felix hominum

Peter Rollins in Edmonton - a brief summary

Events Listing: (note that there are 5 separate venues).  Remember that this is an unconference - no registration, fees or paperwork.  Just show up and participate.

Worship & Ministry in a Postmodern Age
Thursday February 5th, 10 am - 12 pm
St George's Church, 11733 – 87th Avenue
An interactive education event for Clergy & Ministry Workers

Faith in a Postmodern Age: An Open Conversation
Thursday February 5th, 1:30 - 3:30 pm
St George's Church, 11733 – 87th Avenue
Public talk & discussion with Dr Peter Rollins (open to all)

Beyond Belief Towards Practice:
Thursday February 5, 7:30 pm
Taylor University College and Seminary
11525 23 Avenue
Stencel Hall in the seminary building
A free public lecture by Peter Rollins: A Postmodern Church Beyond Belief

Beyond Belief Towards Experience and Practice:
Friday February 6, 8:30 pm
Dewey's Lounge University of Alberta
Located at North Power Plant (Behind Dentistry/Pharmacy Building)
Jazz (Elphida Trio), conversation, and Q&A with Peter Rollins

Beyond Belief Towards Experience:
Saturday February 7, 10:00 am
Taylor University College and Seminary
College Chapel
11525 23 Avenue
A free public lecture by Peter Rollins: Worship for a Church Beyond Belief

Beyond Belief Towards Revelation:
Saturday February 7, 7:00 pm.
St. Paul's Anglican Church, 10127 - 145 Street
An alternative worship experience with Interface Worship & Peter Rollins

Beyond Belief Towards Community and Experience:
Sunday February 8, 10:00 am
Urban Bridge Church
Meets at the Royal Alberta Museum Theatre 12845 102 Avenue NW
Worship, conversation, and Q&A with Peter Rollins

btw, there is an article on the events in the Edmonton Journal here

sermon notes Epiphany 4, 2009; Mark 1:21-28

They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue and taught.  They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes. 

Just then there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit, and he cried out, "What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God."

But Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be silent, and come out of him!"  And the unclean spirit, convulsing him and crying with a loud voice, came out of him.  They were all amazed, and they kept on asking one another, "What is this? A new teaching--with authority! He commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey him."  At once his fame began to spread throughout the surrounding region of Galilee

There are any number of themes once could pick up on here.  What is "authority";  why does Jesus seem to have it but the regular religious leaders don't?  Is it the content of Jesus' teaching which astounds them, or simply the way he presents it?  After all, wouldn't they be teaching out of the same text?  But perhaps Jesus is a bit more familiar with the subject matter.  Then, here we are in the season of Epiphany - getting to be shown who Jesus is - and we have the demon telling us about Jesus' identity.

Authority leads to the question of revelation.  How is it that the unclean spirit knows Jesus' identity, but the rest of the people don't.  If you are into the messianic secret, this is the place to start.

The violence of Jesus:  "Have you come to destroy us?"  Well, in a word, yes.  It is interesting that destruction is here at the beginning of the gospel.  We (or at least I) don't think too often of the "destroying" role of Jesus - but certainly from this perspective, Jesus is the spiritual Chuck Norris (who, by the way, does not do push ups;  Chuck Norris pushes the earth down).  Jesus who gives life is also one who comes to destroy.  Wonder how many will take that approach.  Well, maybe another time...

Then we have the relationship between theory (teaching) backed up or illustrated or reinforced, by the action of healing/exorcising.  It seems that the second use of teaching/authority has to do with the results, with the difference in the real world (or at least the real life of one man) which Jesus makes.

They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue and taught.  They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

If you are following the lectionary, it is fairly easy to let the lesson from Deuteronomy point the way for the Gospel.  DT 18:18: "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall speak to them everything that I command."  So we have the scene set for someone new to come into the picture.  There is an emphasis on the "newness" of Jesus' teaching;  it is unlike (and yet must somehow be like) everything which has come before.  Jesus begins in a traditional enough setting:  the community gathered in the synagogue, on the Sabbath.  So in one sense Jesus preserves the customs, or at least he uses the traditional forms to begin his public teaching.  But something in his "teaching" makes the average listener suddenly become aware that this is different from the stuff they get from the scribes.  But what exactly is this business about authority?  What is it to teach with authority?  And does this passage seem to indicate that the average congregant was already aware that the scribes were offering them rather poor fare?  That the scribes and the leaders did not speak with authority, even though they had the positions of authority? Interesting that the question of authority provided bookends for the gospel story - think of Jesus and Pontius Pilate facing off over that question.  And how our ideas of authority/autonomy affect how we receive Jesus.

Now we have a lot of trouble with the relationship between authority and autonomy.  It might be too simplistic to say that we love autonomy and we hate authority, except when we ourselves get to exercise the latter.  Is recognizing Jesus’ authority the first step in the process of faith?  Or does it come later on in the process?  What is the relationship between accepting the authority of Jesus and becoming a follower?  Do you have to recognize his authority first?  Well, not exactly.  While this passage comes at the beginning of the gospel, and obviously has something to say about the authority of Jesus which will colour the rest of the story, the people understand that Jesus has authority but it does not say that they accept that authority.  It merely says that they were amazed that someone would get up and teach this way. 

I have some thoughts on the demon-guy, but I'll wait til after dinner.  One of the bottom lines for me is that Jesus teaches with authority on the subject matter at hand because He is the subject matter at hand.  

mmm.... spaghetti... pinot noir...

Bernard of Clairvaux: on loving God

At first, man loves himself for his own sake. That is the flesh, which can appreciate nothing beyond itself. Next, he perceives that he cannot exist by himself, and so begins by faith to seek after God, and to love Him as something necessary to his own welfare. That is the second degree, to love God, not for God's sake, but selfishly. But when he has learned to worship God and to seek Him aright, meditating on God, reading God's Word, praying and obeying His commandments, he comes gradually to know what God is, and finds Him altogether lovely. So, having tasted and seen how gracious the Lord is (Ps. 34:8), he advances to the third degree, when he loves God, not merely as his benefactor but as God.

Surely he must remain long in this state; and I know not whether it would be possible to make further progress in this life to that fourth degree and perfect condition wherein man loves himself solely for God's sake. Let any who have attained so far bear record; I confess it seems beyond my powers.

On Loving God, XV

I'm thinking this might be a post series.  It's a great little work, wherein Bernard takes us through the "four degrees of love."  You can find it in English here.

UK inspectors assail the doner kebab

Doner kebabs sold in the UK contain "shocking" levels of salt, fat and calories, a survey has concluded.  Officers from 76 councils sampled 494 kebabs to test their nutritional value, during the Local Authority Coordinators of Regulatory Services (Lacors) study.

The worst doners inspectors came across contained 1,990 calories before salad and sauces - over 95% of a woman's recommended daily calories, 346% of a woman's saturated fat intake and 277% of an adult's daily salt intake.

Researchers uncovered significant regional variations, with the average kebab in the north-west of England containing 1,101 calories, compared with 1,084 in Scotland, 1,055 in Wales and 1,066 in England's south-east.

Research by the UK's Food Standards Agency in 2006 found that 18.5% of doner takeaways posed a "significant" threat to public health, and 0.8% posed an "imminent" threat.

Story from the BBC

Look, I think I found the doner kebab which poses an imminent threat to public safety:

doner kebabs carved and served with a sword, 24 hours a day
southwest Turkey

photo: Joe Walker 2008

The Anglican Church as the monastery of this age

I've had this thought tumbling around for some time.  It's still tumbling.

Once upon a time a culture collapsed.  I, like many who have a fondness for dates, would suggest the deposition of the last Western Roman Emperor (476) as a nice symbolic event.  The responses to this collapse were varied;  one response was the rise of communal monastic life.  Within several decades of each other, Benedict could form his monastic community, and Boethius could use the figure of Lady Philosophy to drive home an essentially Christian message.  In chalkboard level history, one was forming a community in order to survive the shift in culture, while the other was freed to look around and take from the culture something which could be of service to the faith. 

I propose that there were two unthinkables at work here.  The first is that it would have been unthinkable to Christians only 400 years prior that a community cut off from the world would have been a desirable goal for the church.  The second is that it would have been unthinkable for Christians only 400 years prior to suggest that the figure of Lady Philosophy could play the role of handmaid to the faith.

All of this overly simplistic analysis is merely to say this:  the Anglican Church of Canada as we know it is, I submit, mostly like the monastic community of old, even while it struggles to engage the culture in which it finds itself.  This is not in and of itself a bad thing.  The monastic tradition has been (in either solitary or communal form) a vibrant part of Christian tradition from earliest times.  When the culture shifts, there is a certain comfort in knowing that certain things are being preserved;  that treasures are being safely stored; that at least some of the "things that were" are still preserved in ritual and in particular places.  Yet it was never a simple task to join the community.  In some traditions, the would-be novice had to stand at the door and knock for some days (in order to test his perseverance, we are told).  The community was a "solid" place, to which those who were destined were called.  And once inside, the novice found himself subject of a particular way of doing things, under an hierarchical structure which sought to bring order to a society in which chaos had come to be the norm.  The monastery had walls, it had order.  It was, in many ways, a self contained community.  Perhaps too many of our parish churches have become Benedictine in their construction and outlook:  we are a safe haven against the changes and chances of this fleeting world.  Those who would become members must essentially become novices, and then find their place within the established order.

All of this at some juncture has to do with being a monastic or a missional kind of community, or at least being able to combine the best of both.  When I have that figured out, I'll sell you the book and become a celebrity.

can one evaluate proclamation/preaching?

There's an interesting little discussion about this topic over at Simple Massing Priest's place.

When I signed on for this thing, I was given the twofold task of "word and sacrament". Some of my thoughts on the matter are in the comments over there.

this week's reading : The God Who Smokes

in which Timothy J Stoner tells us what he really thinks about the whole emergent mish mash.

I'll let you know at the end of the week how it goes.  From the first 30 or so pages, Timothy wants to give us a broad critique of the good, the bad and the ugly in the various expressions of emergent Christianity.  Nice writing, some great imagery, and good style.  Doesn't like too much of postmodern christian stuff so far.

If my reading schedule goes according to plan (and remember that plans never go according to plan), I'll get around to posting a review at the end of the week.

On the other hand, you could always drop in for a local Peter Rollins event.

in case you were wondering what Rick Warren meant by Isa...

as seen in the Christian Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. 

Apparently Rick Warren made reference to Isa in his prayers.  To make a cultural confession, I didn't watch any of the inauguration stuff.

photo Joe Walker 2005

Bishop Ron Ferris joins Anglican Network in Canada

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 23 January 2009

Bishop Ronald Ferris, recently retired Bishop of Algoma (in Ontario), has announced that, effective immediately, he will minister as part of the Anglican Network in Canada under the Primatial jurisdiction of Archbishop Gregory Venables, Primate of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone.  Bishop Ferris is the third Canadian bishop to be received under Archbishop Venables for ministry in the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC).

While Bishop Ferris will focus primarily on church planting in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, he will be available to assist Bishop Donald Harvey in episcopal ministry.

“Bishop Ferris has been an unwavering advocate of orthodox Anglican and Christian beliefs and practices within the Anglican Church of Canada’s House of Bishops,” said Bishop Harvey.  “He has always supported the stand taken by the Anglican Network in Canada, even when the vast majority of his peers opposed us. Bishop Ferris is a gifted man of God who is highly respected in his former diocese and throughout Canada.  He has a true pastor’s heart and is wholeheartedly dedicated to Christ’s ministry and service. I am grateful for the privilege of ministering together.”

“After 28 wonderful years as Bishop, first in the Yukon and then in Algoma, I am delighted to embark on a new challenge – new church development,” said Bishop Ferris.  “My decision to relinquish the licence I held for so many years within the Anglican Church of Canada was not taken quickly or lightly. My wife and I deeply value our many years in Algoma and the Yukon and are thankful that during our time in Algoma the diocese remained united as a “communion partner diocese” and committed to upholding the teachings and disciplines of the Anglican Communion.”

Bishop Ferris retired September 30, 2008, having served as Bishop of Algoma since 1995.   He had previously served as Bishop of the Yukon from 1981 until 1995.  Bishop Ferris holds a Doctorate in Sacred Theology (1995) from Thorneloe University in Sudbury, Ontario, a Doctorate of Ministry (1995) from Pacific School of Religion in the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California, as well as a Doctorate of Divinity (1982) from Huron College in London, Ontario.  In 2004, Bishop Ferris was a candidate in the election for Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada.

A growing number of biblically faithful Anglicans in Canada, distressed by the seismic shift in the theology and practice of the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC), have joined ANiC in order to remain in the mainstream of Anglicanism globally and historically.  Today, ANiC numbers three bishops, 66 priests and deacons and 26 parishes with about 3200 Canadians in church on an average Sunday.

ANiC is under the Episcopal authority of Bishop Don Harvey and the jurisdiction of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone (based in South America) – one of the 38 Provinces in the global Anglican Communion.  The Anglican Church of Canada is also one of these 38 Provinces.

Members of the Anglican Network in Canada are committed to remaining faithful to Holy Scripture and established Anglican doctrine and to ensuring that orthodox Canadian Anglicans are able to remain in full communion with the vast majority of Anglicans around the world.

from Essentials

The Anglican Journal has a story on Bishop Ferris' move here.

Geez magazine - the Daringly Awkward Sermon Contest

Winnipeg, Canada –– Geez magazine is bringing the stodgy old pulpit back from the brink of cultural oblivion with a sermon contest of holy mischief.

The dark, wooden bulwark of yesteryear has little currency today, but what if the pulpit was torn from its moorings and planted closer to the action? What if it was available to anyone who wished the voices of spiritual authority would say less about other-worldly glory and more about the spiritual side of the big issues of our times?

Building on last year’s “30 Sermons You’d Never Hear in Church” contest,” Geez magazine’s 2009 Daringly Awkward Sermon Contest is ushering in a new and – make no mistake – decidedly different era of proclamation.

“The world needs bold voices of spiritual depth,” says Geez publisher Aiden Enns. “But maybe the message can have an element of holy mischief, a smirk instead of a furrowed brow, and, at the same time, more connection to the pressing issues of the day.”

The Daringly Awkward Sermon Contest invites entries that explore the aspects of social change that make us squirm, things like privilege, right-wing relatives, the drunk stranger in the back pew, guilt feelings, or litter in the poor part of town. Constructing a more fair and compassionate world involves awkward people, pauses and topics, and we want to find the wisdom in the awkwardness.

The Geez pulpit is set up and waiting for activists, anarchists, atheists and good old-fashioned Christians to step up and confront or comfort, pontificate or confess, urge or encourage.

The top three sermons will receive $400 each. The winners, plus a selection of other entries, will be published in the Spring 2009 issue of Geez. Deadline for entries is February 28, 2009. Word limit is 800.

Submissions can be sent to contest[at]geezmagazine.org or Geez Contest, 400 Edmonton Street, Winnipeg MB R3B 2M2, Canada. See entry forms at geezmagazine.org

Geez is a quarterly magazine of spirit and social action. It is aimed at over-churched, out-churched and perhaps even unchurchable souls on the North American fringes of faith. In its three years of existence it has been nominated for three Utne Independent Press Awards and won Magazine of the Year at both Canada’s Western Magazine Awards and the Canadian Church Press Awards.

I have a few ideas for submissions in the works.  Any suggestions?

3rd Annual Vital Church Planting Conference

I went to this last year & found it excellent:

Vital Church Planting 2009

We would like to invite you to the Third Annual Conference on Anglican Church Planting. It will take place at St. Paul’s Bloor Street in Toronto, from Tuesday February 17 until Thursday 19, 2009.

This conference will seek to build on the foundations laid by the previous two conferences. In 2007, over sixty attended from all over the country, including four or five bishops; in 2008, over eighty, including six bishops, attended. We expect over 100 this year.

In 2008, the speaker from the UK, George Lings, spoke a lot about Fresh Expressions, the creative grassroots church planting movement over there. Then, in May, Bishop Graham Cray of Maidstone UK was in Ontario, and again told stories of the diversity and vitality of fresh expressions of church. There was also a Fresh Expressions self-select session at Lambeth, and maybe you were able to attend and learn for yourself what this is all about.

In light of this, it seemed right to invite other leaders and practitioners of Fresh Expressions to come as our plenary speakers. They are:

The Rev. Paul Bayes is the National Mission and Evangelism Adviser to the Archbishops' Council. Paul has extensive experience of parish life, evangelism, church planting and developing different forms of new congregations. The National Mission and Evangelism Adviser has two main roles: to help equip the Church of England in the work of evangelism and to advise and assist in the missionary development of both parish congregations and fresh expressions of Church.

The Rev. Canon Phil Potter is Director of Pioneer Ministry for the Diocese of Liverpool. Phil has been a leading figure developing Cell Church nationally, and the church he led for twenty years has developed several exciting pioneer projects, including the very successful Kings Table café. He is author of two books, "The Challenge of Cell Church" and "The Challenge of Change--Shaping Change and Changing the Shape of Church."

One addition we are making to the program this year is a "track" of three workshop slots especially for bishops and other diocesan officers, to address the particular issues that face diocesan leaders in moving towards church planting and other fresh expressions of church.

We would like to invite you personally to attend the conference. Book your registration before January 16th and save, full details may be found on the conference website: www.vitalchurchplanting.com. If you have any questions please contact Jennipher by phone at (905)833-8327 or by email at ysimcoe[at]toronto.anglican.ca.

We look forward to seeing you in February!
 
Warmest greetings, in Christ,
 
The Vital Church Planting Conference Team

top & bottom of the sine curve

Today's schedule reminds me of some of the basics.  I'm spending the a.m. doing some reading in a variety of topics that are of personal interest to me.  A bit of review of Eriugena's Periphyseon, a bit of Virgil's Aeneid, and some of Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy (from which work, astute readers will recognize the title of my blog as stolen from bk II).  All in prep for Tuesday's class, in which Pooh discovers early medieval Christian thought.  If you are coming, don't worry, we are not doing all three at once.

Then in the early p.m. I'm picking up SJ from school and we are going to spend a couple of hours reviewing speech therapy exercises, and then maybe try to do some basic math skills, and finish up with some word recognition practice.  There's a great resource out there for reading:  Teaching Reading to Children With Down Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Teachers (part of the "Topics in Down Syndrome" series).

I find myself with a tendency to categorize things - but when it's all said and done, which is the top of the sine curve and which is the bottom?

no entrance

Seraglio, Turkey,
photo Joe Walker, 2008

Peter Rollins: Faith in a post modern world

Faith in a Postmodern World:  an open conversation
Thursday Feb 5, 1:30 pm
St George's church on the U of A Campus;  11733 - 87 Ave

Beyond Belief Towards Practice:
Thursday February 5, 7:30 pm
Taylor University College and Seminary
11525 23 Avenue
Stencel Hall in the seminary building
A free public lecture by Peter Rollins:  

Beyond Belief Towards Experience and Practice:
Friday February 6, 8:30 pm
Dewey’s Lounge University of Alberta
Located at North Power Plant (Behind Dentistry/Pharmacy Building)
Jazz (Elphida Trio), conversation, and Q&A with Peter Rollins

Beyond Belief Towards Experience:
Saturday February 7, 10:00 am
Taylor University College and Seminary
Stencel Hall in the seminary building
11525 23 Avenue
A free public lecture by Peter Rollins: Worship for a Church Beyond Belief

Beyond Belief Towards Revelation:
Saturday February 7, 7:00 pm.
St. Paul’s Anglican Church, 10127 - 145 Street
An alternative worship experience with Interface Worship & Peter Rollins

Beyond Belief Towards Community and Experience:
Sunday February 8, 10:00 am
Urban Bridge Church
Meets at the Royal Alberta Museum Theatre 12845 102 Avenue NW
Worship, conversation, and Q&A with Peter Rollins

Poster Download in PDF (big)

facebook event

sermon notes Epiphany 2, 2009; John 1:43-51

The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, "Follow me."

Now that Jesus has been baptized, he seems all set to engage in his public ministry.  It is essential to Jesus’ ministry that he begins not with preaching to the crowds, but my calling an individual.  While we often are tempted to think of ministry in terms of groups, numbers, and crowds, at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is the call to an individual.  Then there is the first request:  follow me.  What that means I’m still working out.  Certainly it is at least a combination of action and belief, of practice and theory.  To follow means to walk a certain way.  Philip will have lots of opportunity to live out his vocation in community, and in relationship to others, but at the very beginning it is a specific and personal call from Jesus.  The call from Jesus does not remain a “private” event in Philip’s life.  Instead, in response to the personal call from Jesus, Philip finds himself proclaiming this Jesus to others:

Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.  Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found him about whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus son of Joseph from Nazareth."  Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see."

While thinking about the atheist bus campaign in Britain (and soon, we hope, coming to Canada), I can’t help but think that Philip’s invitation to Nathanael is a bit of a model response.  Nathanael is skeptical, and Philip simply offers an open invitation:  “Come and see.”  This kind of invitation differs from Jesus’ direct call to Philip.  And I think there is perhaps a lesson there:  the way in which Christ called me is not necessarily the way in which He will ask me to invite someone else into the kingdom.  Philip, it seems, responded to a direct “command” if you will;  while Nathanael responded to an open-ended invitation.

When Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him, he said of him, "Here is truly an Israelite in whom there is no deceit!"  Nathanael asked him, "Where did you get to know me?" Jesus answered, "I saw you under the fig tree before Philip called you."  Nathanael replied, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!"

This seems to me the heart of Nathanael's experience:  he realizes that he is "known" by Jesus.

Jesus answered, "Do you believe because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree? You will see greater things than these."  And he said to him, "Very truly, I tell you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man."

lunch is calling... will pick it up later

Agnostibuses may be coming to Canada!

Atheists hope (don't pray) to bring ads to Toronto

The atheist slogan, "There is probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life," may soon be coming to subways and buses in Canada's largest city.

The Toronto-based Freethought Association of Canada, inspired by a campaign that has plastered British buses with the phrase, has contacted the private firm that handles ads on the Toronto Transit Commission to see if the message would violate any rules. Organizers plan to launch a fundraising page on the website atheistbus.ca in the next few days.

read the whole story at the globe & mail

when you run out of birthday ideas for your wife,

just give her a sonnet

Upon Meeting a Lady by the River

Too long I’ve sat beside this stream
Content to watch her waters flow,
While drought diminished summer’s dream
Of currents filled with melting snow.

Meandering curves of gentle grace
Betray the Spring which gave her rise.
The Sun’s reflecting on her face
Bids me approach with lowered eyes.

I will not cross her at the ford,
No shallow waters shall I tread.
Nor bridge across, like some high lord
Who spray and stones and wave will dread.

Her deepest waters I will test
Though there I drown; I’ll find my rest.

happy birthday, Mrs Felix

National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 2009

from the White House:

A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America

All human life is a gift from our Creator that is sacred, unique, and worthy of protection. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our country recognizes that each person, including every person waiting to be born, has a special place and purpose in this world. We also underscore our dedication to heeding this message of conscience by speaking up for the weak and voiceless among us.

The most basic duty of government is to protect the life of the innocent. My Administration has been committed to building a culture of life by vigorously promoting adoption and parental notification laws, opposing Federal funding for abortions overseas, encouraging teen abstinence, and funding crisis pregnancy programs. In 2002, I was honored to sign into law the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which extends legal protection to children who survive an abortion attempt. I signed legislation in 2003 to ban the cruel practice of partial-birth abortion, and that law represents our commitment to building a culture of life in America. Also, I was proud to sign the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004, which allows authorities to charge a person who causes death or injury to a child in the womb with a separate offense in addition to any charges relating to the mother.

America is a caring Nation, and our values should guide us as we harness the gifts of science. In our zeal for new treatments and cures, we must never abandon our fundamental morals. We can achieve the great breakthroughs we all seek with reverence for the gift of life.

The sanctity of life is written in the hearts of all men and women. On this day and throughout the year, we aspire to build a society in which every child is welcome in life and protected in law. We also encourage more of our fellow Americans to join our just and noble cause.    History tells us that with a cause rooted in our deepest principles and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens, we will prevail.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 18, 2009, as National Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon all Americans to recognize this day with appropriate ceremonies and to underscore our commitment to respecting and protecting the life and dignity of every human being.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

GEORGE W. BUSH

h/t merecomments

Ryan McCourt @ Common Sense Gallery

Get out of the house this weekend:

Ryan McCourt: Sculpture in Our Time
Clement Greenberg: a centenary celebration

Common Sense
10546-115 Street, Edmonton

7:00pm, Friday, January 16, 2009

exhibition runs until February 1, 2009

via the North Edmonton Sculpture Workshop

Patristics blog carnival XIX

Is now up over at HYPEREKPERISSOU. A veritable plethora of stuff on the early church, patristics, translations and texts.

Some of the things which jumped out at me:

Justin Richter on The Way into a Far Country blog considers whether the Church Fathers' opinion on justification really matters, discusses St. John Chrysosthom's view of justification

The Celesital Fundie on The Patristic Page blog features a translation of Theodore of Mopsuestia's Commentary on the Nicene Creed

waterfront, Istanbul

photo Joe Walker, 2008

it had to happen: the carbon cost of Googling

Two search requests on the internet website Google produce as much carbon dioxide as boiling a kettle, according to a Harvard University academic. US physicist Alex Wissner-Gross has conducted research into the environmental impact of "googling".

read the whole story (don't Google it) from the BBC

sermon notes: Baptism of the Lord 2009; Mark 1: 4-11

As a bit of a preamble to this week's sermon notes, I have sometimes amused myself by imagining what it would be like for Jesus to get baptized today in one of our typical Anglican parishes.  In my mind's eye I see John the Baptist as the rector, who sees Jesus walking toward him in the distance.  "Oh, look.  It's him.  I bet he's going to inquire about baptism.  Should I make him take the classes, or just do it because his mother is in town?  And I'm sure that after I baptize him I won't see him again for months, or years...  hmmm...  And how am I going to fill out the baptism registry?   Oh hello Jesus.  Yes, yes, I can do a baptism today, though I'm awfully busy with my repentance preaching.  Just need to fill out a couple of forms for the registry and certificate..."

"You’ll need a couple of godparents.  What's that?  Redundant term? Never mind, we'll call them sponsors – two would be preferable."
Eh? What's that? Moses and Elijah – representing the Law and the Prophets – bear witness to you?"
 
"Father name and mother's maiden name? (oh never mind)... God the Father, but conceived by the Holy Spirit  and born of the Virgin Mary."

"Given names?  Wonderful Counsellor, the Mighty God, Prince of Peace, Emmanuel God with Us, Word of God, Light of the Nations, Messiah, Only Begotten Son, Lord of Lord and King of Kings, Man of Sorrows, Lamb of God."

Enough of that;  sorry, I digress from my purpose.

I find that there are at least a few things about Jesus' baptism which strike me as, well, odd.  Not odd in a bad sense, just odd in the sense that I can't quite fully figure out what they all about.  The Baptism of the Lord is often seen as Jesus' entry in his public ministry.  And yet it is not an active beginning, it is a passive beginning.  Baptism is not something which Jesus does, but rather something which is done to him.  At the very outset of his own ministry, Jesus is the recipient of someone else's ministry.  Jesus allows something to be done to him.  I wonder if this is part of the pattern of his ministry, and ultimately his passion.

Second is the great declaration from the heavens:  You are my beloved, etc, etc.  God's declaration occurs before Jesus has really done anything.  It is a declaration about identity, not about activity.  Too often we reserve such declarations until after some notable action has taken place, or after some activity has been accomplished.  But the declaration of love comes before Jesus has done any healings, cast out any demons, preached any sermons, welcomed any strangers.  He hasn't walked on water, suffered on the cross, fed any crowds.  He has simply been Jesus.  I think about the priority of identity over action.  Who Jesus is precedes what Jesus does, at least temporally.

Third is the "torn apart heavens".  It is a wonderful image.  Like the veil of the temple being torn in two, or the beard of the Christ being torn by the soldiers.  It seems nothing in the Christian life advances without there being something "torn apart".  This is something I want to think on more.  The gospels are really full of things being torn apart:  bread is broken, families are divided, garments are rent.  It seems to be a submerged theme - things torn apart, and it starts right here at his baptism.

Mark 1:4-11
John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.  And people from the whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem were going out to him, and were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.  Now John was clothed with camel's hair, with a leather belt around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey.

Josephus, in the Antiquities of the Jews (XVIII Chapter 5), writes that John was a "good man", and had his run in with Herod.  Here's a sample, which I include for interest sake:

[John] commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late.

The long and the short is that we have the forerunner of Christ appearing, taking the garb and posture of a holy man or prophet, proclaiming repentance, and offering a baptism to signify that change of heart.  John is "proclaiming", and proclamation will be a big part of the ministry of Jesus and his followers, as it continues to be a vocation of the church today.  We are called to "proclaim".  It is interesting that John's message seems to appeal to both urban and rural:  we have folks from the countryside and folks from Jerusalem.  His message seems to cut across many lines.

Now a question I have is this:  does John only have the power to proclaim repentance, or does he also have power to proclaim forgiveness?  As Mark writes: "proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins".  Did the baptism of John accomplish this forgiveness?  Well, answering from this side of the gospel events, no, sort of...  John himself points people toward Jesus, and speaks of the difference between the baptism he offers and the baptism that will be offered by Jesus:

He proclaimed, "The one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to stoop down and untie the thong of his sandals.  I have baptized you with water; but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."

John's preaching of repentance, without the assurance of forgiveness in Christ, would lead, I think, only to despair.  To be made conscious of my faults, without the assurance of forgiveness and the healing of God's Spirit, would, in the end, simply cause me misery without relief.  That is why a call to repentance must always lead into an assurance of forgiveness.  When Jesus came to be baptized by John, Jesus transformed this baptism of repentance into something greater.  He transformed it into a baptism of forgiveness, and then into a baptism of grace.

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.  And just as he was coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens torn apart and the Spirit descending like a dove on him.  And a voice came from heaven, "You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased."

I've found that the best way to get naked together

is by praying the psalms.

Mrs Felix & I began praying the psalms as a bit of an Advent thing, and have found it to be a rewarding thing to do.

Why the psalms?  And why the title?  Because by praying the psalms, I find (and you might too) that pretty much every facet of one's inner world is exposed by some burst of anger, some shout of praise, some sigh of longing, which is found somewhere in the book of psalms.  Allowing the voice of the psalms to shape our prayers has helped us to give voice to those deeper sighs, delights, disappointments, frustrations and joys which are too often covered up in our everyday life.  To pray deeply (especially with one's spouse) is, well, a form of spiritual uncovering and nakedness of which one need not be ashamed.

Go ahead.  Pray the psalms.  Get naked.

ancient thought & post modern theory, or how to talk like one

I've probably spent more time on Virgil's Aeneid these past few months than on any other single topic here.  So what does Virgil’s Aeneid have to do with postmodern theory?  Well, everything.  There is a part of postmodern thinking which says that the great "stories to live by" are, well, not all that great, and certainly not to live by.  The Aeneid sets itself out against the suspicion of metanarratives.   It is one of the great metanarratives of culture. It is an architectural blueprint for Augustan expansion in the Mediterranean, north Africa, Asia Minor, northern Europe, and into the Middle East and beyond.  And as such its influence is not merely “western”, in the limited sense of the term.  It is a vision of human community, a vision which as powerful enough to sustain not only the embodiment of Roman ideals in the classical world, but even to help inform the vision of medieval Christianity and Renaissance humanism.

What Virgil reminds us of is the second half of the concept of a "story to live by".  In fact, I suspect he would say that there is not only the "concept", but the practice.  It is a story "to live by."  It must be worked out in the physical world.  Greek idealism is not sufficient; there must be a practice, in order for it to be a real story "to live by".

One of the great problems of the (post) Reformation era in the west is the fracturing of “church” in a formal sense. I might suggest that much of North American protestant individualism is itself a cousin of post modern rejection of metanarrative.  (It is also the reason why “yet another group” is not really the answer the problem, but then that was why I spent so many posts on Cyprian of Carthage.)  It is not the rejection of the larger idea of a universal “story to live by”;  the First Bible Faith Apostolic Church of Yourtown will always have copies of the story to read. It is rather the rejection of a universal place in which to hear it.  That universal place is the “Church”.  It is the rejection of the Church as catholic, and as the place in which the story needs to be heard.  It is the rejection of meta-community, which then lends credence to the idea of rejecting the meta narrative by which that community lived.  Of course it is not overt in all cases, and it is not covert in other cases.  The "bible believing church" will never say they reject the scriptures.  By the same token, individualism in Christian community can reject the meta-community in which the story is meant to be read, and heard, and interpreted and lived.  On the other hand there is the overt rejection of Scripture as a "given" metanarrative (eg Spong et al.) in some parts of the Anglican world.  This is again a cousin to the more fundamentalist strains in Christianity:  the principle of individual autonomy is supreme.  Freedom (whatever that means) from something imposed or "given" from an authority other than the self, rules the day.  I think that an extreme form of liberalism which has come out of an "independant fundamentalist" background has not really shifted its priniciples all that much.  The "independant" part is still the controlling factor.  Which is why, in my experience (the arbiter of all judgment), many people who come out of the one seem to so easily embrace the other:  the controlling factor is still a form of independence from the universal place (church) in which the story is heard.

Continue on with your day.

ps merry Orthodox Christmas

Faith in a Postmodern World with Peter Rollins

Faith in a Postmodern World with Dr. Peter Rollins. 

The Anglican Diocese of Edmonton is partnering with Taylor University College & Seminary, Urban Bridge Church (P.A.O.C.), and Interface Worship, in bringing Peter Rollins to Edmonton for a series of events. As an author, public speaker, working philosopher, creator of theo-dramas, and founder of the experimental collective Ikon, Dr. Rollins is an innovative and important voice for emerging Christianity.

"Here in pregnant bud is the rose, the emerging new configuration, of a Christianity that is neither Roman nor Protestant, neither Eastern nor monastic; but rather is the re-formation of all of them. Here, in pregnant bud, is third-millennium Christendom." —Phyllis Tickle, author of "The Divine Hours TM" series, and "The Great Emergence", commenting on Rollin's book, "How (Not) to Speak of God"

Peter Rollins' blog is here and his homepage is here.

Free public events include the following:

Beyond Belief Towards Practice:
Thursday February 5, 7:30 pm
Taylor University College and Seminary
11525 23 Avenue
Stencel Hall in the seminary building
A free public lecture by Peter Rollins: A Postmodern Church Beyond Belief

Beyond Belief Towards Experience and Practice:
Friday February 6, 7:00 pm
Dewey's Lounge University of Alberta
Located at  North Power Plant (Behind Dentistry/Pharmacy Building)
Jazz (Elphida Trio), conversation, and Q&A with Peter Rollins

Beyond Belief Towards Experience:
Saturday February 7, 10:00 am
Taylor University College and Seminary
Stencel Hall in the seminary building
11525 23 Avenue
A free public lecture by Peter Rollins: Worship for a Church Beyond Belief

Beyond Belief Towards Revelation:
Saturday February 7, 7:00 pm.
St. Paul's Anglican Church, 10127 - 145 Street
An alternative worship experience with Interface Worship & Peter Rollins

Beyond Belief Towards Community and Experience:
Sunday February 8, 10:00 am
Urban Bridge Church
Meets at the Royal Alberta Museum Theatre 12845 102 Avenue NW
Worship, conversation, and Q&A with Peter Rollins

For information:
Beyond.Belief.in.Edmonton[at]gmail.com (e-mail)

Itsbeyondbelief - event blog

...and speaking of conferences

Virgil the Aeneid; pt 14 book VII: Juno, Furies and the end of the Golden Age

see entire series on Virgil's Aeneid here

Since my last post on Virgil's Aeneid, we've enjoyed some -30 weather and New Year's festivities and all that good holiday kind of stuff.  Thinking back on the first part of Book VII, it seems to me that Virgil is telling us how the Golden Age comes to an end.  What is it that causes humanity to fall out of paradise?  The descriptions of Latinus and his almost immediate knowledge of the will of the gods is a picture of an earlier time:  man was in harmony with nature and with the gods.  The prophecies were clear;  Latinus knows that Aeneas is "the man called for by fate" (VII.369).  If the Aeneid were done by a Disney writer, or perhaps by a Greek idealist, the story would end there.  The will of fate is known, destiny is known, and the Golden Age of the Latins would continue.

Only look upward, though,
At Jove's unpitying queen. (389)

In the midst of this certainty about Fate, Juno makes her return.  Her thoughts are laid out in lines 388-440.  She has come back with a vengeance.  She too, knows that Aeneas is the fated man, but they are to her a "hateful race" (388).  Juno gives us a summary of what she has tried against the Trojans thus far:

Could they be killed on the Sigean battlefield? When beaten
Could they be beaten?  Troy on fire, did Troy
Consume her men?  Amid the spears, amid
The flames, they found a way.
(400...)

The Trojans have persevered despite circumstances.  "They found a way" is at the heart of the Roman pragmatism as articulated by Virgil.  It is moving forward as Fate dictates, despite whatever may happen in the world of circumstances, the world of Fortune.  Not only has Juno tried to stop "fate" through manipulating human circumstances, even the very forces of nature were used against the Trojans:  "The strength of sea and sky has been poured out against these Teucrians" (409).  Juno laments that the Trojans are "unworried by deep water or by me".  Juno even recognizes that she was untrue to her own principles as goddess of marriage in arranging the delay of Dido (Bk 4, post here):  "To leave no risk unventured, lent myself to every indignity".  Finally in exasperation she declares what she thinks is the crux of the matter:  "I am defeated, and by Aeneas!" (423).

This is where Juno is mistaken.  She has not been defeated simply by Aeneas.  She has been defeated by Fate working through Aeneas.  The only reason Aeneas (the pious, the dutiful) has been able to "defeat" Juno (the greatest goddess, "sister and consort of Jove") is that Aeneas has aligned his own will with that of Fate.  He cannot, in the end, fail.  The will of Fate will be accomplished.  Juno's defeat is really her own failure to acknowledge Fate.  She cannot alter Fate from above, she can only delay it from below:

If I can sway no heavenly hearts I'll rouse the world below. 
It will not be permitted me, so be it,
To keep the man from rule in Italy
By changeless fate Lavinia waits, his bride.
And yet to drag it out, to pile delay
Upon delay in these great matters - that
I can do:  to destroy both countries' people,
That I can do.
(425...)

Now this, to Virgil, is an interesting question:  how can one "delay" Fate?  What gives Juno the power to "drag out" Fate?  It is a question which has much in common with questions asked by Christians.  How is the "will of God" accomplished?  Can God's purpose and will be thwarted, delayed, moved?  In other words, what is the relationship between the eternal will of the Divine, and the actual course of events in an ever changing world?  If Fate has decreed something, does it not have the power to make it come to pass in the way it wants?  Or does Fate simply decree that it will happen, but not how it will happen?  Juno seems now aware that she cannot change the "that" of Fate, but she will use everything in here power to influence the "how". 

What does Juno have within her power?  As she said, if she cannot change Fate ("I can sway no heavenly hearts") she will use her power in the less-than-heavenly places:  "the world below".  Juno summons Allecto, one of the Furies, from "the dark underworld" (443).  Allecto is described as the Daughter of Night, so miserable and terrifying that "even her father Pluto hates this figure" (447).  You know you're at the bottom when the king of Hades thinks you are bad news.  Juno summons Allecto to enter the paradise of the Latins and cause havoc.  And cause havoc she does.  She can cause men to be whipped up into mobs.  She can drive Latin queen Amata into a Bacchic frenzy (559).  She can cause Turnus to awake in a sweat after horrifying dreams and grab for his weapons in a fit of rage (634).

The power of the underworld has entered the scene, and the Golden Age is gone in a moment.  What is the reason for the fall out of paradise, the end of the Golden Age?  The answer is found in the question.  What happens is that reason ceases to rule, and the force of unreason, of irrationality, begins to take over.  In that sense there is no "reason" for the Fall.  It is pure irrationality in action.  And this is what Allecto brings from the underworld.  The kingdom of Latinus collapses as his people, goaded on by Allecto and Juno, become less a kingdom and more a mob.  His kingship is "wrecked, swept away by storm" (816).  Latinus knows that his golden age has come to an end: 

He said no more, but shut himself away
And dropped the reins of rule over the state
(825)

a rough sketch of Pete Rollins' events in Edmonton

Here is a rough at-a-glance.  I'll updating and adding more specifics as things are finalized:

5th Feb Thursday evening - free public lecture at Taylor
6th Feb Friday evening  - Theolojazz - alternating sets of jazz (Elphida Trio) and Pete - probably at Dewey’s (on the U of A campus), there may be a small cover or maybe free
7th Feb Sat. am - (probably) a session at Taylor
7th Feb. Sat - evening - Interface Worship alt. worship event with Pete at St. Paul’s Anglican
8th Feb. Sunday am:  Sunday morning worship service with Pete at Urban Bridge Church.

There may be a Thursday daytime event added.

Event blog here

minus 29 degrees. 
but the backyard rink is awesome.

sermon notes: Epiphany 2009, Matthew 2: 1-12

some thoughts...

The epistle reading is Ephesians 3:1-12, which contains the following thought:  "In former generations this mystery was not made known to humankind, as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit."  The word mystery comes up several times in this section of Ephesians.  The sense of mystery as something hidden which is now being revealed is the theme of Epiphany.

Matthew 2:1-12

2:1 In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem,  2 asking, "Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews? For we observed his star at its rising, and have come to pay him homage..."

The progression of the Christmas season began not only with Advent, but many months before.  With the Annunciation it was the angel Gabriel who spoke directly and clearly to Mary about the child who would come.  And throughout the Gospel stories leading up to the Nativity, angels and direct revelations were prominent – they figured in the stories of Elizabeth and Zechariah as they waited for the birth of John the Baptist.  On Christmas eve, too, we remember that there was a revelation to the shepherds in an unmistakable and sure fashion:  the glory of the Lord shone round them, a heavenly chorus filled the skies, and they were told in certain terms to go to Bethlehem, and they would find the child Jesus.

Then we celebrate Epiphany – the coming of the Magi to adore and worship the newborn King, the revelation of Christ to the Gentiles.  If Christmas is about the shortest route from here to Bethlehem (as the Shepherds discovered), then Epiphany is about a longer, ‘pilgrim’ road to Christ.

Instead of angels and visions, we have the image of the magi following a sign in the skies – in nature – and for a longer period of time.  The magi see the intentions of God in the skies.  This is not new:  Psalm 19 tells us that the heavens themselves declare who God is, and that his handiwork is seen in created nature.  But still with a tinge of the “Christmas miraculous”, it is a peculiar kind of sign – “we observed his star at its rising”.  The magi know that there is something significant happening.  In a way we might in all likelihood hazard a guess that they even believed in the divine.  But the whole story of Epiphany reminds us that a general belief in God is a beginning point, not the end point.

The magi have a general idea of this God and this King of the Jews, but they don’t know how to find him.  The general revelation that God gives us are evident everywhere, and the wise pay attention to God’s hints about Himself that he has placed in the world.  Traveling by starlight is a wonderful thing, it got the magi to the right country.  But God does not want us to come to a country – to a merely general idea of God.  He wants us to find Jesus.

In the Epiphany story there are several characters who have the opportunity to find Jesus, but refuse.  First we have “Herod, and all Jerusalem with him”.  Matthew says that they both had the same reaction – “They were frightened”. They are afraid of something new – a new power that they have no control over.  Herod is frightened because the new king of the Jews is a threat. Herod  is the ruler and there is room on his throne for no other.  The people are afraid because they are afraid of Herod -= anything that upsets him, upsets them.  They know Herod is a bit of a tyrant – and anything that makes him upset is a threat to their peace and well being.  At all costs – don’t get Herod agitated.

I need to avoid the temptation of reacting like Herod:  I am threatened that God wants to somehow be King in my life, ‘rule’ my life.  Who is on the throne of my life?  Is it Jesus, or is it me?  There can be only one ruler, one king.  Is it Jesus, or is it me?  Herod decided that there was no room for Jesus in his world.  I am in charge of my life, and no one else.  Self sufficient, self determined, and in the end, self centered.

The people who make up “all of Jerusalem” in the story are frightened like Herod, but for different reasons.  They are perhaps a step ahead of Herod.  They have not placed themselves on the throne of their lives.  They do not say “I will rule my own life”.  Instead, they have let someone else rule their lives.   But they have picked the wrong person.  They have decided to let Herod rule their lives.  Why does Matthew say “Herod, and all of Jerusalem with him, was frightened”?  Jerusalem is frightened because Herod is frightened.  They have thrown their lot in with Herod their ruler, instead of with God, their true Lord.    Whatever Herod thinks, they think, whatever Herod says, goes.  If Herod is scared, then we better be scared, or at least act like it.

We are like “all Jerusalem” when we are controlled by someone else’s reactions and someone else’s opinions.  The people of Jerusalem were afraid of Herod – he controlled how they felt.  They were really at his whim.  It is a very subtle, but very powerful, form of fear.  “All Jerusalem”  is  like someone who is constantly waiting for someone else’s reactions, someone else’s approval or disapproval, someone else to tell them how to act, what to do, someone else to tell them how to live.  The only problem is, they picked the wrong king.  They picked Herod instead of God.  We don’t need to pick Herod, but as long as we fail to choose God, it doesn’t matter who controls us.

So Herod does a smart thing.  He calls together the chief priests and the scribes of the people, and finds out exactly where the new king is going to be born.  He knows where to go – find the people who know the scriptures – the chief priests – the professional clergy are supposed to be paid to know these things.  Herod does not go to the Temple or to the Scriptures to get closer to God; he goes for his own purposes.  He wants information for his own purposes.  He wants the Temple and the Scriptures to serve his own ends, not God’s purposes.  If we approach the Temple (the Church) and the Scriptures in the spirit of Herod; we will have missed the point.  Both the Church and the Scriptures are God’s, and are intended to serve his good purposes.

So the chief priests and the scribes read the scriptures – they know the Scriptures well – it does not take long before they give Herod the answer to his question.  The new King will be born in Bethlehem.  But chief priests do not themselves have any personal interest in going to see the new King.  Amazing.  They had all the information from God right in front of them, and they don’t bother to do anything with it.  Maybe Herod did not tell them that the wise men had come.  But no matter, they were blind to the presence of the star, which the wise men had followed all the way from the east, and they are blind to the importance of their own scriptures.  At any rate, they were too busy playing church to actually take the time to find God.  They have no love for the object of which the scriptures speak.  They know the King will be found in Bethlehem, yet they do not bother to go.

So how does the story proceed?  Herod calls the wise men secretly.  That alone is a warning sign.  Why secretly?  He sends them on their way with a bit of a false promise.  Go and find the child, and then let me know so that I may do him homage as well.  As the wise men head out – there ahead of them is the star – it’s still there, but no one is paying any attention.  God gives us signs, but often we are blind to their presence.  Herod is looking at his throne, the scribes are looking at their scriptures, the people are all looking at Herod, and only the wise men still recognize that the star is still there.

The wise men do what the others do not – they actually make the effort to get to where Jesus is.

2:9 When they had heard the king, they set out; and there, ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. 2:10 When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy. 2:11 On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. 2:12 And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they left for their own country by another road.

So the magi have finally found Jesus.  And what is their response?  Their first response is joy – “they were overwhelmed with joy”.  That is what happens when we find Jesus.  That is what awaits us at the end of the journey.  Next, they paid him homage – they worshiped him and acknowledged Him as King.  After the joy comes the worship.  That means acknowledging Jesus as King.  Jesus as the center.  Jesus as Lord.  And then, after joy and after worship, comes offering of their gifts.  In response to who Jesus is and the joy He gives, we offer ourselves and our gifts to Him.

So how do you find Jesus?  Maybe we all can start out like the magi – with a general idea of God, and a general idea that He is guiding you.  Like the magi, we need to turn to the scriptures.  If you don’t read them, you will never really get the specific directions that God is trying to give you.  Approach them with the right spirit, the right purpose.  Ask for help along the way - the church is meant to be that way.  The wise men knew when they needed to ask someone else for help.  And pray.  Ask God.  When you find Jesus, rejoice.  After all, He is God.  Put Him in the center.  Ask yourself whether what you are doing honors him a King.  Offer to him what you have, who you are.

The way forward for any of us is an Epiphany story.  It is about us paying attention to the signs of God around us:  the visions, the dreams, the stars and the Scriptures.  It will be a pilgrim story:  it took the magi up to two years to find the destination they were looking for.  Patience in God’s work is not always appreciated in our instant world.  But we trust that for us as a people, we will find our joy as we worship him, and offer ourselves to our King.

The Anglican Planet on the web & the death penalty

is located here.

In unrelated news, I've been tossing around various statements by anglican church leaders on the question of the death penalty.  Does anyone have a take on this issue?

And, in keeping with the meandering nature of this post, one day soon I'm going to try to update the links with a number of interesting blogs which have never made it into the sidebar for some reason or other.