felix hominum

an interesting (if confirmed) statistic...

The information received in preparing the Canadian response to the Windsor Report indicated to me that about ¼ to 1/3 of Canadian Anglicans are strongly conservative on this issue, but about 2/3 of church members would fall in the middle and liberal parts of the spectrum of Anglican opinion.

From Affirming Catholicism Canada,
as blogged by Patricia Bays (chair of the Windsor Report Response Group at General Synod)

Darrell Bock & the Nag Hammadi "Missing Gospels"

For the past half year or so I have done a bit more reading some early documents.  You can still see NT Wright's Judas and the Gospel of Jesus : A Christian Response sitting on the reading list, although I finished it last spring.  One of the other books I have recently read is by Darrell Bock.  It's called The Missing Gospels.  It is a fairly good introduction to the Nag Hammadi texts; the many so called "gospels" which pop up in the news, in pop culture and in scholarship on a regular basis.  (Usually around Christmas and Easter, in order to "debunk more fully the mythology" which traditional Christianity has assembled around those dates.)

For the rest of the week I will be doing some posting around this particular area.  What are these "other gospels" which one hears about?  What do they say about Jesus?  Bock does a great study of the original materials, both the Nag Hammadi & the traditional gospels, and compares them in several categories:  God and Creation;  Jesus - Divine and/or Human;  the nature of Redemption - Spiritual/Physical;  Jesus' death.  I will also throw in some stuff from Wright's analysis of the Gospel of Judas.

There are so many fundamental questions involved it's hard to know where to begin, but let me suggest this as a starting point.  in my reading of various churchy-type publications (okay, I like to read church newspapers), I came across a description of a traveling Jesus Seminar presentation in the Diocese of Calgary: 

For those who attended the Seminar at All Saints, our speakers presented  Jesus as one who was just as radically counter cultural in his own day as he is in ours.
An illiterate rural peasant from a dirty town, itinerant preacher and a day laborer...
Sower (big pdf, pg 8)

There are two things which jump out at me.  First is having a look at some of the "alternative texts" which people use to establish a new idea/picture of Jesus.  And second is the question of whether there are fundamental problems which arise in this sort of re-drawing of Jesus.  Many folks might be startled by this description.  Jesus an illiterate peasant?  How then shall we think of this:

When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written:
‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
   because he has anointed me
     to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
   and recovery of sight to the blind,
     to let the oppressed go free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’

And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him.

Let us fix our eyes on Him.

sermon notes Pentecost 18 (Year C): 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.

Rwanda Mission to Women: Edmonton Anglicans overseas

Why a mission to women, in Rwanda? Because the women in Rwanda have borne the brunt of the genocide which took place in 1994. Their husbands and children were killed, often meaning they lost their land and consequently their livelihood. They lost the support of husbands who have been in prison for taking part in the genocide. Now the wife must provide food for the imprisoned husband. In families of mixed race the survivors often turned on each other. Because the genocide took place between neighbours and within families and because survivors have returned to those same communities and neighbours after the genocide, there is acute isolation. Each goes through life in solitude...

The SOMA team included: Kjeryn Allard, Dudley Baker - Team Leader, Patricia Halligan-Baker - St. Paul’s Anglican Church, Edmonton; Kay Forsyth, St. Timothy’s Anglican Church, Edmonton; Wanjiku Kironyo, Anglican Inland Church, Cura, Kenya; (Director, Maji Mazuri Intl., Nairobi); Michael Williamson, Rector, St. Paul’s Anglican Church, Edmonton.

full story here

 

sol cafe @ salvation army

On Sunday, September 30, the sol cafe will be meeting for one of our regular "service services", where our Sunday gathering and worship takes the form of some work in the community. This month we will be back at the Salvation Army downtown food sorting depot (9618 101A Avenue), processing donations and doing whatever other work they might need done.

If you can join us, please meet at the depot at 5 pm; you'll need to be relatively prompt because the facility will need to be locked once we're inside. If you've never been before or need a lift, we will also have a couple of volunteers at Cafe Dabar at 5 pm to shuttle people over.

church, holy land

sermon notes Pentecost 17; Luke 16:1-13

The parable of the "shrewd manager" is probably one of the more difficult readings for us to make sense of, which fact is unrelated to the fact that the curate ended up on the preaching schedule this weekend...  But we will try to post something later today.

You could also check out Millionaires for Jesus.  Lots of err, interesting stuff. 

Matt has a great quote in the comments.

Hmm...  Well, there is always the question of whether or not a parable works like an allegory - X stands for person Y. 

The manager might be commended by us if we think that he is viewing wealth as a means, rather than an end in itself.  Money functions as a tool (albeit in his case for selfish ends).  I wonder as well if we had the same attitude which the manager has toward our possessions.  After all, the manager is free with the goods because the goods are not really his - so why not be rather free with the accounting?  The goods belong to his boss.  It is interesting to think as to whether or nto we have the same freedom with our material possessions as the shrewd manager has with his boss's wealth.  I mean, if we really saw ourselves as "managers" of what we have, rather than presuming to be the outright "owners".  The manager certainly exhibits a freedom with material wealth which I find difficult to do.  The difference is that I see all my wealth as primarily MINE, and not really belonging to God.

The manager came to see that his master's wealth was a tool which could be used to gain (temporal) "friends".  Jesus challenges his disciples to have the same freedom with wealth.

Steve London has some thoughts here.

ps.  If we think this set of teachings is troublesome, then the next few weeks bring up the questions again.  Although there is stark contrast between Lazarus and the rich man (comes up a few verses later) , there is also the question of when we move from simply having enough, to a form of gluttony.

Update:  since I don't have to preach tomorrow, what I've really been trying to work on today is this.
What I need to do next is see the sol cafe web guy, since I have a domain name, but the site just hasn't pointed in the right direction yet.  Been using iweb and Forklift.  We'll see how it goes.  Now there is this, which seems to be up and running.  Which brings us around to what I have really been thinking about lately, which is evangelism.  I would like for us to have a website which is helpful for present members of the parish, but is also inviting and comfortable for others, unchurched, non Christians - without being over the top.

You know, no one uses the Yellow Pages anymore to find a church...

 

Update:  since it turns out I am preaching on this text this coming Sunday, I'll fill it in and update it for September 2010

+Don Harvey writes a letter

here

excerpt:

But I believe God is about to do a new thing.

“…Where morning dawns … you call forth songs of joy.” Psalm 65:8

Just days ago, I returned from Africa where I had the privilege, together with Canon Charlie Masters and Dr. Terry and Cheryl Chang, of participating in the consecrations of several new North American bishops – all good and godly men and dear friends of the Anglican Network in Canada. Bishops Bill Atwood and Bill Murdoch were consecrated in Nairobi on August 30th, while Bishop John Guernsey was consecrated in Kigali on September 2nd.

What a time of celebration and thanksgiving! I wish you could have been there with me – and the thousands gathered for both services. (Estimates for the outdoor service in Uganda ranged up to 10,000.) Had you been there, your heart would have soared. The preaching was solidly Biblical and the intensity of the love and joy expressed in the worship was overwhelming. Both events were substantive. The Kenyan service lasted almost five hours, while the Ugandan service required six.

Note:  since it is also International Talk Like a Pirate Day, I may later attempt to translate some of Bishop Harvey's letter into Pirate dialect.

Important Update:  some Pirate translation of parts of the letter:

   

“…'ere mornin' dawns … ye call fore songs o' joy.” Psalm 65:8

Jus' days ago, I returned from Africa 'ere I had th' privilege, together wi' Canon Charlie Masters an' Dr. Terry an' Cheryl Chang, o' participatin' in th' consecrations o' several new North American bishops – all good an' godly men an' dear shipmates o' th' Anglican Network in Canada. Bishops Bill Atwood an' Bill Murdoch be consecrated in Nairobi on Augst 30th, while Bishop John Guernsey be consecrated in Kigali on Septembree 2nd.

What a time o' celebration an' thanksgivin'! I wish ye could ben thar wi' me – an' th' thousands gathered fer both services. (Estimates fer th' outdoor service in Uganda ranged up t' 10,000.) Had ye been thar, yer heart would be havin' soared. Th' preachin' be solidly Biblical an' th' intensity o' th' love an' joy expressed in th' worship be overwhelmin'. Both events be substantive. Th' Kenyan service lasted almost five hours, while th' Ugandan service required six. Aaarrr.

Expression - Art & Religion

EDMONTON - Mayor Stephen Mandel wants four sculptures outside the Shaw Conference Centre taken away immediately after local Hindu leaders complained they're disrespectful of one of their faith's beloved gods.

The works by Edmonton artist Ryan McCourt use castoff industrial material to depict the elephant-headed Ganesha in various poses, including one piece in which he stands with his head lying on the ground beside a pillar that holds a breast and female genitals.

The temporary display has been outside the conference centre on Jasper Avenue since last November.

from the Edmonton Journal

There has been a bit of backlash against the work of Ryan McCourt, a local sculptor.  His work involves the depiction of Hindu deity.  There are some interesting questions and social interactions here.  Leaders from the local Hindu community find the pieces "disrespectful".  Ryan McCourt argues that the principle of  freedom of expression is at stake.  Tax payers from the burbs will wonder how they ended up partially funding this project, no doubt.

I find it refreshing that at least, for once, it is not the Christian community up in arms about another ho-hum artistic depiction of Jesus or Mary doing something which is supposed to "shock" the hegemony out of us.

More importantly, it raises some interesting questions about the nature of art, the relationship between an artist and the wider (multi-faith/multi-cultural) community and society.  I'll be interested to see what else comes of this.

The Bishop of Rwanda

We are still finding bodies - buried in pits, dumped in rivers, chopped in pieces.  Besides providing the details of this very sad story, my goal with this book is to tell an amazing, uplifting story.  It is the story of the new Rwanda, a country that has turned to God, and which God is blessing.

It is wrong to say that Rwanda was forgotten or hated by God.  That is like saying that God forgot Jesus when He was on the cross...Rwanda was abandoned and forgotten by the world, especially by the rich and powerful nations, but God did not forget Rwanda.

from
The Bishop of Rwanda:  Finding Forgiveness Amidst a Pile of Bones.

The Rt. Rev. John Rucyahana, a Tutsi, was elected as bishop of Shyira Diocese in Rwanda in 1997.

aaarrh, ye scurvy cur

T'day be International Talk Like a Pirate Day

So afore we dreg ye keelside across the dunes o' Oak Island, get ye back to work.

autumn leaves: a jazz cabaret

Just a little something for the season:  A bit of jazz at St Tim's church (145 St and 84 Ave).  Info on  how to get tix will be available soon. In the meantime...

sermon notes, Pentecost 16, Luke 15: 1-10

A few introductory thoughts on the gospel this week. 

1]Now all the tax-collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to him. 2] And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, ‘This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.’

3] So he told them this parable: 4] ‘Which one of you, having a hundred sheep and losing one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness and go after the one that is lost until he finds it? 5] When he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders and rejoices. 6] And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbours, saying to them, “Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.” 7] Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who need no repentance.

8] ‘Or what woman having ten silver coins, if she loses one of them, does not light a lamp, sweep the house, and search carefully until she finds it? 9] When she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbours, saying, “Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin that I had lost.” 10] Just so, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.’

At the beginning of this gospel we see that the tax collectors and the sinners were coming near to Jesus to listen to what he was saying.  Apparently whatever Jesus was selling, they were buying;  whatever Jesus was teaching, they were willing to learn, and whatever Jesus was saying, they were listening.  The beginning of relationship is just talking – Jesus is having a conversation with these notorious folks.  And the Pharisees and scribes fill in the picture for us a bit more: "This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.”  Jesus does more than just lecture to the sinners and tax collectors.  He spends time with them, welcoming them and sitting down and enjoying a meal with them,  Jesus wants to build friendship, trust, relationship with them. 

It’s fairly evident that the Pharisees are not really interested in that sort of thing.  But Jesus is.  God is deeply interested in relationships:  both those we share among one another, and the relationship we share with Him.

When we look at the parables Jesus tells, what is the outcome?  The shepherd calls together his friends and neighbours;  the woman of the house calls together her friends and neighbours.  A theme of relationship is here at the beginning and at the end of the gospel.

So what was Jesus saying to the tax collectors and sinners that made them want to stay listen to him?  These two parables come just before the parable of the prodigal son.  The three parables he tells give us a hint: A sheep gets lost, a coin gets lost, a heart gets lost. 

The shepherd doesn’t tell us how the sheep got lost.  he doesn’t say whether the sheep wandered off on its own, or gradually strayed little by little, or got scared by something and disappeared.  The shepherd doesn’t give us the details of how far the sheep had wandered.  No, the shepherd is not interested in us knowing those details.

Jesus tells us that the shepherd does not cut his losses.  After all, losing only one out of a hundred is pretty good.  Why not just let it go?  The shepherd cares for the one.  He is willing to pursue it wherever it has gone, now matter how far.  He wants that one. 

And what does he do when he finds it?  He carries it home on his shoulders.  And that is at the heart of repentance:  It is not about punishment for wrongdoing, or excessive guilt over our faults;  it is not about wringing our hands in self pity:  it is about coming home.  Coming Home on the shoulders of the Good Shepherd.   Repent, and turn toward Home.  And if you don’t think you can get there, don’t worry, the shepherd will carry you there himself.  All sin is a wandering of the heart away from God.  All repentance is a turning and being carried homeward;  back to the One who made us;  home to the one who loves us.  Jesus came to carry us home.

What about the lost coin?  The coin is lost inside the house. Maybe you don’t have to wander out of the sheepfold in order to be lost.  Maybe you can be lost right in the midst of the house – even in the midst of the house of God.  And what does this woman do?  She searches, she sweeps, she looks in every nook and cranny.  She gets down and dirty, prying and looking in cracks and crevices until she finds the coin – because she knows it is valuable.  We aren’t told how tarnished the coin is when she finds it.  We aren’t told where it rolled to.  We are only told that it was lost, and she will not stop searching until she finds it.  Like the shepherd, she is not content to cut her losses and just let it go.  She wants it, it is hers, and when she finds it I’m certain that she hold it in her hand, cleaning and polishing it until it shines like new.  It is back with her, where it belongs.

And what does he do when he find the sheep?  He puts it on his shoulders and rejoices.  He knows the sheep is frightened, and has lost its way.  He knows the sheep is tired, and doesn’t have the strength to make its way home.  And so he carries it, on his shoulders, rejoicing.

And what about the coin?  Where is the coin?  It’s in her hand.  Held in her hand.  I think there are several great images to contemplate here.  Held in the hand of God, who has been looking and searching.

God’s joy is infectious.  He calls together his friends and neighbours to rejoice with him over the heart that has come home. Like the parable of the prodigal son, we tend to leave our focus on the wrong part.  We think of the lost sheep, the lost coin.  Instead, let us think about the found sheep and the found coin;  nor are the parables about the scolding shepherd, the frustrated woman.  Instead, it’s about the rejoicing shepherd, the rejoicing woman.

Repentance leads to rejoicing.

The Throne of Love

A meditation for Holy Cross Day

"We venerate the cross as a safeguard of faith, as the strengthening of hope and the throne of love. It is the sign of mercy, the proof of forgiveness, the vehicle of grace and the banner of peace. We venerate the cross, because it has broken down our pride, shattered our envy, redeemed our sin and atoned for our punishment.

"The cross of Christ is the door to heaven, the key to paradise, the downfall of the devil, the uplifting of mankind, the consolation of our imprisonment, the  prize for our freedom. The cross was the hope of the patriarchs, the promise of the prophets, the triumph of kings and the ministry of priests. Tyrants are convicted by the cross and the mighty ones defeated, it lifts up the miserable and honors the poor. The cross is the end of darkness, the spreading of light, the flight of death, the ship of life and the kingdom of salvation.

"Whatever we accomplish for God, whatever we succeed and hope for, is the fruit of our veneration of  the cross. By the cross Christ draws everything to him. It is the kingdom of the Father, the scepter of the Son and the seal of the Holy Spirit, a witness to the total Trinity."

Rupert, Abbot of Deutz, early 12th century

further brief thoughts on worship

Following up on this post below, I suggest that since the God whom we worship is revealed to us, so we should turn to revelation (Scripture) to inform our worship.  Two passages come immediately to mind.  First is Paul's statement from Romans - presenting our bodies as living sacrifices, which is our spiritual worship.  Second are the images of worship given to us in the book of Revelations.  There are more images and references to worship, but I want to begin with these two.  It strikes me that Paul is referring, at least in part, to worship as a way of life.  And the images of "heavenly" worship we are given at the end of the New Testament are images of the fullness of worship.

Without allowing Scripture to inform and shape our worship, we run the risk of simply ending up worshiping some form of, well, ourselves.

I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb. And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb.

9/11

and let light perpetual shine upon them

tonight - sol cafe

On Sunday, September 9th, the sol cafe will be meeting at around 5ish at Cafe Dabar for an evening of worship, and the discussion of worship.

For some people, "worship" is simply churchenese for "music." In particular, it is music sung for a very specific purpose -- the worship of God. In that spirit, it is music meant to be delivered in community and with a particular attitude, not merely as background music or entertainment. The point is not how well you sing or how musical you are, but that you join in the communal act.

For other people, worship is something more than just music. It is still something to be done with a particular attitude. Or with that same specific purpose. Or maybe it is just the attitude with which you do all things.

Maybe they are both right. Maybe it is something in between. But for this Sunday, we can say this for sure: we will be having music for the purpose of celebrating God together, and we will be talking about it too.

Not sure how this will be fitting into the evening yet, but the readings for this week from the Revised Common Lectionary are listed below. Maybe the Psalm 139 reading would be a good place to start?

Jeremiah 18:1-11
Psalm 139
Philemon 1-21
Luke 14:25-33

I figure we will just get lattes and pontificate.  Or something.  Drop by.

Diocese of Edmonton episcopal nominations procedure

Full memo on the Diocesan website can be found here.
Also, the Chancellor has put together a very helpful memo on the whole process (pdf here)

...As the date for the Electoral Synod is March 8th, 2008 our timetable for the electoral process is quite tight. Therefore, Executive Council established a small working committee (composed of the Dean, the Archdeacons, the Chancellor and the Executive Officer) to do some of the ground work necessary for the Diocesan Search Committee prior to its creation on November 1st, 2007.

• A Diocesan Search Committee will be struck at the November 1st meeting of Executive Council. At that meeting Executive Council will elect three clergy and three lay members to the Search Committee. The Metropolitan will appoint three more members, all drawn from outside the Diocese; one bishop, one clergy and one lay. In early September you will receive a letter requesting nominations for the Search Committee. Please prayerfully consider who you might wish to nominate to this committee.

• At this point, the Working Group invites individuals, vestries and parishes to pray for Bishop Victoria in this time of discernment and to prayerfully consider the following points:

• What should be included in the memorandum which the Search Committee must prepare and circulate describing the Diocese, and the specific qualifications and gifts which might be required or desirable for candidates to possess?

What challenges will face the new Bishop immediately and in the longer term?
What information will be helpful for members of the Diocese to know about the candidates?
What format should that information be in (bearing in mind financial constraints)?
Are there particular initiatives in the Diocese that are most important to you in your understanding of our mission of “Proclaiming the Gospel, Making disciples, and Furthering the Kingdom.”

Please send your thoughts care of David Connell at the Synod Office, 10035 103 Street, Edmonton, T5J 0X5 or by email to executiveofficer[AT]edmonton.anglican.ca by September 21st, 2007. Please mark your email ‘episcopal election’ in the subject line. Thank you.

Since the deadline for this submission is coming soon, I would suggest that we prayerfully consider submissions to the Synod Office within the next week.  Input at this stage of the process is part of our (joyful) obligation to take our responsibilities seriously as members of Christ's Church.

sermon notes for Pentecost 15; Luke 14: 25-33

Luke 14:25-33

Three times in this passage there is a kind of negative condition attached to being a disciple:  in verses 26, 27 and 33.  Jesus warns the crowds that one “cannot be” a disciples unless one:  has a greater allegiance to Jesus than to family;  has a greater desire for Jesus than for “life” (take up the cross);  has a greater desire for Jesus than for possessions.

14:25 Now large crowds were traveling with him; and he turned and said to them, [26] "Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple.

Jesus appears to want to thin out the crowds that have been following him.  At least, what he says to them does not seem in keeping with the “how to win friends and influence people” school of thought.  It might help us to look at a parallel passage from Matthew  10:37-38: “He who loves father and mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more that me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.”

There is the “comparative” way of looking at this passage:  our love for Jesus must be greater than our love for family.  Or, to put it more accurately in the context of being a disciple, our allegiance to Jesus must take priority over other competing allegiances, including those that come from family.  Most of us rarely face such choices, or we think that God could not possibly put us in a situation in which we must choose between allegiance to family (families are good things, after all) and allegiance to God.  It is true:  God does not put us in those situations.  We put ourselves in those situations, or members of our families put us in those situations.

One of the marvelous things about reading the Scriptures is what they make you think of. – This is a bit of an aside, but part, I think, of the whole business of how Scripture nurtures us.  This passage reminds me of something I’ve seen many times in the Middle East.  Travelling along the east bank of the Jordan River a few years ago – the “Jordanian State” side – a few of the pilgrims noticed that lots of the houses in the countryside seemed to be only half finished.  You would see a brick or concrete structure which looked complete and polished on the ground floor, but out of the roof would stick strands of steel rebar like a half emptied spaghetti package.  My fellow travelers were wondering why these various houses, which looked quite polished otherwise, had what appeared to be an unfinished construction zone on the roof.   The explanation was that this is to allow the son to build an addition on the roof when he gets married.  He is expected to remain under his father’s authority and simply add to the family home, build a second story, and move in.  It’s an image of a form of family allegiance which takes precedence over all other allegiances.

There may be times when following and serving Christ will seem like “hatred” to those people who also wish to have a claim on our lives.  Indeed, even to the point of “hating life itself”.  One set of interpretations of this appeals to the ideas that : a] we get a new family in the form of fellow disciples;  b] we can only fully have those other relationships when we have a relationship with Jesus;  c]  we cannot even fully have our own life without the presence of Jesus.

14:27 Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

There is a difference between being one of the crowd who likes to hang around, and being a disciple.  Anyone can blend in with the “crowd” which follows him.  To carry the cross is to be marked for death – this is the culmination of “hating” “even life itself”.  This is what it means to be a disciple, as contrasted with simply being part of the (religious) crowd.

14:28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not first sit down and estimate the cost, to see whether he has enough to complete it? [29] Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it will begin to ridicule him,
[30] saying, 'This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.'
14:31 Or what king, going out to wage war against another king, will not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to oppose the one who comes against him with twenty thousand?  [32] If he cannot, then, while the other is still far away, he sends a delegation and asks for the terms of peace.

Both of these illustrations speak about the difference between intention and ability.  Remember the claims of Peter in the gospel – ready to follow Jesus and die with him. Cockadoodle dooo!
There is a bit of nuance here:  on the one hand Jesus wants to give us fair warning that if we truly intend to be disciples, and not just part of the crowd, we should soberly consider what that means:  it means serving Him first, it means denying ourselves. 

I’m not entirely sure what I’m going to do with these two illustrations.  The first one appeals to our sense of self – it appears that the negative consequence is public ridicule.  Well, you might get that anyway as a Christian.  But more to the point – Jesus tells us to “estimate the cost” of being a disciple, and he gives the cost in those three stark terms – family, the cross, and possessions.

The second illustration, to take some poetic liberty:  shall we not sue for peace with God?  And of whom shall our delegation consist... Jesus...

The Book of Common Prayer (and the BAS) marriage service says that marriage is an estate which “none should undertake lightly”.  It seems the same is true for discipleship.

14:33 So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions.

Ouch!  I'll pick this up later...

an assortment of things to go to

First off, AJ is closing the 2nd cup on 149th for a few weeks.  They are doing some reno work.  Normal  folks will assume this is so they can simply sell more coffee, but personally I think it has to do with improving the acoustics for the great open stage hosted there on Wednesday evenings.  Said open stage appears to have anglican clergy (in cognito) and other ne'er do wells performing on a regular basis.  In the meantime, you can catch Alex Boudreau and friends on Sunday evenings:

Every Sunday starting September 9th
at the
Good Earth Café
8623 112 Street,
(434-4892)
7 to 10 pm

Next up is a visit by Rt Rev Larry Robertson, a bishop from Canada's north. Here's the blurb:

Rt Rev Larry Robertson, Bishop of Mackenzie-Kitikmeot Region and Suffragan Bishop of the Arctic, on Tuesday, September 16, 2007 at St. John’s, 11111 – 57th Ave, Edmonton, at 7:00 PM. Bishop Larry will present first-hand information on the work of the Anglican Church in the Diocese of the Arctic and the importance of having prayer support in “the South”. Clergy persons and their families in the Arctic Diocese covet regular prayer support and personal contact. Perhaps you individually or your parish would like to participate in this “outreach” ministry. It has truly been a wonderful blessing to hear of prayers granted and how the difficult task of serving in the North can be made more bearable through knowing there is prayer support on an ongoing basis. For more information contact Bev Orieux @ (780) 963-2615 or Ralph and Margaret Morris @ (780) 436-0393.

I'm hoping to get out to hear Bishop Robertson.  I've met him briefly just a few times, but was impressed. 

Diocese of the Artic quick facts:  "The Diocese of The Arctic is the largest Anglican diocese in the world. It spans the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Nunavik (Arctic Quebec). It has over 10 language groups, as well as 3 dialects of the Inuit people, Gwichin, Dogrib, North and South Slavey, Cree, English and French."

Try that kind of ministry on for size.

"not fit to live": Bishop Isaac Orama & the Dromantine Statement

"Homosexuality and lesbianism are inhuman. Those who practice them are insane, satanic and are not fit to live because they are rebels to God's purpose for man."

The above statement is quoted in a UPI press article as coming from Rt Rev Isaac Orama, a bishop in  Anglican Church of Nigeria.  If this is an accurate quote, it needs to be soundly condemned, and particularly by those who have promised to "assure homosexual people that they are children of God, loved and valued by him, and deserving of the best we can give of pastoral care and friendship" (Primates' statement from Dromantine).

I don't know if it is accurate, but I have yet to see a "clarifying statement", or a statement from the Church repudiating the above.  The phrase "not fit to live" hits home for some of us in a particular way.  My own SJ has Down Syndrome, and there are many in our culture for whom such a person is "not fit to live".  It is a connection to those who are "other" which is difficult to explain.  It is saddening to see the words of the Zacchaeus Fellowship so clearly illustrated:

In many parts of the Global South, the society and culture remain rigidly opposed to homosexuality and uphold strict legal prohibitions against this behaviour. The church leaders are often supportive, even of the extremes. Anyone who is struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions has nowhere to go in such a society, sometimes under fear of penalties of imprisonment and death. Where then is the mercy and forgiveness of God to be found, if the church supports the secular attitude?


We in the Zacchaeus Fellowship can find little comfort and acceptance in either situation. In the West, the direction of the church implies that we are either in denial of our God-created natures or that we were never homosexual in the first place. That does not equate with our experiences and our understanding of Scripture. In some parts of the Global South, the direction of the church comes across to us as unloving, unfriendly, and condemning—we feel we would be regarded as irredeemable and a lost cause, and thus should be excluded and rejected both by the church and the society. The members of our fellowship uphold the very Biblical admonitions the Global South uses to condemn homosexuality, but it appears we would not always be welcomed or tolerated in some parts of the Global South because of what we were and are: same-sex attracted.

Claims of "loving the sinner" while "hating the sin" don't quite come up to snuff in this case, to put it mildly.

"I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full."

"A Pastoral Response to Homosexuality": Zacchaeus Fellowship submission to ACO Listening Process

From here


The move to affirm those living in committed same-sex relationships has championed itself as a matter of compassion, justice, and human rights, but does so by ignoring the primacy of the authority of Scripture, tradition, and reason. We, the members of the Zacchaeus Fellowship, have accepted the authority of Scripture in the face of same-sex attraction and have chosen the path it prescribes. Some have undergone transformation through their encounters with Jesus and are now living heterosexually, while others who accept the Biblical admonitions against homosexual acts are living in celibacy.
We speak from the vantage point of having subjected our same-sex passions and desires to the authority of Scripture. We have first-hand experience of the stigma against both the acts and the person associated with homosexuality as well as being marginalized and dismissed for who we are now.


Before the church can resolve its difficulties surrounding the issue of homosexuality, it might first need to take a hard look at itself and its mission. We have been empire-builders. Jesus commissioned us to make disciples of all nations; to teach, to baptize, and to obey God’s commandments. The focus was a personal relationship with our Saviour. In sharing the Good News, we were encouraging each other, nourishing each other, and being accountable to each other—it was growing together in obedience to God’s ways, thus establishing His Kingdom. Buildings, robes, numbers, and other such current signs by which we measure success in today’s material world, were all unimportant. It was the message of hope of an eternal and transformed life as promised by the death and resurrection of Jesus.


A key was obedience; but obedience to what? Holy Scriptures has always been the guide for the church. The Bible revealed God’s ways over time. The mistakes, the corrections, and the lessons were all signs pointing to how we are to live. Over and over, when the people turned to follow the ways of the world, disaster soon followed. When the people acknowledged their mistakes and turned back to the ways of God, rebirth and renewal followed.


In the West, society and culture have moved in the direction of loosening sexual and spiritual morals. Over time, homosexuality became acceptable and the legal barriers were removed. Government has removed the stigma previously attached to such a lifestyle and through legislation and judicial decisions is ordering its acceptance in society. The church appears to be acquiescing and adapting to this new cultural trend.


For us in the Zacchaeus Fellowship, it appears that our church in the West has evolved into a secular-political entity. We seem to have chosen leaders who tell us how to be most successful—based on numbers in the pews, money in the collection plates, and admiration by the society around us. Our leaders have walked side-by-side with their societies’ political and cultural leaders, adapting church policies to reflect the ways of the world in which they live.


In many parts of the Global South, the society and culture remain rigidly opposed to homosexuality and uphold strict legal prohibitions against this behaviour. The church leaders are often supportive, even of the extremes. Anyone who is struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions has nowhere to go in such a society, sometimes under fear of penalties of imprisonment and death. Where then is the mercy and forgiveness of God to be found, if the church supports the secular attitude?


We in the Zacchaeus Fellowship can find little comfort and acceptance in either situation. In the West, the direction of the church implies that we are either in denial of our God-created natures or that we were never homosexual in the first place. That does not equate with our experiences and our understanding of Scripture. In some parts of the Global South, the direction of the church comes across to us as unloving, unfriendly, and condemning—we feel we would be regarded as irredeemable and a lost cause, and thus should be excluded and rejected both by the church and the society. The members of our fellowship uphold the very Biblical admonitions the Global South uses to condemn homosexuality, but it appears we would not always be welcomed or tolerated in some parts of the Global South because of what we were and are: same-sex attracted.


We are left to ask if our church has lost its purpose of bringing people to salvation through a personal relationship with a Saviour—Jesus Christ, crucified and risen from the dead. The Anglican Church claims that as its primary goal, but its actions say otherwise. Oftentimes it appears to be obsessed with self-preservation. To survive in our world, it seems to believe that it must conform to the society around it—whether it is supportive or not of homosexuality (in this case). Do we as a church really believe that if we walk in agreement with what society at the moment supports we will be successful in our mission? To the contrary, it makes us more and more irrelevant. The question becomes: What do we have to offer that the world is not already offering?


We in the Zacchaeus Fellowship have been transformed by our encounters with Christ. We have looked at our brokenness and failures in the eyes of God—how we have missed the mark, as defined by Scripture. We have not felt loved by those who advocate moving in the populist direction of the West and we are concerned for our brothers and sisters dealing with unwanted same-sex attractions in the face of the rigidity demonstrated in some parts of the Global South. We have felt loved by God. We have been aided in our journeys by those who have not been judgmental or rejecting of us as persons, but who have supported us in love to help us find our ways to be obedient to God. It is in our personal relationships with Christ that we experience God’s mercy and love. That is how we walk in faithfulness and hope. It is not an easy walk, but it is possible, as demonstrated by those who have shared in this journey with us, from many countries and within many ministries around the globe. We seek to conform to God’s commands for righteous living as given to us in the Bible. Sadly, the Anglican Communion is slowly losing its appeal for some of our members because both sides appear extremist and unloving—despite their professions to the contrary.


For a long time, the church has failed to teach its moral theology—Biblical standards for holy living—as evidenced in its lack of speaking out against heterosexual couples living together outside the bonds of Holy Matrimony. In the past, moral theology directed our pastoral theology. Those who struggled with sin could come for help because that help would be based on the boundaries set forth in the Bible. The ideal was no judgment of the sinner but a freedom to confess and seek the root causes of the desire to give in to any particular sinful desire. Now, by allowing its pastoral theology to direct its moral theology, the church has left itself vulnerable to the dictates of the society and culture around it. This lapse has introduced fear into the equation. For those seeking help for unwanted same-sex attractions, there is a fear of speaking up because it is not known whether the response will be supportive, misleading, or condemnatory. The church is not a safe place to discuss this issue for many people.


The Church must love. Part of that loving calls on the Church to stand in its compassion against the societal injustices and stigmas levied against same-sex-attracted individuals. No one should be treated as harshly as many of these people have been treated in the past and sometimes are today. Would society apply the same punishments and discrimination to someone guilty of the sins of gossip, gluttony, or pride? No. The answer is to profess our love for all sinners, including those with same-sex attraction, but also to point out through Scripture that we do not approve of their behaviour. This is what Jesus did with the rich young man. Jesus clearly loved him and welcomed him into His presence but taught him that his idolatry of material wealth would keep him from being a disciple and inheriting the eternal Kingdom. Jesus did not reject him but held firm to God’s ways and God’s truth. It was the rich young man’s choice to walk away. He was not excluded or rejected by Jesus; he chose to walk away. If the church upholds its traditional teachings on morality and is prepared to walk with those who struggle in any of these areas, then it will be the genuinely loving, open community it seeks to be and which we are commanded to be by God.


Healing in the Bible is grace in action—mercy in response to faithfulness. The call to hear and live the Good News is focussed around a call to obedience to God’s ways. Above everything, we need to remember that God respects the free will He gave us and will only work with what we give Him. A life totally surrendered to God is a life that God can transform. Left to our own devices, we are inclined to make a mess of things, and incapable of rising above sin. It is in surrendering the broken areas of our lives to God that healing becomes possible. The Lord is bigger than the traumas and shame that have caused us to act out, and ultimately, it is when we learn to surrender our life to God and invite the Lord into our brokenness that healing can begin. That is the essence of a personal relationship with God through Christ.


The Christian’s theology and ethics need not be held captive to modern science or personal conceptions. It has been suggested that it is a matter of justice to accept and affirm the inner compulsions, in this case to act out same-sex attraction but in a committed, covenanted relationship in a way that is asserted to be analogous to what heterosexually oriented people do in marriage. Regardless of orientation or compulsion, it is a choice—to act out or not. Gossips, thieves, pedophiles and even murderers can claim their orientation—their inner compulsions—are geared to their particular sins, so how can you deny them if you are going to affirm another’s sin?


For all of us who believe it is wrong in the eyes of God, according to Scripture, there is another serious danger if the church does opt to dismiss the Biblical teachings on homosexuality: what else in the Bible by which we are seeking to live a holy life might likewise be dismissed? That truly undermines our faith! If what we had always believed to be sin in the eyes of God is no longer such, then we will ultimately get to the point where we ask: Why did Jesus die on the Cross? The whole foundation of Christianity can be dislodged if we base our pastoral theology on our human feelings of love, compassion, and justice unless that theology is also grounded squarely on Biblical teachings of moral theology for holy living.


It is not too late, but the church has reached a major crossroads with this issue of homosexuality. If we are to continue walking together to further our mission of bringing the Good News of salvation through Jesus Christ to this world, then we must come together and walk on the foundation of Biblical authority, led by the Holy Spirit. We must walk in humility and acknowledge that we have all missed the mark—sinned—and seek mutual forgiveness and understanding to seek obedience to our calling as God’s people.


Respectfully submitted by

The Reverend Dr Don Alcock, Vice Chair of The Zacchaeus Fellowship and rector of St David’s and St Thomas the Apostle Anglican Churches, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada

and

The Reverend Dawn McDonald, Chair of The Zacchaeus Fellowship and Priest in charge of St Mary Magdalene Anglican Church, Fort Nelson, B.C., Canada

on behalf of the Zacchaeus Fellowship.

Nepal airline sacrifices goats...

Nepal's state-run airline has confirmed that it sacrificed two goats to appease a Hindu god, following technical problems with one of its aircraft.
Nepal Airlines said the animals were slaughtered in front of the plane - a Boeing 757 - at Kathmandu airport.

The offering was made to Akash Bhairab, the Hindu god of sky protection, whose symbol is seen on the company's planes.

The airline said that after Sunday's ceremony the plane successfully completed a flight to Hong Kong.

from the BBC

I'm wondering how PETA will respond to this.