felix hominum

"Democratic bloggers claim Palin faked pregnancy", or, why I don't blog on things like American elections

Democratic bloggers claim Palin faked pregnancy

Democrats can't understand how a middle-aged woman can have both a career and a family, especially one that includes a baby with Down Syndrome.

...
Hornrimsylvia, who blogs on the Progressive Democratic site "Daily Kos", believes the video shows that Palin's pregnancy was faked. "I have never seen a woman with an eight-month pregnancy be able to cross her legs and vigorously sit forward like that. Their backs are usually curved so far back that they need a pillow for lumbar support." [note to self: I'm not touching that one with a barge-pole, especially since I happen to be married to a person who has, in fact, been 8 months pregnant.  Not just 8 months pregnant once, but four times]

The whole article is at Spero News, see what you think.

Ah, those crazy interwebs, combined with those crazy American politics...

Full itinerary for the 2009 Holy Land Pilgrimage: Christ and the First Christians

can be viewed here, registrations forms, etc, will be uploaded shortly.

ps - I will be departing from Edmonton, but we can make a variety of accomodations for people who would like to come, but would be departing from other cities.

Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church, pt 4

5. And this unity we ought firmly to hold and assert, especially those of us that are bishops who preside in the Church, that we may also prove the episcopate itself to be one and undivided.  Let no one deceive the brotherhood by a falsehood: let no one corrupt the truth of the faith by perfidious prevarication. The episcopate is one, each part of which is held by each one for the whole.

The Church also is one, which is spread abroad far and wide into a multitude by an increase of fruitfulness. As there are many rays of the sun, but one light; and many branches of a tree, but one strength based in its tenacious root; and since from one spring flow many streams, although the multiplicity seems diffused in the liberality of an overflowing abundance, yet the unity is still preserved in the source.  Separate a ray of the sun from its body of light, its unity does not allow a division of light; break a branch from a tree,—when broken, it will not be able to bud; cut off the stream from its fountain, and that which is cut off dries up.

Thus also the Church, shone over with the light of the Lord, sheds forth her rays over the whole world, yet it is one light which is everywhere diffused, nor is the unity of the body separated. Her fruitful abundance spreads her branches over the whole world. She broadly expands her rivers, liberally flowing, yet her head is one, her source one; and she is one mother, plentiful in the results of fruitfulness: from her womb we are born, by her milk we are nourished, by her spirit we are animated.

In par. 4 of the treatise, Cyprian argued that the unity of the church was made manifest in the unity which began with Jesus' saying to Peter:  on this rock I will build my church.  But lest you think that Cyprian unambiguously supported a further primacy of Peter (and hence of the bishop of Rome), he then wrote of how there is an equality among the Apostles after Pentecost:

...to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, “As the Father hath sent me, even so send I you: Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they shall be remitted unto him; and whose soever sins ye retain, they shall be retained;” yet, that He might set forth unity, He arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as beginning from one.

Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity.

So suppose you call yourself a catholic Christian, or you are at least a bit taken with the idea that the church on earth has some sort of structure which you believe Jesus would like it to have.  A good part of that would have to do, in Cyprian's eyes (and the eyes of many early Christians) with the unity to be found in the bishops of the churches.  Yet one might bluntly ask:  so are the Anglican bishops united?  In Cyprian's day he saw it as important:  "And this unity we ought firmly to hold and assert, especially those of us that are bishops who preside in the Church, that we may also prove the episcopate itself to be one and undivided."  Well, it might be one and undivided on paper, but surely there were "divisions", no?  In many ways there were divisions, there were opinions, and there were personalities. 

But there was something else:  a visible unity and mutual recognition of office, authority and ministry.  Sometimes we hear that "a bishop is a bishop for the whole church".  Some of the thinking behind that can be seen in Cyprian:  "The episcopate is one, each part of which is held by each one for the whole."  That is to say, being a bishop in a particular church context does not mean that you are autonomous.  It does not mean that you need not respond to, be accountable to, and even occasionally challenge, your fellow bishops.  In Cyprian's language, the bishop holds his office "for the whole" - that is, for the whole church, the whole people of God.  A bishop is not merely a local governor.  If a bishop (or a fellowship/Communion) is to be 'catholic' in that sense of the word, its bishops must first and foremost consider their ministry to be "for the whole" of the church.

Now I'm not nearly as smart as many Anglicans who think and write deeply on these things.  But it seems to me that this is one area where some bishops in the Anglican Communion could, by the grace of God, do a little better.  Or perhaps, they might ask themselves, how am I serving the whole of the church?  It seems to me that we have remade episcopal ministry along the lines of contemporary political models.  A bishop governs a state, or a province, or a municipality, and is answerable only to "his own" constituents.

But to Cyprian at least, the bishop's "constituents" are in one important sense, the whole people of God, where ever they might be found.

previous posts:  intro, part 1, part 2, part 3

the summer project: building a playhouse for the kids

Back in early June the smaller members of the felix clan got the idea that dad should build a playhouse for them in the backyard.  Two words -- summer project".  So without further ado we had to figure out where exactly it should go.  Son #1 thought it should be close to the kitchen, with the option of installing a tunnel through which snacks could be passed directly from the kitchen to the playhouse.  I liked the idea, but mrs felix said no.  The project is almost completed.  This afternoon we put the second layer of drywall compound on the interior.  There are still a few bits and pieces to finish up.  Tip: you can actually save a bundle on good quality materials by buying ends and left over sizes.  The guys at Cedar Village gave me a great deal on some very swank cedar siding.  It is all leftovers and shorter pieces from other jobs.  Here are a few shots of the work in progress:

"Anglican Church moves to evict breakaway B.C. clergy"

GREG JOYCE
THE CANADIAN PRESS
VANCOUVER – The Bible battle that has been dividing Anglicans in Canada for more than a decade is moving into new territory, with a third court battle looming in a Vancouver court.

The battle over same-sex blessings specifically, and interpretation of the Bible generally, is splitting liberal and conservative Anglicans and the fight over church property ownership has already resulted in two interim court rulings – one in Ontario and one in British Columbia.

Now the Diocese of New Westminster has invoked a church bylaw to essentially fire the clergy at two other Vancouver-area churches and order them to leave the premises.

whole article at the Star

I must get back to my series on Cyprian's Unity of the Church.

When any of you has a grievance against another, do you dare to take it to court before the unrighteous, instead of taking it before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels—to say nothing of ordinary matters? If you have ordinary cases, then, do you appoint as judges those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to decide between one believer and another, but a believer goes to court against a believer—and before unbelievers at that?

In fact, to have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you.

1 Corinthians 6

book review: Kyle Strobel, Metamorpha: Jesus as a way of life

Metamorpha:  Jesus as a way of life
Kyle Strobel
2007 Baker Books

A bit of Kyle’s background is evident from this one off quote, which BTW, was quote of the day here at felix hominum a few weeks ago:

Mine is probably the first generation of children whose parents became Christians in the seeker movement.  The first time I sang a hymn was in college.  I have been saved from facing issues that come with growing up around a lot of tradition;  for example, I have no qualms with redoing everything if that is what is needed.  On the other hand, my lack of tradition has left me feeling my way in the dark even though millions of others have walked the way before me.

The first time I read this book it didn’t really grab me, but on a second reading I found that I appreciated more what Kyle was getting at.

The book is based on the theme of change.  Hence the title – use of Greek word for change.  Kyle divides the book into thee broad sections.  He writes about Christian metamorpha as a new way of seeing, and new way of being, and a new way of living.  Within these broad categories, he gives us his take on the three basic means (“informers” as he calls them) by which change takes place: “This is the equipment you’ll need for the metamorpha journey: the Bible, the Spirit, and a community of believers to travel with.”

The new way of seeing ourselves and the world is the first step in metamorpha:  Kyle claims that “much of Jesus’ ministry was about worldview development”.  In this I think he is right;  how one lives in the world will come out of how one views the world (including one’s self).  So we have the challenge of Jesus:  begin to see things through a new lens.  Kyle points to the importance of community as the place where change takes place: “Institutions as institutions can encourage people to accept propositions and even a general way of life, but they rarely change people’s core beliefs.”

His section on the new way of being touches on each of the 3 informers:  Bible, Spirit and Community, with additional material on the self.”  Much of what he says will resonate with those who have come from a modernist evangelical background.  That’s not to say that he doesn’t give some helpful and interesting general approaches for the rest of us.  He invites the reader to “interact with the Word in a more holistic way”, engaging it as “history, shepherd, and friend”.  He borrows a helpful thought or two from John Webster:  “Revelation is thus not simply bridging of a noetic divide (though it includes that) but is reconciliation, salvation, and therefore fellowship;  The idiom of revelation is as much moral and relational as it is cognitional”.  With this in mind Kyle takes us on a brief tour of the Gospel of Mark.

His section on the Spirit was, I think, the weakest section of the book.  I think I can live with that, seeing as it took the church as a whole 4 centuries to articulate the beginnings of a doctrine of the Spirit.  In dealing with the topic of community, Kyle reminds us that we cannot follow the path of Christ apart from the body of the church.   One of the thoughts which struck me on second reading is that we have so many difficulties in our church community because we haven’t really seen what an actual biblical community looks like.  Kind of like every church that describes itself as “friendly and welcoming.”  Easy to say, not so easy to do.

In the last broad section of the book, he turns to a new way of living.  This follows on the heels of the previous section, which ended with a look at selfview (as opposed to worldview).  Kyle brings the reader to the place of wisdom in living the Christian life:

“In all things, we must not seek to live above or beyond this world, but to understand that we are to live kingdom lives within it”.  He touches on the theme of the cross as part of Christian living (no ‘prosperity gospel’ here) and gives us what I think is one of the great keys to Christian development:  discipleship starts within, and then moves outward.

Overall, I'd give it a 7.5 to 8 out of 10.  It is an accessible read, something which I think I could give to a lot of ordinary churchgoers to their benefit.  I think he raises some important questions with the theme of change, and invites us to seriously consider the ways in which change takes place.

Kyle's website for the book: Jesus as a Way of Life

Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church, pt 3

4. If any one consider and examine these things, there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments.  There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truth.  The Lord speaks to Peter, saying, “I say unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

And again to the same He says, after His resurrection, “Feed my sheep.” And although to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, “As the Father hath sent me, even so send I you: Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they shall be remitted unto him; and whose soever sins ye retain, they shall be retained;” yet, that He might set forth unity, He arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as beginning from one. Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity. Which one Church, also, the Holy Spirit in the Song of Songs designated in the person of our Lord, and says, “My dove, my spotless one, is but one. She is the only one of her mother, elect of her that bare her.”

Does he who does not hold this unity of the Church think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives against and resists the Church trust that he is in the Church, when moreover the blessed Apostle Paul teaches the same thing, and sets forth the sacrament of unity, saying, “There is one body and one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God?”

5. And this unity we ought firmly to hold and assert, especially those of us that are bishops who preside in the Church, that we may also prove the episcopate itself to be one and undivided.

Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church

Commentary later, when I actually have something to add...

Related posts: intro, part 1, part 2

sermon notes Pentecost 16; Matthew 16: 21-28

From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This must never happen to you."

But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things."

Then Jesus told his disciples, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.  For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.  For what will it profit them if they gain the whole world but forfeit their life? Or what will they give in return for their life?

"For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done.  Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

Last week we had "Peter's confession" that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.  Remember that reading ended with Jesus sternly warning his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.  Well, Peter's subsequent comments might give us a bit of insight into that.  We may not know exactly what kind of Messiah Peter thought that Jesus should be, but we clearly see what kind of Messaih Peter thought Jesus should not be.

Jesus lays out before the disciples the basics of Messiahship;  Jesus must 

go to Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

That's Messiahship 101, but Peter will have none of it. [side note:  if you haven't read any of Rene Girard's works, they are really fasicnating on the whole suffering/violence theme]  I suspect (though I cannot of course prove) that Peter really did not understand what Jesus was talking about.  More than that, I suspect that Peter (like many who look at the suffering Christ) heard only the first part of what Jesus was saying.  Jesus' description of what must happen in Jerusalem seems to focus only on his suffering and death.  And perhaps Peter had some selective hearing - he either did not hear or did not understand what Jesus ended with:  "be raised on the third day".  And note that the passage ends with a description of Christ coming in his glory and a reference again to "life".  But initially, Peter will have none of it:

And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This must never happen to you."

Gotta give Peter credit for looking out for Jesus' best interests.  The only problem is, Jesus wasn't looking out for his own best interest - he was looking out for ours.  There are several routes one can take with this rebuke from Peter to Jesus.  Perhaps Peter's idea of Messiahship was nationalistic or idealistic.  These things don't happen to Messiahs, so these things can't happen to Jesus.  Or Peter had no idea why such things should happen.  Or Peter had no inkling of what Jesus was opening up for humanity in being "raised on the third day."  At any rate, It is not just Peter's problem;  all of us tend to fashion our favourite kind of Messiah out of Jesus.  And then we tend to ignore or dismiss the bits of Jesus which don't fit into our idea of what Messiahship should be.

But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things."

Or, as the prophet wrote, "My ways are not your ways, nor are my thoughts your thoughts".  It is at this point that one is confronted with the choice of humility.  Can I believe such a thing?  It is the essence of the old joke:  God made man in His own image, and we've been trying to return the favour ever since.  There is much more to work out here, but how do I set my mind on divine things, instead of on human things?  What does this look like?

Then Jesus told his disciples, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.  For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.  For what will it profit them if they gain the whole world but forfeit their life? Or what will they give in return for their life?

I suppose it is the greatest counter-intuitive thing to proclaim that the road to resurrection must go by the way of the Cross, and that we must lose our lives to save them, and that we are called to take up our cross and follow Jesus on the way of sacrifice and suffering.  If I had any further wisdom on this, I would add it here.  But I don't, really.

A fellow blogger recalls saying from his dad.  People treat Christianity like they treat vaccines.  They inject themselves with a little bit of it in order to prevent themselves from getting the real thing.

"For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done.  Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

The passage ends not with death and suffering, but with glory and life.  That's the pattern of Jesus' Messiahship.  That's all for now.

"King of Kings" title given to Gaddafi

A meeting of more than 200 African kings and traditional rulers has bestowed the title "king of kings" on Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

story at the BBC

I don't have the heart to tell him that the title is already taken...

BTW, you can also visit Gaddafi's MySpace page...

Feast of St Augustine

Happy St Augustine's day.  My personal patron and favourite.  I've benefited from his writings for a long time.

Some of my posts on St Augustine over the last little while and be found here.  I still have some more in the works, but it might be a while before I get them out there.

Cyprian On the Unity of the Church pt 2

Since the Lord warns us, saying, “Ye are the salt of the earth,” and since He bids us to be simple to harmlessness, and yet with our simplicity to be prudent, what else, beloved brethren, befits us, than to use foresight and watching with an anxious heart, both to perceive and to beware of the wiles of the crafty foe, that we, who have put on Christ the wisdom of God the Father, may not seem to be wanting in wisdom in the matter of providing for our salvation?

For it is not persecution alone that is to be feared; nor those things which advance by open attack to overwhelm and cast down the servants of God. Caution is more easy where danger is manifest, and the mind is prepared beforehand for the contest when the adversary avows himself. The enemy is more to be feared and to be guarded against, when he creeps on us secretly; when, deceiving by the appearance of peace, he steals forward by hidden approaches, whence also he has received the name of the Serpent.
 
That is always his subtlety; that is his dark and stealthy artifice for circumventing man. Thus from the very beginning of the world he deceived; and flattering with lying words, he misled inexperienced souls by an incautious credulity. Thus he endeavoured to tempt the Lord Himself:  he secretly approached Him, as if he would creep on Him again, and deceive; yet he was understood, and beaten back, and therefore prostrated, because he was recognised and detected.

Unity of the Church 1

Perhaps the modern reader of Cyprian will be surprised to see how he starts.  Not, as we might imagine, with an analysis of the “politics” of church-land, but with a survey of the spiritual geography.  He draws our attention to the “wiles of the crafty foe” – the spiritual reality which “has received the name of the Serpent”.  This is a very different starting point than most of us are used to.  Cyprian tells us to look to the spiritual world.

So did the devil make him do it?  That’s really what Cyprian is talking about.  “The world is full of dangerous things” said Gandalf to Gimli.  Many of us would not even really think about the possibility of, well, evil and temptation personified in a creature.  This tempter is identified as the Satan of the 3 temptations in the wilderness.  Clearly, Cyprian thinks that there are spiritual forces which, in the old language, seek to corrupt and destroy the creatures of God.  Many of us have been to baptisms where reference is made to “Satan and all his works”.  And yet how many can take seriously, if at all, that this refers to some sort of actual creature?  People will have different takes on this:  some skeptical about such things, others offering metaphorical interpretation of such “spiritual realities”, and still others will simply say that there is such a thing as a fallen angel, who happens not to like God or people very much, and whose activity is much more hidden from sight. Cyprian tells his readers that the main problem is that we must recognize and detect such spiritual forces.

There is a great deal of wisdom here.  It is the less obvious and more subtle temptations which can be the most dangerous.  Sort of a spiritual version of some kind of bait and switch.  Most of us tend to be aware of our “obvious” faults.  But maybe we need, both individually and as a body, to become more aware of what the psalmist called “my secret sins”.

Cyprian contrasts these dangers with the open danger from persecution, and bids his reader remember that “it is not persecution alone that is to be feared; nor those things which advance by open attack to overwhelm and cast down the servants of God.”   

related posts: intro, pt 1

Diocese of Athabasca website hit by hackers

Now why would someone go and do a thing like that?

Tim Chesterton playing at hulbert's

Tim Chesterton's latest gig.

Cyprian: On the Unity of the Church, pt 1

The very fact that Cyprian devoted a little treatise to the topic of church unity might cause us to ask whether there was any disunity, which caused him to think and write about this topic.  The answer, of course, is yes.  In fact, the disunity was a bit complicated at the time.  The occasion for this treatise is, on the surface, some trouble over who was the bishop of Rome.  All of this took place just at the end of a persecution by the Emperor Decius, around the year 250-51.

The persecution was on a grand scale:  every person in the Empire was required to sacrifice to the cult of the Emperor or to face the consequences.  Many Christians decided to give in and make the appropriate sacrifices to please the Romans. Others had bought little “get out of persecution free” papers.  And others refused to give in and suffered the consequences.  In the midst of this we have Cyprian becoming bishop in Carthage, North Africa.

So when the persecution ended, there was a bit of a problem.  On the one hand were large numbers of those Christians who had remained steadfast and had suffered for their faith.  Against this group were those who had, either in earnest or pretence, made the appropriate sacrifices and had denied Christ.  So then within the Church there arose the question of whether or not these lapsi could or should be admitted back into the fellowship of the Church.  They had, after all, denied Jesus.  Strong voices argued that they were out:  they Church was pure, and there was no penance for those who had denied Christ.

With me so far?  Then we have a vacancy for the position of Pope bishop of Rome.  (Sorry, couldn’t resist, mea culpa) and we have Cornelius elected.  Novatian, who tended to be more on the strict side regarding the lapsed Christians, was in the running, but lost.  He immediately set himself up as bishop of Rome.  So we have two bishops of Rome.  This was schism – and it was to last for several decades.

Meanwhile, back at home, Cyprian was also faced with some questions about authority and the role of bishops.  Again, these questions came about in the wake of the end of the persecution and the questions about the standing of those who had lapsed.

So to a great extent, Cyprian wrote about the unity of the church, located and made visible in the unity of the bishops.  And when we come to his interpretation of the role of Peter and the primacy of Rome, remember that there was in fact a schism in Rome at that time.  I'll add a bit more background as we get into the treatise itself.

related post:  here

For some further thoughts on Cyprian and the contemporary church, see this excellent post by Phil Snider.

Τὰ ἄρχαῖα ἔθη κρατέιτο; Cyprian: On the Unity of the Church

Τὰ ἄρχαῖα ἔθη κρατέιτο.

Let the ancient examples prevail.

The occasion of this post is a simple question:  what do I mean when I (or you) say "I love the Church"?  Augustine in his Confessions posed the question, what is it that I love, when I love God? It is the sort of question that one either sees as profound or simplistic.  To some, the asking of such a question borders on nonsense, either because it ought to be obvious that one simply loves God, or that one gropes about in the dark, and utters an untruth, when one says "I love God".  To others, asking the question is the first step in having it answered, as the soul expresses its desire for God and begins its journey homeward. 

I hear many people in Anglican circles saying "I love the Church".  Yet what do we mean when we say that?  With various loves appearing to move the church in different directions, perhaps the first question should be what do I mean when I say "I love".  But be all that as it may, I think the question about loving the Church needs to spark, at least for some Anglicans, the further question:  what is the Church?  And this is where our friend Cyprian comes in.  His treatise On the Unity of the Church was probably written c. 251, which is 7 years before the time of his martyrdom.  In this short treatise Cyprian lays out for the reader a few considerations about the nature of the Church.  I hope over the next two weeks or so to do a short study of this little treatise of his, in expectation that it might give the contemporary church some insight into what at least a few Christians of old thought about when they declared their love for the Church.

The online text of Schaff's translation can be found here, or here.

This sacrament of unity, this bond of a concord inseparably cohering, is set forth where in the Gospel the coat of the Lord Jesus Christ is not at all divided nor cut, but is received as an entire garment, and is possessed as an uninjured and undivided robe by those who cast lots concerning Christ’s garment, who should rather put on Christ.

Holy Scripture speaks, saying, “But of the coat, because it was not sewed, but woven from the top throughout, they said one to another, Let us not rend it, but cast lots whose it shall be." That coat bore with it an unity that came down from the top, that is, that came from heaven and the Father, which was not to be at all rent by the receiver and the possessor, but without separation we obtain a whole and substantial entireness.

He cannot possess the garment of Christ who parts and divides the Church of Christ.

Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church, vii

Update:  links to the rest of the posts in this series:

related posts: Cyprian On the Unity of the Church
intro
part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4

sermon notes Pentecost 15: Matthew 16: 13-20

[notes for Pent 16;  Matt 16: 21-28 are here]

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."  He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."

And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.  I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Caesarea Philippi was located about 30 kms north of the Sea of Galilee in what is now the Golan Heights.  It has an interesting religious history:  used as a cultic center for Baal worship in Canaanite times, then it was part of the Panion (you might see it called Paneas) during Hellenistic times.  The reference is to the god Pan.  Herod the Great built a temple to his patron Emperor Augustus there, and then Philip the Tetrarch dedicated it also to the Emperor Tiberius, and decided to lend his own name to the town as well.  Hence Caesarea Philippi.  Just to add to the charm of the place, Josephus (Jewish War 3.9.7.) tells us that Vespasian had a few gladiatorial games with Jewish victims there after the fall of Jerusalem.

An interesting place in which to pose the question: "Who do you say that I am?"  Now it is also worth considering that Jesus does not directly jump to this question.  Instead, he asks what the people say about him.  And in giving their various answers, the disciples show that they are at least a bit conversant with popular opinion "out there".  It is an approach worth considering - rather than jumping straight to the second question, do we need to become conversant with what the culture says about the Son of Man?  The stereotype of evangelism is to jump to a direct question, rather than take the slightly roundabout route that Jesus takes to get there.

“Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

Now who are these people and why do the people think that Jesus is one of these characters?

John the Baptist was very austere – living in the wilderness on locusts and wild honey, dressed up so that he would stand out from the crowd.  If you read the accounts of John the Baptist in the gospels you’ll see that his main ministry was calling people to repent of their sins.  In fact, sometimes he was pretty harsh – he called the Pharisees a brood of vipers – a nest of snakes.  So perhaps people saw in Jesus the continuation of the tradition of John the Baptist.

But Jesus is not John the Baptist.  He’s more than John the Baptist.  John's baptism of repentance is fulfilled in Jesus' authority to forgive.  And John's ministry of preparation is fulfilled in the arrival of the Lamb of God.  Jesus was surely like John in the call to repentance, but Jesus also delivers something which John could not:  divine forgiveness and absolution.

Next, some people say that Jesus is Elijah. In Jewish tradition, Elijah was the greatest prophet and miracle worker of the Old Testament.  When Elijah prayed, God listened.  Elijah could do anything:  he could cure the sick, he could raise the dead, he could make food miraculously multiply, he could control the weather, he could control the outcome of battles and armies and wars.  He was the greatest miracle worker that ever lived.  He could solve the problems of people, cities, even kingdoms with his miracles.

But Jesus is not Elijah.  One of the small things we forget when we see the various miracles is that the miracle does not solve the problem, it merely postpones it.  Consider Elijah's miracles around death.  'Nuff said.  The problem was postponed, not solved. And like John the Baptist, Elijah had a preparatory role (as seen elsewhere when Jesus replies that 'Elijah must come first').  But Jesus is more than Elijah;  Jesus is not preparatory - he is the event.

Next, others say that he is Jeremiah or one of the prophets.  Now who is Jeremiah?  There are two main writings in the Old Testament about Jeremiah.  The first is the book of Jeremiah, and the second is called the Lamentations of Jeremiah.  The lamentations of Jeremiah are just that – a collection of laments. Songs and stories of woe;  unhappiness at how badly things are going for us.  Jeremiah was the best at saying – “Look God, things are just terrible, life is hard and all my enemies are beating up Israel, and things just aren’t fair and won’t you do something about it?" Okay, that might be a very loose translation, but you get the picture.

The prophets were also known for their zeal in calling Israel back to Yahweh from worship of other gods, for their zeal in defending the cause of justice and their condemnation of those who offended God through injustice and oppression.  Perhaps by this time Jesus had a reputation in this area.  But Jesus is not Jeremiah or one of the prophets.

He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."

And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.

For now I want to focus on that little word "revealed".  Here, I think, is the crux of the matter.  Knowing Jesus is not something we achieve by our own cleverness, but it is something revealed.  Many can and have argued over just what is meant by the phrase "Messiah, the Son of the living God."  But I sense that there comes a point when argument will not gain anything - there must be revelation - the divine work of  God breaking in on our notions of Jesus as wise man, prophet, miracle worker, whatever - - and then we come to know Him as the Son of the Living God. 

More on this later, and for the sake of Roman Catholic dialogue, I'll skip over the whole Peter thing.  An interesting early discussion of these verses can be found in Cyprian's Unity of the Church (ch 4).  Pelikan (The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition, 159, 250) has some good summaries of the interpretation of these verses in the early church. 

Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Let me just half lightly say that this is the one command of Jesus that many Christians are only all too happy to keep. 

 

Christ and the Early Christians - Holy Land Pilgrimage 2009

Here are the basic details of the next Holy Land pilgrimage.  I'll have more stuff to download for those who are interested - registration forms, fuller itinerary, etc. I'm away for a couple of days, so you can just email me if you think this might be something you would like to join us for:

Following Christ and the First Christians: A Pilgrimage Through the Holy Land and Egypt in the Footsteps of our Lord and the Desert Fathers

Our pilgrimage will begin in Israel, in the Holy City of Jerusalem. There, we will stand where Jesus stood 2000 years ago, we will visit the sites of his life, his death, and his resurrection. As we journey, we will come to new understandings of our faith, our scriptures, and our traditions.

The trip will be led by the Reverend Sally French and the Reverend Joseph Walker, both Anglican clergy with experience leading pilgrimages to the Holy Land. We will be journeying through Israel and Egypt, following the bible stories from Bethlehem to Nazareth, the Galilee, and, of course, Jerusalem. In Egypt, we begin with the Sinai Desert, the wilderness of the Exodus. We will then explore the landscapes of the Desert Fathers and the early Christians, the monastic centers of the ancient world, the great city of Alexandria, the monuments of Pharaoh’s Egypt, and the modern-day metropolis of Cairo.If you have already visited the Holy Land, then this pilgrimage is an opportunity to revisit the holy sites, to acquaint yourself with new places, and to continue your pilgrim journey through this ancient land. Our pilgrimage is designed for both newcomers and returning pilgrims

Monday, February 2, 2009:Depart Edmonton for Israel.

Tuesday, Feb 3, 2009:Arrive in Tel Aviv. Bus to Jerusalem. Dinner and overnight at our hotel within the Old City walls.

Wednesday, Feb 4, 2009:Jerusalem at the time of Jesus: An overview of the city, its history and geography.

Thursday, Feb 5, 2009:Ancient Jerusalem: Following the Roman Cardo (the ‘heart’ of the Roman city), we will look at the archaeological remains of the ancient kings, tracing the biblical story through the sites and references of the Jewish and Armenian Quarters. In the afternoon, we explore the birth of the Messiah with a journey to Bethlehem to visit the Basilica of the Nativity and the Shepherds’ Fields. Dinner in Bethlehem with some of the Palestinian Christians who live ‘behind the wall’.

Friday, Feb 6, 2009:Jerusalem in decline: as Jewish rebels struggled with Roman occupation at the end of the first century, the geography of the Holy City was forever changed. We will examine the history of the city, looking at key events and features of the decades immediately following the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Visit the Mount of Olives and Mount Zion, stopping to reflect on the sites of Christ’s ministry there, including the ancient Pater Noster Church and the site where Jesus wept over Jerusalem

Saturday, Feb 7, 2009:The Wilderness of Jesus: the Judean Wilderness, the Dead Sea, Masada and Qumran. Our pilgrimage takes us into the deserts around Jerusalem, to the Wadi Quelt in the Judean Wilderness, to the ancient city of Jericho, then on to Masada. We will have the opportunity to float in the Dead Sea, to visit Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, and to explore the Negev desert.

Sunday, Feb 8, 2009 - worship with the local Christian communities, at St George’s Anglican Cathedral, at Christ Church Anglican in the Old City, and other local churches. After lunch, we will be meeting to tour the Church of the Resurrection, on the site of the crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Monday, Feb 9, 2009:The Galilee region: Early departure for the north, via the Jordan River Valley. Stops at Bet Shean and Bet Alpha, Mount Tabor, and on to Tiberias for the night

Tuesday, Feb 10, 2009:The Sea of Galilee and beyond - move up into the heights of the Galilee region, exploring the Golan, and continuing as far as Caesarea Philippi in the northernmost region of Israel.

Wednesday, Feb 11, 2009:The heart of the Galilee: We will begin with a visit to Sepphoris, the ancient center of the region. From there, we will travel through Cana to Nazareth, visiting the sites of Christ’s childhood home. Dinner and overnight with the Sisters of Nazareth, including private tour of their excavations.

Thursday, Feb 12, 2009:From Jerusalem to the ends of the earth: We return to the Holy City along the via maris, following the Mediterranean coast. We will explore Caesarea Maritima, Herod’s great seaside fortress, and the seat of the Roman governors of Judea, also famous as the site of the Apostle Paul’s captivity.

Friday, Feb 13, 2009:Free day in Jerusalem

Saturday, Feb 14, 2009:Early departure from Jerusalem to the Sinai desert via the Negev, with stops in the wilderness, including Ein Gedi, the spring where King David hid from Saul and his army. Arrive in Egypt (Taba/Eilat border crossing) in time for a packed lunch. Drive into the desert for wilderness stops. Overnight either in the Sinai Wilderness (sleeping bags provided) or in a hotel on the Red Sea shore.

Sunday, Feb 15, 2009:The ‘Wilderness of Sin’ – the desert of the Exodus, ancient monuments, and the Silence of the desert. Eucharist in the wilderness. Including stops at the Feiran Oasis Convent, and on to Overnight at Saint Katherine’s Monastery/ Mount Sinai. Evening “Camel Orientation”

Monday, Feb 16, 2009:Our Sinai experience continues with a pre-dawn climb up Mount Sinai via camel or on foot. Sunrise Eucharist up Mount Sinai, option for pilgrims to climb to the summit. Tour of the Monastery, including museum and the Church.

Tuesday, Feb 17, 2009:The First Christians: we will be visiting the Monastery of Saint Anthony of the Desert, the oldest active Christian monastery in the world and an ancient center for the Desert Fathers. There, we will encounter modern-day Coptic Christian monastic life and learn about the traditions of the Desert Fathers.

Wednesday, Feb 18, 2009:The Land of Pharaoh: We will be visiting the monuments of ancient and modern Egypt, with a special focus on the Christian and Jewish quarter, and on the bustling ancient market, the Khan el-Khalili. On this day, we will be able to contrast the silence of the desert with the chaos of Egyptian city life, giving us new insights into the lives of the first Christians.

Thursday, Feb 19, 2009:The Early Christian Community and the Alexandrian Traditions: We depart early, driving north through the Nile Delta on our way to Alexandria, the city founded by Alexander the Great and once a major centre for philosophy and learning. After our tour of the ancient city, we will return to Cairo via the Wadi Natrun Oasis, home to a number of active and ancient Coptic monasteries with many ties to the first Christians

Friday, Feb 20, 2009:Our final day begins in the company of our fellow Anglicans from Africa as we join with them in the Eucharist at All Saints Cathedral, Cairo. We will spend the afternoon exploring the hidden treasures of the Egyptian Museum and the City of the Dead

Saturday, Feb 21, 2009:Out of Egypt: Depart from Cairo for North America.

jobs which are better than yours...

my aunt, single malt taste tester

Charles Inglis, First Anglican Bishop of Canada

"The state of religion in this province," as Inglis was to write, "is truly deplorable ... Ignorance and lukewarmness on the one hand, fanaticism and irreligion on the other. ... The inhabitants divided into many sects, and carried away by a variety of Enthusiasts that under take to preach to them."

quoted in "Charles Inglis, Missionary, Loyalist, Bishop" by Reginald V. Harris
(Toronto: General Board of Religious Education, 1937)

Today is the commemoration of the consecration of Charles Inglis.  He was consecrated on August 12, 1787 at Lambeth Palace.  Inglis was, apparently, the only one available for the job.  His life and loyalties spanned the rise of an independent America and the war of 1812.  His jurisdiction included what was then called Canada - the Maritime provinces, Quebec and part of present day Ontario.

He came from a family of Scots Episcopalians, and set out to America.  He worked as a schoolteacher for while, and then was ordained.  He eventually settled in as Rector of Trinity Church New York.  He and Thomas Paine had a bit of a pamphlet war during the lead up to the American war of independence.  Inglis was a fierce Loyalist.  According to one legend, Charles Inglis led prayers for George III while George Washington was in the congregation.  A militia soon surrounded the church.

On 11 August 1787, George III created the Diocese of Nova Scotia by Letters Patent, and Inglis was consecrated the next day.

From a sermon of Charles Inglis, Trinity church

The Duty of Honouring the King, explained in s sermon 

Preached On Sunday, January 30, 1780;

Being the Anniversary of the Martyrdom of
King CHARLES I.

By CHARLES INGLIS, D.D.
RECTOR OF TRINITY CHURCH, NEW-YORK.

INFLUENCED by those Motives, let us, in the Name of God, and in his Strength, resolutely set about this Conduct: Cheared with the pleasing hope which results from it, when pursued, let us look forward to that happy Period---not very distant now, I trust---when we shall return into the soft Bosom of Peace; when the Remembrance of past Sufferings shall serve to enhance its Value, and inspire us with the more Zeal to praise, and thank, and fear God, and  to honour the King; when our misguided Brethren, cured of their Delusion, shall be brought back to their Duty, and partake once more of the Benefits which, hitherto, they have too lightly regarded. Let each of us then, Òput on Bowels of Mercy, Kindness, Meekness, long Suffering; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any Man have a Quarrel against any; even as CHrist forgave youÓ; and let us resolve to imitate the Example of Christ's Subjects in that blessed State, foretold by Isaiah, when all Envy shall be extinguished, and brotherly Love shall abound--- Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.

            THAT each of us may cultivate this divine Temper---that each of us, as a Follower of the meek Jesus, may adorn that Profession, and manifest a deep Sense of our Obligation to imitate, and love, and serve him---that each of us may improve by the Chastisements of Heaven, and rise, purified from the Dross of Sin, more bright and shining out of the Furnace of Affliction---that each of us may attain that Amendment, with all its consequent Blessings, which are designed and aimed at by the Dispensations of our merciful God----May He of his infinite Goodness grant, for the Sake and Merits of his dear Son, Jesus Christ; to whom, with the Father, and the Holy Spirit, three Persons, but one eternal God, be ascribed immortal Praise, Glory, and Dominion, henceforth, for evermore.

In 1816, Bishop Inglis died; his remains were buried under the chancel of St. Paul's at Halifax.

Well, there you have it.  Raise a glass to Inglis.

add'l sources:

Hein, David; Gardiner H. Shattuck, Jr. (2004). "The Episcopalians. New York"

"God made me this way" - smokers

Nicotine Gene Linked to Addiction

American researchers studied data from 435 volunteers to probe the link between forms of a nicotine-receptor gene called CHRNA5, how people recalled their first smoking experience, and how they smoke now.

They compared three groups: those who never smoked; those who never got hooked after trying at least one cigarette but not more than 100; and regular smokers who lit up at least five cigarettes a day for at least five years.

Regular smokers were far more likely to have the less common form of the gene compared with those who never smoked, the researchers said.

"It appears that for people who have a certain genetic makeup, the initial physical reaction to smoking can play a significant role in determining what happens next," said Ovide Pomerleau, the study's senior author and a professor of psychiatry at the University of Michigan Medical School.

story at the CBC

I'm going to get me a pouch of something at Burlington's

Ten things you never hear in church

From Ian's Messy Desk, in his humour files:

1. Hey! It’s MY turn to sit in the front pew!

2. I was so enthralled, I never noticed your sermon went 25 minutes over time.

3. Personally, I find witnessing much more enjoyable than golf.

4. I’ve decided to give our church the $500.00 a month I used to send to TV evangelists.

5. I volunteer to be the permanent teacher for the Junior High Sunday School class.

6. Forget the denominational minimum salary: let’s pay our pastor so he can live like we do.

7. I love it when we sing hymns I’ve never heard before!

8. Since we’re all here, let’s start the worship service early!

9. Pastor, we’d like to send you to this Bible seminar in the Bahamas.

10. Nothing inspires me and strengthens my commitment like our annual stewardship campaign!

Have Temple, will travel

From the ancient synagogue at Capernaum:
(photo felix hominum, 2007)

A temple on wheels, with some classical overtone in the architecture?  a travelling ark?  the mobility of Judaism after the destruction of the Temple?

For real buffs on ancient synaguges, you can read:

Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery
By Dan Urman, Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher
Contributor Dan Urman, Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher
Published by BRILL, 1998

Thoughts on the Feast of the Transfiguration

Today is the Feast of the Transfiguration.  It is a feast which is, I have read, more widely celebrated in the Eastern churches than in the West.

Now about eight days after these sayings Jesus took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray. And while he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white.  Suddenly they saw two men, Moses and Elijah, talking to him. They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.

Now Peter and his companions were weighed down with sleep; but since they had stayed awake, they saw his glory and the two men who stood with him. Just as they were leaving him, Peter said to Jesus, "Master, it is good for us to be here; let us make three dwellings, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah" -- not knowing what he said.

While he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them; and they were terrified as they entered the cloud.  Then from the cloud came a voice that said, "This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!"  When the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone. And they kept silent and in those days told no one any of the things they had seen.  (Luke)

The Feast of the Transfiguration is a wonderful thing.  Moses and Elijah (the law and the prophets) bearing witness to Jesus.  Transfiguration taking place in the context of prayer (he went up to the mountain to pray).  Seeing Jesus for who He really is.  Each of the Gospels which record the event has a slightly different detail added here or there.

There are two significant mountains in Scripture where God speaks.  In the southern part of the Sinai penninsula rises a mountain which has been known to the local Bedouin tribe for centuries as “Jebel Musa” – the mountain of Moses.  The landscape, like all of the Sinai, is harsh.  Ancient red granite rock greets the visitor to Sinai.  What is not rock is sand, and what is not sand is dust.  There are 2 main paths up to top. There is the main route which is used by the Bedouin, a series of switchbacks wide enough for a camel to walk upon.  There is another, rather less trodden path – it is comprised of hundreds of steps carved into the rock by monks many centuries ago.  The second path is appropriately named “The steps of repentance”.  It was designed as a form of penance for the monks of the Monastery of St Catherine, which has been part of the mountain for almost 1700 years.

When you finally get to the top of Sinai, there is a spectacular view of the desert landscape for miles around. It is a jagged and rough place – a fitting spot for human beings to experience the majesty and, yes, even the terror of coming into the presence of God.  It is the mountain of the giving of the Law – the commands which Moses gave to the people of Israel. 

9 KM west of Nazareth rises another mountain – Mount Tabor. It commands a view of fertile valleys, the villages around the sea of Galilee, and it’s slopes are covered with lush greenery and gardens.  It is the traditional site of the Transfiguration.  There is only one route up to the summit:  and though it is steep it is worth the climb.  As opposed to camel, you can take a Mercedes Benz stretch limo for about 30 shekels.  By the way, like the camel handlers in the Sinai, the taxi drivers are also Bedouin tribesmen.  When you get to the top you see the variety of greenery – Mount Tabor receives that rare commodity – “rain”.  Just as God spoke one set of words on the top of Mount Sinai, so he also spoke another set of words on the top of Mount Tabor.

If Sinai is the mountain of the Law, then let us think of Tabor – the mount of Transfiguration - as the mountain of grace.  Law can only restrain us – but grace transfigures us.  We are invited in the Transfiguration into a new vision of God in the person of Jesus Christ.  Perhaps you are still living on Mount Sinai – thinking that faith is only about following the laws – seeing God merely as the one who rewards or punishes.  Or you are thinking that keeping yourself “good” in God’s eyes is impossible. 

And maybe like Peter our first reaction to being invited into a new vision of God in Jesus is to turn our attention elsewhere. Then Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if you wish, I will make three dwellings here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."  Peter represents here an all too common experience in the 'church'.  When God is doing something spiritual, we turn our attention elsewhere.  In this case it seems that Peter thinks what is required is a building project, as if walls and wood could contain God.

It doesn't of course have to be a building project, but when God in Jesus makes his presence known, that is what we should pay attention to.  If God is at work, don't get bogged down in other things.  We can be like Peter when we spend our time and energy only on the "externals" - the mere trappings of church - and then we can miss out on the presence of Jesus in our midst.  Or we get so caught up in the institution of 'church' that we can't see the Kingdom of God.

While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, "This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!"

When the disciples heard this, they fell to the ground and were overcome by fear.  But Jesus came and touched them, saying, "Get up and do not be afraid."

The voice is like that which was heard at Jesus’ baptism.  Only this time there is an addition:  “Listen to Him.”  But when the disciples hear this voice, they are afraid. And so are we.  Because this also promises us something wonderful and terrifying at the same time.  God calls us to be, well, not exactly transfigured, but rather transformed.  He calls us to be his beloved, and he calls us to "share" in the transfiguration of Jesus.  And that means change. God invites us to take a look at ourselves and see where we need to change: a habit, an action, an attitude.  We are often afraid of change – but the change which God has in mind is to make us more fully into the beloved children he has called us to be.  He calls us to be “Christ-like”.  As we learn to see Jesus, we begin to see who God calls us to be.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn dies at 89

Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who exposed Stalin's prison system in his novels and spent 20 years in exile, has died at 89, Russian media say.
The author of One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovich and the Gulag Archipelago, who returned to Russia in 1994, reportedly died of a stroke.

from the BBC

His Gulag Archipelago is a book to which I have returned several times since I first read it.  Most notably, I have found it an indispensable guide to, well, many things in church life.

 

Biblical Studies blog carnival

The XXXII Biblical Studies blog carnival is up at Ancient Hebrew Poetry.  It is divided into 3 parts:  Part 1 deals with primary texts and discoveries; Part 2: with controversies; and Part 3 with posts on individual texts.

Thanks to Tyler Williams (Codex) for keeping us informed.  The carnival features posts by a variety of bloggers, and I have always found something in these carnivals which is informative and edifying.