered 7 or 8 points (congregations, for those unused to angli-speak) spread out over what I considered to be a fairly wide area.  When I came to Alberta, I discovered that distances are measured in hours of driving, rather than miles.  "It's about 4 hours from here, if the roads are good, while you still have daylight."

As the diocese of Edmonton begins to select a new bishop, I want to ask a question. or two.  What is the future of rural ministry?  Will it be forgotten in favour of urban/suburban ministry?  Will it go the way of the family farm?  I'd like to see the candidates views on this one...

sermon notes for Advent 2: Matthew 3:1-12

Just to set the mood, let's have a look at the wilderness where John the Baptist liked to hang out...  Somewhere I have some shots of the Jordan, but I'll find them later.  I keep thinking about the pre-Christmas cleaning activity which has been going on both at home and at the church.  You know, looking in the various little nooks and crannies where dust gets hidden.  It is a season of personal house cleaning.  I remember  when Jesus "cleansed' the temple, he did so by driving out what was sinful.  So it is with ourselves - we are called to cleanse the house of God (which is ourselves) by repenting of what is sinful in our lives.  This reading reminds us that Advent is season of repentance - which is a way of preparing for the coming of the kingdom.

[1] In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, [2] "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near."  [3] This is the one of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke when he said, "The voice of one crying out in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.'"  [4] Now John wore clothing of camel's hair with a leather belt around his waist, and his food was locusts and wild honey.

The message of repentance is not unique to John the Baptist in the New Testament;  it is also the beginning of Jesus' preaching.  It is interesting to note that the kingdom comes near to us, rather than us coming near to it.  That is the movement of grace - God comes to us first. 

John seems to have feet in both worlds - the OT and the NT.  This guy will make a great children's story if you get the visuals right.  Note to self:  get some locusts and honey for Sunday...  But now where were we?  John I think is a living testament to the continuity and relationship between the two worlds.  We tend to see more the division between the old and the new, whereas John shows us the connection.  The new Elijah, the fulfillment of prophecy, the beginning of the message that Jesus takes up.

[5] Then the people of Jerusalem and all Judea were going out to him, and all the region along the Jordan,  [6] and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.  [7] But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?  [8] Bear fruit worthy of repentance.  [9] Do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our ancestor'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.

Our culture is an emotive one.  I suspect many people think that repentance means feeling sorry for our sins.  Well, that's a good place to start.  But if we think feeling bad is all that repentance involves, we have missed John's preparatory message.  "Bear fruit worthy of repentance".  There is an active element involved.  Just as there is with love:  it is not simply a feeling, but an action which is expressed.  So it is with repentance.  While we focus on ourselves and our feelings, God is interested in our lifestyle and our actions.

There is that interesting warning that we should not "sit back" and think that we are in, that we've done our part, that we are part of the covenant and that's all we need.  "Do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our ancestor'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham".  John is warning the Pharisees & co. against a sense of religious entitlement.  Perhaps the same thing occurs today in differing forms.  "I've been baptized.  I'm good for life.  No need to do anything else."  Or perhaps like the Pharisees, we might appeal to the idea that we were "born" Christian.  "Oh yes, I've been Anglican since I was born."  (That's a whole other topic...)  But you get the picture. 

Side note:  this episode raises an important question.  Can I repent on behalf of someone else?  John seems to be saying that repentance is individual, or at least for the purpose of the ministry he is doing.  We can't rely on the faith of Abraham, we have to own it for ourselves.

[10] Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.  [11] "I baptize you with water for repentance, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.  [12] His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and will gather his wheat into the granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."

As I think about this, it seems to me to be a grace sandwhich - with warning on either side.  The center is the coming of Christ, with the baptism of the Holy Spirit.  "Fire" seems to be a theme here, which could use some drawing out.

Afterthought:  as Advent is a season of repentance, those so inclined might take opportunity to make an examination of conscience, talk with a spiritual director, or make a confession.

sermon notes for Advent 1

Well, having completed a fair bit of preparation for a sermon based on the Gospel reading and the usual Advent themes, I decided to scrap that in favour of Psalm 122:  "I was glad when they said to me, Let us go to the house of the Lord." So the usual Thursday sermon notes won't be up for a while.  In these days of turmoil for the Anglican Church, I felt a nudge to turn the sermon in a different direction.  I'll let you know...

"For the sake of the house of the LORD our God, I will seek your good."
Ps 122: v 9

sermon notes: Reign of Christ - November 25

We will be looking at Colossians 1:11-20, and Luke 23:33-43 this Sunday.  These two readings show us what seem to be contradictory notions of what it means to "reign".  The Colossians reading gives a rather glorious picture of Christ  - "his glorious power", "the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation", "in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell".  The reading ends by pointing us to the cross:  "making peace through the blood of his cross".  So to the cross we go.  Here are some preliminary thoughts.

Luke 23:33-43

33 When they came to the place that is called The Skull, they crucified Jesus there with the criminals, one on his right and one on his left.

Well, I suppose this is as unlikely a throne room as one can imagine.  And as for court attendants, I couldn’t think of more unlikely candidates.  So this Sunday we celebrate the Reign of Christ. On the feast of the Reign of Christ we can start with ourselves –(after all, where else do we usually start?) we can start with our own ideas of what it mean to “reign”; or what it means to be a “King”, or what we think a Kingdom is supposed to look like.  Or we can look to Christ, and see what kind of reign, what kind of kingship, and what kind of Kingdom he brings.

34 Then Jesus said, "Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing." And they cast lots to divide his clothing.

Here we see the foundational charter of the kingdom:  Jesus pleads with the Father to grant forgiveness for those who sin. 

35 And the people stood by, watching; but the leaders scoffed at him, saying, "He saved others; let him save himself if he is the Messiah of God, his chosen one!"  36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine,
37 and saying, "If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!"  38 There was also an inscription over him, "This is the King of the Jews."  39 One of the criminals who were hanged there kept deriding him and saying, "Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us!"

Twice Jesus is (mockingly) called “Messiah”.  Twice he is (mockingly) referred to as “King”.  Each time there is a challenge.  It is reminiscent of the temptations in the wilderness.  IF you are the Son of God, turn stones into bread, throw yourself down, worship me…  Here we have the same pattern – the Tempter has shown up again, in different form:  Let him save himself, IF he is the Messiah.  Even the criminal next to him tempts him to save himself first, and then while you’re at, it throw me in as well. (Save yourself and us!)  The old temptations return in different form.

40 But the other rebuked him, saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?  41 And we indeed have been condemned justly, for we are getting what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." 42 Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."  43 He replied, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

It is interesting that this is the only “positive” reference to Jesus and the idea of a “king”.  This criminal believes, even in these circumstances, that Jesus has a “kingdom”.  His cry  strikes me as a cry for pity.  And without further ado, forgiveness is offered and received, and there is reconciliation between a man and God, even on the cross.

This reign of Jesus, this kingship of Christ, is far different from models of kingship, governance and reign which the world offers.  The king does not keep himself safe from harm.  He does not order his followers to go anywhere he himself has not gone.  There is the question posed in the Gospel:  do you acknowledge Jesus as the "King", the "Messiah".  Contrary to their expectations, this King's business is not to "save himself" - it is to save us.

Lots to think about here:  the picture of the King on the cross, and then the description of Christ from Colossians - sort of the old "meekness and majesty" side by side.  It would be a mistake not to take the two together.  And it would be a mistake to forget that the cross is not the "final" picture we have of the reign of Christ, although it is the central picture.

I'll add or amend as Sunday draws closer (or as wisdom comes in the comment section), and in the meantime, pray that He might reign in us.

The major question I'm facing this week:

should we use incense on the feast of the Reign of Christ?

The Bishop was talking to the local Master of Hounds about the difficulty he had in keeping his vicars off the incense.
-P. G. Wodehouse

You might sooner get lightning out of incense smoke than true action or passion out of your modern English religion.
-John Ruskin

Ouch - on dealing with incompetence in the church

Ouch!

Not long ago we followed in a neighbouring parish a battle between the vicar and the organist / choirmaster. On paper the vicar was, of course, in charge of the parish, and had every right to sack the musician, but for complicated psychological reasons he felt compelled to minister to the man, to feed and clothe and shelter his incompetence, rather than to show him the door. We're told that it got to be so bad that there were loud arguments between the vicar and the musician during the worship service. After months of conflict, the vicar finally found it in himself to push the organist/choirmaster out the door.

It's fairly easy to tell when a musician is incompetent. People wince and cover their ears, and then they find a new church. Churches also employ clerks, administrators, and various specialty staff whose very job title is meaningless to the general public. We've been introduced to parish Lay Ministry Coordinators, Parish Missioners, Directors of Christian Formation, Liturgical Coordinators, Development Coordinators, and Webmasters. Beyond the parish level, there's a wealth of titles whose meaning sometimes eludes us. And if we can't tell what their job is supposed to be, then how ever can their job performance be evaluated effectively?

Terrible things seem to happen when church leaders project onto their staff their pastoral urge to take care of the needy, the downtrodden, and the weak. Nowhere in the parable of the sheep and the goats does it say 'I was incompetent and you employed me' or 'I was abusive to everyone but you didn't sack me'. The notion of charity seems altogether too often to be applied in church administration to charity towards one's own staff. For better or for worse, church organizations have more in common than not with ordinary business and government organizations. The secular world has it easier, in a sense, because the need to make a profit provides a means of telling quickly whether or not it is succeeding or failing. Churches can survive for decades under the stewardship of people who are pious, faithful, and incompetent, and no one benefits from that survival.

Guess where this is from, or read it all.  The original article is now archived here.

sermon notes Penetecost 20: Luke 17:11-19

Luke 17:11-19

[11] On the way to Jerusalem Jesus was going through the region between Samaria and Galilee.

So here we have Jesus going on his way from the northern, Jewish area  toward Jerusalem, with a pleasant meander through the rather unclean Samaritan area.

[12] As he entered a village, ten lepers approached him. Keeping their distance, [13] they called out, saying, "Jesus, Master, have mercy on us!"

What strikes me most about these verses is the dual posture of both approaching Jesus and yet keeping distance.  On the first level, this is understandable.  Perhaps the lepers are merely keeping up their duty not to get too close to anyone, lest they spread their infection.  They know their place in the order of things. There are no explicit reasons given in the text, although some can reasonably be assumed. They are content just to get within “shouting distance” of Jesus, whom they call “Master”.  As long as he can hear their cry for mercy, that is close enough.

And yet this dual posture strikes me as something which we can all engage in.  Approaching Jesus, and yet keeping our distance at the same time.  Just get close enough to be within “shouting distance” when we need something.  Or perhaps we are so used to our position, feeling ourselves far from him and others, that we dare not get too close.  Whatever the reason, it is a tendency of human hearts to draw close and then withdraw.  Maybe we suffer from a bit of Christophobia – we don’t want to get too close to Jesus.  There is something of this sentiment in Jesus’ plea as he completes his journey to Jerusalem:  How I long to gather you under my wings, and you would not.”  Jesus is always approachable, but it is we who decide to pull back, lest we encounter the real Jesus, who as Paul says, “was raised from the dead, a descendant of David” – the Messiah.

[14] When he saw them, he said to them, "Go and  show yourselves to the priests." And as they went, they were made clean.

No healing touch or magic words come out of Jesus.  He simply gives them something to do.  The priest was rather like the public health officer of the day:  if the priest said you were cured, then you could be restored to your family, you could be restored to your community.  “As they went, they were made clean” – it is in the journey of obedience to Christ that we are healed.

[15] Then one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, praising God with a loud voice. [16] He prostrated himself at Jesus' feet and thanked him.

This fellow doesn’t quite follow the rules here:  it appears that he did not makes it to the priest to get his official clean bill of health (and all the rituals associated with that process).  Maybe he would not have gotten very far in the process, being a Samaritan and all...  The gift from Jesus evokes in him a more immediate response: praise of God and thanks to Jesus.

And he was a Samaritan.
Then Jesus asked, "Were not ten made clean? But the other nine, where are they?
Was none of them found to return and give praise to God except this foreigner?"
Then he said to him, "Get up and go on your way; your faith has made you well."

As an aside, Jesus does not revoke the healing of the other “ungrateful” nine (“if we are faithless, he remains faithful-- for he cannot deny himself”) which tells us something of the nature of mercy.  There is certainly a tie in to the epistle on this point.  The Samaritan is now made well, or whole.  The gift of Jesus has cured him, but it is faith that has made him well.

sermon notes Pentecost 18: Luke 16: 19-31

This section of Luke seems to hit me in the wallet.

This week continues to focus attention on some issues related to wealth/possessions with the contrast of poverty thrown into the mix, a healthy dose of "afterlife balance adjustment", and an appeal to the witness of Scripture and the resurrection.  Most commentaries will also point out that this might be a reworking of some existing folklore themes or stories.

There are a few things that stick out at me in this one.  There is the contrast between dives (let's give him a name, as this is one of the few, or is it the only, parable in which the characters have names.  Or maybe that is part of the point:  it is the rich man who is nameless and it is the poor man who has a name.  Lazarus ("God helps") is named because it reinforces the sense of his personhood;  he is not invisible to God. The rich man has the Rolex and Mercedes of his day - purple clothes and fine linen;  while Lazarus has sores and a few dog licks.

16:19 "There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.  [20] And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, [21] who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich man's table; even the dogs would come and lick his sores.

It appears what the rich man has chosen is a lifestyle in which he does not even recognize Lazarus.  Lazarus is the sort of person to be stepped around on the sidewalk.

[22] The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried.  [23] In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side.  [24] He called out, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.'

It is interesting to remember that Abraham was also a wealthy man in his day, and wealth is after all a sign of God's favor, isn't it?  So on one level we have a bit of the reversal of the popular conception that material wealth is a sure sign of God's favour.  On the other hand, Abraham was a wealthy man and here he is as the figure in paradise.  So what is the difference between the rich man in the parable and Abraham - it's not just the objective presence in their lives of material wealth.  I'm not certain I want to go too far in that direction.  At least this much is clear:  wealth and poverty are no longer the sure signs of God's favour that they were in Abraham's day.

The imagery is contrasting:  Lazarus is carried by angels (an upward image?) while the rich man "died and was buried" (a downward image?).  This I think is reinforced with the image of the rich man "looking up" to see Abraham.  And then there is the reversal:  while at first Lazarus hungered for just of morsel of what the rich man has, now the rich man thirsts for just a drop of what Lazarus has.

I also think there is going to be some more work to be done about the whole torment and agony bit.  I still think that one of the best ways of looking at this is what is found in Dante's Inferno:  God will give you the true form of what you desire, but that is a major series of posts best reserved for Lent or some such penitential time.  One of the questions this raises is the difference between true "feasting" and mere "gluttony".  If you have thoughts on what you might say (or not say) about the torment and  agony, have at it.

[25] But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony.[26] Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there to us.'

Well, this parable at least seems to take the afterlife seriously:  temporal actions (or inactions) have eternal consequences.   Abraham explains the reversal of fortune.  Question to myself:  what is God's idea of justice?

[27] He said, 'Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father's house—[28] for I have five brothers--that he may warn them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.'
[29] Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.'
[30] He said, 'No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.'
[31] He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'"

At first glance I considered the rich man's words to be a beginning of some sort of redemptive thought, and maybe they are.  But the nature of his request is a] centered only on his brothers ("don't even Gentiles do the same"); b] fails to address the real problem - attitude and action toward Lazarus' peers. It strikes me that the rich man's warning is mere "fire insurance"; his concern has not actually come around to helping the Lazari of this world.  And all of these teachings are not new - they are there in Moses and the prophets.

The last reversal is the greatest - "even if someone rises from the dead".
More later.   

1 Timothy 6: 6...
6 Of course, there is great gain in godliness combined with contentment; 7 for we brought nothing into the world, so that we can take nothing out of it; 8 but if we have food and clothing, we will be content with these. 9 But those who want to be rich fall into temptation and are trapped by many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.  10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be rich some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pains.