Did Easter really happen?

I believe so, but if you attended a recent chapel at Asbury Seminary you wouldn't be able to tell. I've never been to services that are more void of joy in the weeks following Easter in my life. I'm not sure what the problem is but the services are dry and joyless. There is no excitement when the leader says "Christ is risen" and there seems to be even less excitement when the people respond "He is risen indeed." When we sing song proclaiming the resurrection they are listless and flat. We celebrate the resurrection with our words but our physical expressions and our emotions don't attest to the fact that Christ is truly risen.

Could it be that the end of the year rush has gotten students down? Well if it is the case that school work can rob you of the joy of Christ being risen from the dead then I would wondering if you have any business being a pastor.

I'm not sure if this is the case but I wonder if the problem is with the chapel services themselves. I don't want to say this is definitive problem, but I would like to offer it as a possibility. It seems to me that lately in chapel we have misplaced our focus. Instead of focusing on the major things (i.e. CHRIST'S RESURRECTION) we decide to focus on music, call to worship creativity, and other things. It seems to me that we may be allowing ourselves to become blinded by things that should just be natural expressions.

Allow me to offer one example.

During lent I suggested, using the Orthodox Church as my example, that we not only proclaim "Christ is Risen" in English, but that we also proclaim it in other languages (ideally those that are represented in our seminary community). It seemed good to the group that this was a good idea and thus we decided to press forward with it and even got a banner made with all the languages. The problem is that somewhere between idea and praxis this small expression has blinded us. It seems that we are striving so hard to "make this work" and "get enough mileage our of it" that we are forcing the issue. It's almost as if it is a showcase and we're trying so hard to be intercultural that we are allowing it to be our focus rather than the joy of the resurrection which indeed allows us to proclaim that there is "no longer Jew nor Greek."

I think this idea is great but it seems that it only works when the the focus is absolutely on the Resurrection and not on the means to convey the truth of it. It seems that this problem of focusing on the means rather than the truth to be conveyed has been a protestant problem for such a long time, but I digress.

This is just one example. I am completely befuddled as to how a SEMINARY community to be so lackluster and joyless in the weeks following Easter. I shudder to think that many in this community are merely semester away from leading churches in the celebration of our Lord's resurrection.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm completely out of my mind but this is what I observe. Maybe I'm not observing correctly because I sit in the balcony running sound or maybe I'm just comparing this to the amazing joy and celebration that was had during the Pascha Vigil at my church. I'm not sure, but if what I am observing is correct then I am scared to death for the western protestant church.

May the Lord rekindle his people and fill them with joy for truly Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death!!

Christ is Risen...Indeed He is Risen

Hallelujah! I attended my first Orthodox Pascha (Easter) service last night from 11:30pm-3:30am and it was amazing. The beauty of sight, sound and smell, combined with the somber tone moving to extreme joy brought me almost to tears. I don't know if I've ever celebrated Easter this fully at any other church.

From one of the Paschal Songs:

Christ is Risen from the Dead, Trampling down death by death and upon those in the tomb bestowing life!

This is the Paschal homily of St. John Chrysostom. Apparently it is read every year in Orthodox Churches. I have read it before, but having it preached to us by Father Justin was amazing. I wanted to put it in the reader but I thought it was a little much to include that and Wesley and according to the higher-ups Wesley is the trump card. (Text copy and pasted from here.)

Is there anyone who is a devout lover of God?
Let them enjoy this beautiful bright festival!
Is there anyone who is a grateful servant?
Let them rejoice and enter into the joy of their Lord!

Are there any weary with fasting?
Let them now receive their wages!
If any have toiled from the first hour,
let them receive their due reward;
If any have come after the third hour,
let him with gratitude join in the Feast!
And he that arrived after the sixth hour,
let him not doubt; for he too shall sustain no loss.
And if any delayed until the ninth hour,
let him not hesitate; but let him come too.
And he who arrived only at the eleventh hour,
let him not be afraid by reason of his delay.

For the Lord is gracious and receives the last even as the first.
He gives rest to him that comes at the eleventh hour,
as well as to him that toiled from the first.
To this one He gives, and upon another He bestows.
He accepts the works as He greets the endeavor.
The deed He honors and the intention He commends.

Let us all enter into the joy of the Lord!
First and last alike receive your reward;
rich and poor, rejoice together!
Sober and slothful, celebrate the day!

You that have kept the fast, and you that have not,
rejoice today for the Table is richly laden!
Feast royally on it, the calf is a fatted one.
Let no one go away hungry. Partake, all, of the cup of faith.
Enjoy all the riches of His goodness!

Let no one grieve at his poverty,
for the universal kingdom has been revealed.
Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again;
for forgiveness has risen from the grave.
Let no one fear death, for the Death of our Savior has set us free.
He has destroyed it by enduring it.

He destroyed Hades when He descended into it.
He put it into an uproar even as it tasted of His flesh.
Isaiah foretold this when he said,
"You, O Hell, have been troubled by encountering Him below."

Hell was in an uproar because it was done away with.
It was in an uproar because it is mocked.
It was in an uproar, for it is destroyed.
It is in an uproar, for it is annihilated.
It is in an uproar, for it is now made captive.
Hell took a body, and discovered God.
It took earth, and encountered Heaven.
It took what it saw, and was overcome by what it did not see.
O death, where is thy sting?
O Hades, where is thy victory?

Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!
Christ is Risen, and the evil ones are cast down!
Christ is Risen, and the angels rejoice!
Christ is Risen, and life is liberated!
Christ is Risen, and the tomb is emptied of its dead;
for Christ having risen from the dead,
is become the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.

To Him be Glory and Power forever and ever. Amen!

Happy Easter!! Happy Pascha!! Christ is Risen!! Death has been destroyed by death!! Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages!!

- Ben

Thoughts After a Shane and Shane Concert

On Saturday I ventured up to Cedarville, OH primarily to hang out with my friend Becca and also to see Shane and Shane in concert. Here are a few thoughts from the trip:

1. Sugar-free Red Bull works as well and tastes just as good as regular Red Bull.
Even though Red Bull is an essential part of my routine when I run sound at concerts, it was needed for this one as well. I ended up staying in Cedarville until after 1:00am talking and then decided to drive the 3 hours back to Wilmore so I could make it back for Church in the Morning. I had a hard time deciding on the sugar-free variety but I am now sold on it. It does lack just a little in the "liquid Smartie" taste as Nate Jacoby coined it. But it's hardly noticeable and if you don't think about it the difference is non-existent.

2. Shane and Shane seem like the type of people I would want to run sound for.
I have not always had the greatest experience running sound for artists. Some are great people to work with and some are just jerks. Sadly this includes worship leaders as I've worked with more than my share of difficult worship leaders. While you can't always tell what an artist is like from on stage you can notice a few things. The first thing I noticed was how laid back they were. There were a few minor sound glitches and things didn't sound "fantastic" but they (and their openers) were incredibly laid back and just rolled with it. We found out halfway through the show that Shane Everett was actually the one running sound for the openers and doing the 'check' for he and Shane Barnard. This is amazing. Most bands tour with a front of house tech (at a minimum) and usually a monitor tech, and are completely anal about everything, this was assuredly not the case here. They approached the show as if they were just spending an evening with friends and weren't worried if everything was going to be "performed" correctly. They didn't seem to present themselves as stars and appeared really down to earth. It could be argued that all this is a facade, but from my experience (although limited) it seems that they are the real thing. I came away from the show thinking that these are the type of people that I would enjoy running sound for and would even do it for free if given the chance. That is much more than I can say about most artists and as sad as it may be this includes a good number of Christian artists and worship leaders.

3. Shane and Shane's newer songs seem to lack the lyrical "zip" or depth that the older ones have. I'm not quite sure what it is that I'm referring to here, but there is a noticeably difference in the lyrical content of the older songs and the newer ones. The newer songs are still good, but they seem to be lacking in power and the ability to pierce to the heart when compared to the old ones. Maybe this is because many of the older songs were actually modified Psalms or other pieces of scripture. One could argue that I am just biased because the new songs are obviously new and I haven't had time to emotionally and experientially associate feelings with them. Although this is a valid point I don't think it's necessarily the correct one. I think the new music is good but it seems that they are trying to be more lyrically creative and while not bad it is bringing a slight shift to the scriptural weight and deep yearning that has come to define their music.

4. I can't think of a sentence which describes this point.
At the concert Shane and Shane played the song "Yearn" which includes these lyrics:

Holy design
this place in time
that i might seek and find my God
my God

Lord i want to yearn for You
i want to burn with passion
over You and only You
Lord i want to yearn

I think this song is fantastic and it is one of my favorites. As they were singing I had a few thoughts concerning the phrase "that I might seek and find my God." While the thoughts in the song convey a sense of yearning and longing for God and also convey a Scriptural anticipation they also sounded to me in that moment to convey a sense of not having found God yet. While this is a beautiful perspective on the 'already but not yet' nature of the Kingdom and our lives with God I also thought of this phrase in juxtaposition with a phrase from the Divine Liturgy of St. Chrysostom. The phrase I'm referring to in the Divine Liturgy reads:

We have seen the true light; we have received the heavenly Spirit; we have found the true faith, worshiping the undivided Trinity, for the Trinity has saved us

To be fair I don't really see these phrases as juxtaposed but it was entertaining this thought of apparent juxtaposition that started the following thoughts. While the lyrics of the song are meant to convey a longing for God it seems to me that if taken out of context they could be used to convey a sense of postmodern agnosticism. It seems to me that one of things that typifies postmodernism is an unwillingness to definitively claim truth. This tendency may also be creeping into some of the more 'emergent' circles of Christianity in their attempts to be relevant. While postmodernism says that we can't know truth or, maybe more aptly, that all truth is relative, the postmodern church may be tempted to work within that paradigm and thus claim that there is truth and we think it is in Christ. This leads to a sense of 'we know, but we really can't be sure.' Thus, for the postmodern individual, we are still hoping that we can somehow, if it were at all possible, "seek and find our God," as the song says.

As I thought about this postmodern agnosticism I thought that the church does not need to commiserate with the postmodern as many of the emergents do. Rather, the church needs to boldly shout as the Orthodox Church does that "We have seen the true light; we have received the heavenly Spirit; we have found the true faith," and this truth is in "worshiping the undivided Trinity," because "the Trinity has saved us." Maybe this sounds elitist or arrogant, but in an age of uncertainty where all truth is perceived as relative we do not need to fall into the trap of claiming we don't know. It seems to me that if we truly wanted to be relevant (I shudder at the use of the word) then then best thing we can do is boldly proclaim what we know to be true and hold to that truth no matter how much the culture claims that we can't be certain. For it truly is a mystery that "Christ has died, Christ is risen and Christ will come again." But just because it's a mystery doesn't make it any less true. It seems that now more than ever we should be embracing the historic creeds of the Church, not because they're ascetically pleasing (like the emergents use them) but because they indicate the truth that has been handed down to us through the ages of faith.

Bureaucratic Gnosticism

Lately I've been thinking on and off about leadership and I coined the term "bureaucratic gnosticism" while conversing with a couple people on campus. While reflecting on leadership in general and on some current and past situations in which I've been involved I began to see a sort of pattern emerging from those that I would describe as "bad leaders" or at least "bad leadership." I'm not seeking to be the next John Maxwell (heaven forbid!!) and I'm really not even trying to pontificate on leadership, or so I think. The reason I'm writing this is twofold. The first reason is that I think the phrase "bureaucratic gnosticism" is nifty and since I made it up (to my knowledge) I thought I would share it. The second reason is because I am fearful that this form of leadership, although effective, is not healthy and is creeping into the church. Before I go any further let me explain what I mean by this phrase.

Gnosticism was an early heresy refuted by the church which had many forms and thus it is almost impossible to completely define it in a short blog post. With that said, one of the most common ways to describe the most basic tenet of gnosticism is to say that it was a religious sect that hinged on secret knowledge (gnosis = the Greek for knowledge). It was by possessing this secret knowledge (supposedly handed down from Christ in some gnostic circles) that one could partake in eternity. Now there are many more forms of gnosticism which emphasize different things, but we will allow this definition to suffice because it is primarily the concept of secret knowledge on which my phrase hinges.

I'm not 100% sure if I'm using bureaucratic according to its strict dictionary definition, but for our purposes we will allow it to mean: pertaining to authority, leadership or political influence. On a side note, it took me about 10 minutes to figure out how to spell bureaucratic. This is why i sucked at spelling bees.

By now you might have guessed where I'm going with this, but if not let me explain. I made up this phrase in reference to a particular style of leadership that, intentionally or not, keeps 90% of the knowledge within a small group of individuals. This does not mean that the information is confidential, on the contrary, the information (or knowledge) could easily be passed on to all involved without any harm or complexity. Why is the knowledge not shared? It seems to me that the reason is power. We are taught from a young age (and to a degree, rightly so) that knowledge is power. However, to use knowledge or information to create an artificial barrier between you (the leader) and everyone else so that you can control the power is absurd. It seems that it is this kind of barrier that leads to distrust, power trips, and dictatorial rule. Now I am not saying that there should be no division between a leader and those he or she leads, but what I am saying is that for a leader to keep such a tight reign on information leads to a form of gnosticism and micromanaging. Obviously if no one else knows all the details then they must rely on the leader for all guidance, instruction and facilitation. This keeps the leader firmly rooted in importance and power even when there is no real threat to his or her headship anyways. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that this is always done consciously. This may just be a learned leadership trait that people perform without realization. Now, this form of leadership may be effective in allowing the leader to guide his or her followers (for lack of a better term) the way that he or she wants, but it does drastically cut down on creativity, freedom, and ownership by the group under the leader. As I said, I'm not seeking to decry business practices, but I do fear that this is sneaking into the management styles of the church.

It seems that often a Pastor will unnecessarily keep information secret so that he or she may guide a board, congregation, or committee the way that they want. This approach keeps the church under the authority of the Pastor not because he or she is the pastor and has been put in place by the bishop, district superintendent, or vote, but rather because they are keeping the congregation in the dark. It seems to me that it is this bureaucratic gnosticism that perpetuates the 'god-complex' among pastors and encourages them to take hard nosed, 'It's my way or the highway,' stances with their congregants.

Really when it boils down to it this form of leadership seems unnecessary and even unchristian. We must respect those in authority but it is also an obligation for leaders not to abuse their power and create a form of gnosticism that allows them to hold the knowledge and thus the power with a closed fist. I admit that there are many times when information cannot and should not be shared and I also admit that this is not a black and white issue, but it seems to me that when the information can be shared it does no harm to share it. It seems to me that if an individual, or even a group of two or three, keeps such a tight reign on non-confidential information then they may indeed be falling into the trap that is bureaucratic gnosticism. This gnostic approach to leaders may be intentional or it may just be subconscious but either way it seems to me that it is an unsatisfactory and undesirable form of leadership.

Does this make sense? Have I described this phenomena well? Please give me your feedback as this is something that I'm just starting to think through as I see it more and more.

Baseball starts in 8 days!!

I know that I've tried to keep this blog primarily about faith, theology, and things of that sort but I would like to make a quick post about baseball so if you don't like sports then feel free to ignore this one.


I know it's still spring training and I know that opening day is 8 days away but I am really excited about baseball this season. More specifically I am really fired up about the prospect that the Orioles might finish over .500 for the first time in 9 years. Yes, that is right the last time the Orioles had a winning season i was 14!!

If I were to remain logical I would have to admit that the O's probably won't win the world series. They have a weak hitting lineup and a young and untested pitching staff and that probably isn't a good combination. In fact everything has to be perfect in order for them to win it all, but I don't care. I am a fan. I am a Baltimore Orioles fan and I have been one since the first grade. There is no bandwagoning here and thus I can confidently take my Kierkegaardian leap of faith and boldly declare that the Orioles WILL win the World Series.

To be fair I don't think our buddy Soren would think this is a true leap of faith because I'm not willing to die for this, but he can just be quiet. How on earth did I start talking philosophy. Back to baseball.

One of the reasons (probably the biggest reason) that I'm so excited this year is Erik Bedard. Here is his line from today's game:
5IP 1H 1R 1ER 2BB 8SO 1HR

Oh and this RAISED his preseason ERA to 0.95.

I predicting that if Bedard stays healthy he'll be a 20 game winner.

I'm also looking forward to seeing Brian Roberts get back into his game now that he's fully healthy. And Nick Markakis is going to have a huge year!!

Can you tell that I'm excited about baseball? The only down part to this season is that my cousin, Josh Kinney, is out for the year. Josh helped the Cardinals win the Series last year and then tore a tendon in his elbow this spring and had to have Tommy John surgery.

Enough of this march madness basketball crap. Bring on Baseball!!! Oh and I'm also taking another leap of faith and fully believing that the Yankees will suck this year. Oh how I hate the Yankees.

Lent: Feasting During the Fast

This lent has been interesting for me. Though I've not had a great many Lenten epiphanies to blog about I think that God is still teaching me good things. Probably the most significant thing I'm learning is how to feast on him while I'm fasting.

The past week or two I've been fighting diligently against a constant bad/angry mood. It's all that I can do to keep from saying or doing something in my angst - something I will likely regret later. My frustration and my "pissyness" (for lack of a better term) seems to be perpetual. I don't want to get into all the reasons for this now, but let us suffice it to say that it is not caused by the Lenten fasting (though a burger would be great right now).

Despite this "funk" the Lord has been my constant help and comfort. The Holy Spirit has sustained me through a few significant things. It seems as if I must constantly feed myself or else I will break. Here is what is sustaining me.

Psalm 103: Bless the Lord, Oh my soul and all that is within me bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, Oh my soul and forget not all his benefits. He forgives all your iniquities and heals all your diseases... The Lord, is compassionate and merciful, long suffering and of great goodness. Bless the Lord Oh my soul.

Though this is not verbatim with the text we sing this Psalm every Sunday in church and is has been my friend and food during this season. My mind and my soul sing it when things are quiet and it is the first thing that I force myself to utter when I feel this angst building.

Psalm 146: Praise the Lord, Oh my soul. I will praise the Lord as long as I live; I will sing praises to my God while I have being. Put not your trust in princes and sons of men, in whom there is no salvation. When his breath departs he returns to his earth. On that very day his plans perish. The Lord, will reign for ever, They God oh Zion to all generations. Now and ever and unto ages of ages Amen.

This psalm is much like the first. although not word for word with the text we sing it every Sunday. It like Psalm 103 often springs forth from within me and sometimes I make is a forced prayer and cry to the Lord.

The Nicene Creed: I won't recap the whole creed here. This is also sung every Sunday at my church and it encourages me and fills my spirit with joy.

Colossians 3:1-4 Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of god. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is your life, appears then you also will appear with him in glory.

We have been memorizing this passage as a chapel team and it has truly sustained me during these periods. This is incredibly ironic because most (if not all) of my frustration and angst comes during times that I'm doing chapel things. I'm not sure if that means anything except that it's interesting.

The Lord's Prayer: Lord teach me how to pray! This is often my cry and then I dive deep into the prayer our savior taught us to pray. This has become a form of strength and spiritual food.

Various prayers: I also find myself scrambling at night when I'm reflecting on the day or even throughout the day for the Lent Reader that Asbury put out. I find myself flipping through the pages and frantically prayer every prayer from every page. I ask the Lord to teach me how to pray some of the prayer and others just gush out from my being. These prayer are from a variety of places: the book of common prayer, various saints (St. Anselm, St. Ephraim), other Christian figures (Mary Fletcher) and I even wrote a few of them for the reader.



These are the things that are sustaining me. These are the things that the Holy Spirit has placed in my life to feed me and has allowed me to feast on during this great and holy fast. Looking back over this post it seems so rigid and dry. Believe me when I say this is anything but dry. These wells are full of living water which the Lord pours out to me. I drink to partake of the Lord and distance myself from the flesh. I drink often and deep. I feel as though I must drink or I will die! I have to sing the songs of Zion. I have to pray the prayers of God's people. I must recite the symbol of the faith!! The Lord has given us these good gifts to bring life and health and freedom to our souls. This they have brought to my soul. If it wasn't for these gifts of grace I shudder to think how much more offensive and mean I would be. Yes, I am still frustrated and angry but these gifts feed me in this desert. I'm looking at making changes to help eliminate some of this angst but until the Lord leads in those decisions I must rest in these gifts. I must grab them and not let go. I don't care if I am charged with using them as a crutch because it seems as if that's what they are for now.


May our God - the Giver of good gifts grant you all things on which to feast during this holy fast!!

- Ben

Ray Boltz is a heretic and other thoughts from church on Sunday

I'm not sure if anyone else even knows who Ray Boltz is, but he was a Christian pop singer in the early 90's that was quite popular with our parents generation. Ol' Ray had a sweet curly mullet sorta thing going on with a huge 'stache he was the archetype for the mid-life crisis wanna be "rock/pop star" for the Christian worldview. I'm very familiar (as I'm sure my sister is) with Boltzy because my dad became a huge fan during a Promise Keepers crusade back in the day. Our house and somehow our church became a Ray Boltz extravaganza and I'm sure there are many kids from our church (like myself) that could sing almost all of Ray Ray's songs from memory. Although all the above information is greatly important (or not so much) the point of this post is really not to bash Ray, and his sweet moustache, the point it rather to address theological ideal espoused in one of his songs and indeed much of western theology.

The song I want to draw attention to is "One Drop of Blood" (lyrics: here) and to be honest Ray is primarily guilty of mixing metaphors and not necessarily heresy per se. The metaphors he mixes (and I could be wrong so please correct me) is at the beginning he seems to assert "the accuser of the brethren" is demanding the the plea and later in the song he seems to be saying that the one to whom "their righteousness is filthy rags" is demanding the payment. Either way the music video (yes I've seen it) is what caused me to think of this song in church. In it Ray Ray depicts the courtroom where he stands accused by the prosecutor (probably a satanic figure) and it is the judge (set up as the Father) demands payment.

While we may vary on our theologies of atonement let me humbly suggest that the way this penal substitutionary view has worked itself out since St. Anselm is near heretical.

This is where we get to church. The priest at my church was talking about the cross on Sunday and how there is a view of the cross as a divine extraction of justice. When he was describing all this the scenes from Ray's video kept coming to mind. While my priest did not specifically say this view is heretical let me explain the process that caused me to think this.

This divine extraction of justice is often portrayed in a courtroom setting (as Ray does) and depicts the Father as Judge and sometimes even accuser. This image also portrays Christ as defense and substitution. This image often sets the Father up as condemning and the Son as mercifully intervening. This view seems to violate the essential doctrine of the Trinity. The Father and Christ are not opposed and neither do they have contrary wills. We should not allow analogies of atonement in our churches that are contrary to the Trinitarian doctrine of the church. We cannot and must not see the Father as a vengeful judge and Christ as a merciful ambassador. This dichotomy cannot stand! How can we assert that the Trinity is of one essence and yet has three different wills. Correct Christian theology has always taught that the Trinity is united in will because the three persons are united in essence. Three persons and one substance. This implies that it was not the Father mandating the sending of the Son, but rather the Holy Trinity participating in this act willfully unified.

Contrary to my title, I'm not necessarily claiming that Ray Boltz is a heretic, rather I am just using him as an illustration. I also have not read enough of St. Anselm to know if he espoused these ideas or, as with some theological constructs (i.e. Augustinian theology) it just decayed over time. I am also willing to recieve correction if anything that I have said violates the history of Christian orthodox teaching. I am not an expert on the Trinity, but I do think that what I have said is correct.

---------------------

Here is another and possibly even more interesting (read: less nerdy) thing from sunday. Though we practice the same liturgy with a few mild variation every sunday I am continually struck by the beauty and precise articulation of the service. Sometimes I notice phrases or pieces of the liturgy that I have never heard befoer and they sink deep within my soul. Yesterday was one of those occasions.

During one part of the liturgy the priest was offering prayers and he said something similar to: "for those who love us and those who hate us, may you remember in your kingdom always" to which the congregation responds "Amen." I've heard prayers for enemies before (sadly too few) but to have it as a part of the liturgy and to say "remember in your kingdom always" is amazingly beautiful and humble. I ask myself if I could say that about those who have wronged me and to an even greater extent, could I say it about someone if I had been severly wronged. I hope so. It seems to me that it is one thing to pray for those who hate you, but to ask God to remember them in his kingdom is a very bold statement. Hopefully this prayer can resound in all of our hearts. Amen Amen Amen.

Now and even deeper question comes to mind. How does this prayer fit with the above section of my post? If someone is outrightly espousing heresy can we bless them? Is it not our job to refute that heresy and uphold the truth of the faith? I believe that it is, but we must find a way to do it in love and a prayerful spirit. We must have in mind the salvation of the person espousing heresy. Just as Paul says: hand them over to the devil so that their soul maybe saved. Maybe this is an inadequate answer, but it's a start.


May the Lord God remember you all in his Kingdom now and ever,

Ben

More thoughts on W

I intended to post this a while ago, but never got around to it. Shortly after I posted my thoughts on W not being a vowel I noticed a lot of people venturing to my site from the site of David Black. It turns out that David Black happens to be the author of my greek text book and professor at Southeaster Baptist Seminary. I'm not sure how he found my page but nevertheless he posted a link to my page and also included a link to the wikipedia page concerning W as a vowel.

I posted similar comments over on Diercks' blog and Michelle posted a comment that helps illumine the situation.

So here is the clarifying material concerning W as a vowel from David Black and Michelle Mosher.

Dave Black directs us here.

And Michelle writes the following in the comments on Diercks' page:

so W and Y aren't really vowels, but they're not really consonants either. some linguists call them "semi-vowels" because of the way they're sort of in-between.

W is actually a lot like U (and Y is a lot like EE). So if you say "snow" with a "u" at the end instead of a "w" it'll still sound pretty similar. Try saying "snou" (with a normal "oh" sound and a normal "uu" sound.

It's easier to tell with a word like "water". Try replacing the w with u: u-ater. Now say it fast.

so yeah, W and y are kind of vowels, but not really.

So there you have two very knowledgable people helping us understand the notion that W can indeed serve as a vowel.

Maybe they have changed my opinion on the matter (yes I know this contradicts what I said in my earlier post) or maybe not. I guess I still need to think about this some more.

Hopefully some Lent thoughts will be posted soon.

Zeal vs. Love

About a week ago I began going back through my blog affixing labels to each post in hopes of categorizing my thoughts according to the list you see off to the right and I began to realize something. My blog has changed drastically in the past two years. Or rather, I have changed drastically in the past two years and it is exemplified in my blog.

As I read back over the older posts I thought to myself, "wow, I use to be such a 'good' Christian." I thought about how the nature of my posts has changed and how it reflects the nature of my spiritual life. I found myself thinking or rather realizing that the critical turning point seems to be seminary. Yes, it seems I have concluded that I was a 'better' Christian before coming to seminary.

I don't want to get into why this is, or exactly what I mean by this just yet (these posts will be forthcoming...maybe). I also don't want to blog about how I got this way or if I think seminary life had a part to play in it or not.

I just say all this to bring up that over the past weeks since I've had this realization I've prayed every day something similar to: "Lord, bring back my zeal for you."

Tonight as I was laying in bed (I got up to write this) I had a different prayer. "Lord, bring back the love that I once had." In saying this it came to my mind that love can cause zeal and often does, but zeal seldom causes love. Zeal can exist on it's own without causing one to love, but Love shifts one's entire paradigm and causes one to be zealous for that which he or she loves.

So this is my new prayer. "Lord bring back and even increase the love I once had for you, for others, and for your church."



"O Lord and Master of my life, take from me the spirit of sloth, despair, lust of power, and idle talk. But give rather the spirit of chastity, humility, patience, and love to Thy servant. Yea, O Lord and King, grant me to see my own transgressions, and not to judge my brother, for blessed art Thou, unto ages of ages. Amen."
- Lenten Prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian

Lent I

Today for my devotions I was reading a community reader that our seminary puts out each season and the entry really spoke to me. I would like to share that entry here. I don't want to appear pompous by posting the work I did, but I really liked today's reading. Yes, it has my favorite quote from one of my favorite fathers of the church but God really spoke to me through it today so I thought I would share it. Here is today's (Feb. 22) entry:

Opening Prayer:
Almighty Father, who didst inspire Simon Peter, first among the apostles, to confess Jesus as Messiah and Son of the living God: Keep thy Church steadfast upon the rock of this faith, that in unity and peace we may proclaim the one truth and follow the one Lord, our Savior Jesus Christ; who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
- BCP 187

Luke 9:18-27 NRSV
Once when Jesus was praying alone, with only the disciples near him, he asked them, "Who do the crowds say that I am?" They answered, "John the Baptist; but others, Elijah; and still others, that one of the ancient prophets has arisen." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered, "The Messiah of God." He sternly ordered and commanded them not to tell anyone, saying, "The Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised." Then he said to them all, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will save it. What does it profit them if they gain the whole world, but lose or forfeit themselves? Those who are ashamed of me and of my words, of them the Son of Man will be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. But truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God."

Reading:
Come fire, cross, battling with wild beasts, wrenching of bones, mangling of limbs, crushing of my whole body, cruel tortures of the devil – only let me get to Jesus Christ! Not the wide bounds of earth nor the kingdoms of this world will avail me anything. I would rather die and get to Jesus Christ, than reign over the ends of the earth, That is whom I am looking for – the One who died for us. That is whom I want – the One who rose for us…What I want is God’s bread, which is the flesh of Christ, who came from David’s line; and for drink I want his blood: an immortal love feast indeed!
- St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans 5:3-6:2; 7:3


Prayer of Response:
Holy Father, you know our hearts and our desires. You know that often we fail in our pursuit of you. Though we are frail, give us strength. Though we fall, lift us up. Though we fall short all too often, empower us for the journey on which you have called us. Help us to live as those who have gone before us, willing to give our life and our all for the cross of Christ. Help us to bear the holy cross. Amen.

I promise not to continue to post the whole entries from the reader and to share more of my thoughts through this lenten season.


Blessings to you all,

Ben

Ash Wednesday - Lent Begins

"O Lord and Master of my Life, take form me the spirit of sloth, despair, lust of power, and idle talk. But give rather the spirit of Chastity, humility, patience, and love to thy servant. Yea, O Lord and King, grant me to see my own transgressions, and not to judge my brother, for blessed are Thou, unto ages of ages. Amen"

- Lenten Prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian.

I have the language skills of a third grader!

I know that I joke a lot about my poor writing skills but the other day in my Greek class I found out just how poor a grasp of the English language I have.

I don't know why, but for some reason my professor was talking about the number of vowels in English and he said something like "We all know how many vowels we have in English." I confidently thought to myself: A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y. After someone said "five" and someone else said "six" (presumably counting Y) someone from the front of the room said "seven." Five and six I can accept, but when I heard seven I began to mock the student in my mind (which I do with regularity when stupid things are said) until my professor repeated "seven" as if it was correct.

He then reminded us that "W" can serve as a vowel in the English language and the whole class except a couple of us seemed to accept it as gospel truth.

He then went on to explain that in words like "snow" the W serves as a vowel.

How on earth could I have graduated high school and college without ever hearing this? Was my education that poor? Are my Greek prof. and the rest of my class crazy?

I can sort of understand not hearing this in college, maybe they thought it was fundamental and I should have learned it in... oh I don't know...Kindergarten!! But to go through elementary school and high school and not hear this (if it is indeed true) is absurd. I even excelled in elementary school and high school, I seriously don't understand and thus I have come to this conclusion:

I don't believe it. I don't believe that "W" can serve as a vowel. I don't care how many people tell me it can, or how many English professors speak against me, right now I refuse to accept it.

I'm fine with Y, but W I will not tolerate. Am I the only one who has never heard this? I guess either way it doesn't matter because I'm just refusing to accept it. It is simply not true!

So this isn't theological and it's really not that interesting, but I had to vent somewhere and it's my blog so deal with it or else maybe I'll just refuse to accept that you exist.

Ben

St. Valentine'(s) Day

This is not one of those "hey i'm lonely and single so I'll rant against Valentine's Day" posts. I just started wondering who exactly St. Valentine was and so I thought I'd share my research here. Note this is not a defense for or argument against the celebration of St. Valentine's Day, it is merely a short post on who St. Valentine was.

Since most of us follow the western church calendar and most of our holidays are based on this it seems to me that the logical place to start would be New Advent as they are the Catholic online encyclopedia. New Advent seems to assert that traditionally there were three saint Valentines that were venerated on the 14th of February. These saints were:
- a Priest in Rome,
- Bishop of Interamna (modern Terni, in Italy I think)
- one from Africa with not much else known about him.

According to New Advent these three men were all martyrs with the first two suffering for the cross in the third century and the third suffered with friends but we dont' know when.


After pursuing the western tradition I decided to turn my attention to the eastern church. Although the eastern church does not celebrate (to my knowledge) St. Valentine on the 14th of Februrary most of the saints (especially the early ones) are celebrated by both East and West and often just have different dates.

I started my search on the Orthodox Wiki site and then continued my search on the Orthodox Church in America site. Orthodox Wiki turned up next to nothing but the OCA website had quite an interesting take on St. Valentine. The St. Valentine that they reference is the one that was the Bishop of Interammna.

Here is a quick synopsis of his story:

St. Valentine had the gift of healing and cured many "maladies." As St. Valentine's name spread through the city he began to convert many people. One such person was the son of a prefect in the city. Since the city was pagan (as was much of the world) the prefect was angered and demaned that St. Valentine reject his faith and worship idols. Refusing to reject his faith landed St. Valentine in prison where his disciples visited him daily. Upon hearing of these visits the prefect ordered St. Valentine to be beheaded. After the beheading St. Valentine's disciples buried his body in Interammna converting many on their way. Hearing the news of these most recent conversions the prefect ordered the three main disciples of St. Valentine to be beheaded as well. St. Valentine is celebrated on July 30th of the eastern calendar.


I continued to do some research to see if I could find any more about the other Valentines and using Orthodox Search I turned up a result form the Antiochean Orthodox Church website that related the story of St. Valentine a Priest in Rome (our first Valentine).


Here is a synopsis of the story of this St. Valentine:

In the third century Emporer Claudius, thinking that marriage was bad for the armies, decreed that no more marriages should take place. St. Valentine ignored this decree because of it's unjustness and continued to marry people. St. Valentine was caught marrying people and was sentenced to death.


I was unable to find anything on St. Valentine of Africa. But I didn't really spend a ton of time on this short project.


So there you have the matrydom of two St. Valentines. Both of them are cannonized by the Church and both died in love of Christ and love for his people. It seems to me that knowing the saint-story behind two of the three Valentines commemorated today in the western calendar puts a new spin on Valentines Day. I'm not saying that the holiday as now celebrated is a Christian one and I'm not saying that there isn't history in the celebration of February 14th as a pagan holiday. I am, however, asserting that our memory of these men, our forefathers and our brothers in Christ who were martyred should shape our thinking about Valentine's Day. It should at least make us think what it means to be somebody's "Valentine."


Lord, let the memory of these saints of the church encourage us in holy love for You and for Your Church. If you so call us may our blood be spilled like these men for the sake of the faith. Amen.


Blessings to you all in Christ,

Ben


Sources:
New Advent
Antiochian Orthodox Church
Orthodox Church in America Search Valentine in the search box and then click on the "life of the saint" when you see "Hieromartyr Valentine the Bishop of Interamna, Terni in Italy"

Oh my goodness!!

Was my first reaction to this.

Then i came to my senses and realized that if it was a real game it would be awesome. It would be even cooler if it was denominationally based or maybe create your own religion.

I found the link on my friend: Jo's blog.


Fear not a real post should be coming soon.

What a beautiful church....I mean bar?

I've intended to write this post shortly after the event but after procrastinating for a while I decided to save it for a rainy day. And today is that day. Not that this post is extremely interesting and merited anticipation, it just never got posted and is still a slight point of interest to me.

On my way home for Christmas I stopped in Pittsburgh to visit my good friend Gustav. The evening I arrived we decided to go out for dinner and in an effort to avoid popular chains and get some local Pittsburgh food we decided on a place called "The Church Brew Works."

The food was great but even better was the setting. The restaurant is an old Catholic church turned into a microbrewery.

To be honest I didn't know what emotion to feel as I walked in; I didn't know whether to lament or rejoice and in fact I think i felt a little of both.

The lament came from seeing what seemed to be a once beautiful church vacated and left empty until the brewery took over. This seems to be a classic example of the church fleeing the city and leaving huge vacant buildings as signs that seem to indicate God's abandonment. This is such a sad state because in reality it is not God who has abandoned the city and its people but rather God's people who have abandoned the city.

Along with this very basic realization I also grieved when i walked inside. Where a baptismal font once would have stood to remind people of their baptism now stood a small sign that read "Please wait to be seated." To the right where the confessionals would have been now stood a long bar encompassing almost the entire wall. By far the most saddening sight was at the front of the church. There where the altar once stood - where the Eucharist was prepared and the word was proclaimed now stood a huge micro-brewery.

Now I say all this as lament not because I am a staunchly opposed to alcohol. Yes, I have never had a drink of alcohol, but I am not opposed to it's use in moderation. I lament these replacements because it seems to indicate a larger problem - namely the church fleeing the city, this signs of grace leaving the life of the city in favor of something else. Now, to be sure, it could merely indicate the church outgrew it's building and build another one 3 or 4 blocks over or maybe as people left the city the church was left with no congregants (but I highly doubt these scenarios). I am saddened by the replacement of grace-filled things for that which (though can be used by God) are not necessarily designed for that purpose. Although I was saddened by these things, I was also happy for a few reasons.

It was good to see a once abandoned building being used for some purpose and helping the economy of Pittsburgh. It was also great to see the beauty of the architecture of the building still intact and what seemed to be pointing to God. I was blown away to see that the Latin above the altar was still intact and that our waitress knew what it meant (something similar to: "By faith in Jesus Christ the Son of God we are saved."). Apparently they have been asked enough that they tell their servers what the saying means (that or we got a waitress who knows Latin...that would be awesome!) Oh and the food was great!

All that to say that The Church Brew Works is a very cool place. Yes it's sad that a church has been left behind, but maybe God is using this place as a small means of grace to help reach to people of Pittsburgh. Maybe the Latin causes curiosity, maybe the architecture points to the transcendence and maybe just being there makes people long for home and rest in Christ. Maybe none of this happens and it's just sad and depressing. I'm not passing judgment I'm just relaying my experience.

So I guess my post ends there..."and it was cool."

Short thoughts on Christmas music

I know the time has passed when this post would be appropriate but I'm going to write some short thoughts anyway... it is my blog after all.

In the days following Christmas I listened to the standard Christmas songs and as I listened I began to think that many of them are border-line heretical. This caused me to wonder if it was just me seeing heresy in everything (which some would say I do) or if they are genuinely quasi-heretical. I've continued to reflect on this and came to the conclusion that my descriptor of "many" might be a little bit of an over generalization. I haven't taken the time to sit down and analyze a great deal of them so I feel that 'many' is too strong of a word, but I do believe there are some songs that are seemingly heretical as well as, so I would argue, our larger conceptions of Christmas.

Let me explain.

Christmas is about the incarnation - God becoming human in the truest sense of humanity yet without sin. It is about Jesus Christ being truly human and truly God; 100% of both at the same time. Many of the heresies throughout Church history have been condemned because of errant thinking on the incarnation. Many of these heretics erred by over-emphasizing Christ's humanity at the expense of his divinity and it seems that an equal number of heretics erred by over-emphasizing his divinity at the expense of his humanity.

In protestant theology we seem to see both of these errant trends come to the surface. The arch-liberals deny the divinity of Christ while it seems (and here lies the point of the post) that many of the more conservative Protestants deny Christ's humanity (or at least minimize it) to emphasize his Divinity.

For example let us look at the song "Away in a Manger." I choose this song for a few reasons: 1) It supports my point - it's good to pick an example that supports your argument (or so I've been told). 2) It seems to me that although this isn't a song of vast theological content it encapsulates the themes of contemporary Christmas theology. 3) It's the only one that I can remember the words to off hand.

Now to the "heresy:" I don't think this is a horribly blatant heretical treatise against Christ's full humanity but I do think that traces of heresy are evident. Think with me how the infant Messiah is portrayed in this song (remember that this seems to be an archetype for most of our Christmas thinking). Jesus is viewed as peaceful and serene little child that doesn't cry, fuss or cause his parents any loss of sleep. Oh that cute little baby Jesus "no crying he makes." I am willing to grant that maybe Jesus was one of the babies that don't seem to cry at all when they are younger, but (and I am, for sure, no expert in babydom) isn't that the exception more than the rule. Isn't the rule for babies that they cry, they keep their parents up and they fuss. Maybe I'm grasping at strings for an example from a song but I think the assertions that baby Jesus never cried, never fussed, and never acted like a NORMAL BABY are all too prominent in our little Christian Christmas subculture.

I think it's good that we're saying Jesus was set apart from birth. Yes he was different, yes he was the fullness of God even while he was an infant, (emptied himself of "all but love" saith Wesley) but the nuance of our assertions of his divinity seem to make his humanity minuscule... is this not the beginning of heresy? It seems that we have characterized this first Christmas night into an image barren of any true humanity. Mary and Joseph are content and happy giving birth in a stable, and Jesus is cute, adorable, and doesn't act like any other baby.

I'm not trying to be a downer on Christmas but it just seems that the way we tend to think about and portray the first Christmas minimizes the humanity of it all. Our Christmas songs, our nativity scenes, and all the other trappings of the holiday seem to make Christmas more a time of myth and fantasy rather than the in-breaking of the divine into the real world.

Yes Jesus was a baby, one may argue that all babies are cute and thus was Jesus, one may also argue that Jesus was one of those peaceful babies, but to characterize Jesus' infancy so that resembles nothing like real infancy borders on heresy. This does not mean that I am willing to assert that Jesus sinned as a child or anything of the like. I am merely trying to assert that he was indeed FULLY HUMAN and FULLY GOD. He was incarnate without sin and suffered and died for us and for our salvation. Maybe our Christmas songs are fine, maybe they don't say anything heretical enough for us to kick them out of our hymnals, but this is not just a passing matter. We must strive to think rightly about the incarnation and the divine Godhead. For it is our thinking of this that shapes all of our other thoughts. Our moral lives, our social lives and the rest will be shaped by what we think of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Our obedience to the Holy Scriptures is directly corollary to our view of the God who speaks in and through those scriptures. This is why this isn't just a passing issue.

Christmas is over, but let us think hard next year (and at all times) about incarnation. Maybe we just need to readjust the lens through which we sing the Christmas songs, maybe we need to get rid of them, maybe we need a solution that is more outside of the box, who knows. All I know is that thinking correctly about the incarnation is paramount!!

Advent III: The final night

And now for the final installment of my advent musings.

I know I've missed a week and for anyone who actually reads and was disappointed I apologize. To be honest I've been very bad at my advent plans. I was absolutly dreadful at keeping my advent reading schedule, both in scripture and in devotionals, but I did continue the advent fasting and tried to focus my volitional 'christmas' music listening to only those songs that were adventy. Despite some consitency my advent planning and thinking came to a great hypocritical head today - I skipped church. Not only did I skip church, but I skipped it to attend a Buffalo Bills game.

No chastizement is necessary. Although I greatly looked forward to spending time with a good friend at the game (who obtained freakin sweet free tickets) I was almost sick to my stomach the whole day before (and of) the game at the thought of missing church on the last Sunday of Advent - especially when it falls on Christmas Eve. Despite my thoughts to the contrary I went to the game because I thought it would be wrong to bail on a close friend but I'm glad I went. Not only did I have a great time at the game but missing church gave me even greater zeal to attend our church's Christmas Eve service.

The way our church structures the Christmas Eve service is fairly unique (though individualistic) the sanctuary is dimmly lit and you can come and go as you please between the given times. There is music playing through the system quietly and you are encouraged to come, pray, read scripture, and meditate as a family or individual until you want to stop and then you can come forward to the front and the Pastor will serve you the Eucharist. Maybe it's not too individualistic, maybe I only conceive of it that way because I'm the only one in my family who goes... but alas I digress.

So in this time at the service I was able to finish my advent reading of Lamentations, through which the Lord spoke to me greatly. I don't really know how to recap it except to say that it is worth sitting down and reading in one sitting especially when read through the advent lens of expectation, longing, waiting, and promise of the second coming. God spoke mightily and it really strengthened and uplifted me. After reading Lamentations I spent some time in prayer, yet another thing that I have been dreadful at, and then read through the earliest creeds of the church - those found throughout the NT (in books like: Philipians, Hebrews, Ephesians, etc). I then capped this time off by reading the Nicene Creed and meditating on the incarnation, the Trinity, and the promised second coming in which he will come to judge the quick and the dead. My heart was so blessed. This may be one of the most focused and powerful Advent seasons I've ever had.

As far as what I've been thinking about posting for the last week before today's happening it would simply be: Maran atha. "Our Lord Come!"

I compiled a cd for myself of Advent songs and worship songs that are themed similar to Advent and listening to it just makes my heart cry out 'Come Lord Jesus!'

Other than that I don't really have profound to share. This little Advent experiment has been fantastic. Although I sucked at being disciplined through most of it, the fact that I tried to focus my thoughts even when I wasn't doing the readings helped to put Advent and Christmas in persepective. It was very good.

--------

Oh, I just rememebred something I was going to post earlier. The other day I was driving and turned on the radio and the first thing I heard on the Christian station up here was a song (albeit intended to be humorous) lamenting the fact that all the signs in the Mall are "Happy Holidays" and not "Merry Christmas." I promptly turned the radio off for the rest of the day while driving around delivering flowers and began to think about this. I came to the conclusion and I could be wrong, so feel free to add your two cents, that Christians have no right to lament the loss of Christmas phrasology.

We have no right when we do nothing different than the secular world. If we as Christian choose to ignore the Christian calendar, of which Christmas is a part, then we have no business decrying society. If we are going to ignore advent with which comes fasting, penitence, and prayerful longing, then what context do we have in which to place Christmas? Yes Christmas is a feast day (as are the days following it) but that does not give us the excuse to partake in cosumeristic whoremongering and party like its 1999 (to quote Prince). We are a people not of this world, and we are a people who are called to live and place oursevles in a world that longs for the Bridegroom. If we party the year away with the heathens then how can we have any context to truly and adequately celebrate any of the prescribed feasts of the Church Year. We cannot fully partake in Christmas unless we fully partake in advent. Likewise we cannot fully partake in Easter unless we prepare ourselves with Lent. And while these are man-made suggested and edifying, though not required seasons, how can we really ever fully partake in the second coming of our Lord and Savior if we have not become aquainted with the longing, unfulfillment, and brokeness that comes from being part of a world that is not our own?

I would write more but I have to get ready for the midnight service at the local UMC. I hope to write in the next few days concerning Christmas music and just some general things.

Remember Our Lord is Coming!! Come Lord Jesus!! Amen.

Peace and blessings,

Ben

Advent II

Ok this is going to be quick because I have finals to study for.

I have to confess that I'm behind on all of my readings for lent. I allowed frantic paper writing to dominate my life for the past few days and thus I don't have a lot to reflect on as far as the readings go.

I've been thinking about something concerning advent since I made the last post and then it was reemphasized by a conversation I had with my friend Tony. How do we find the right balance in the tension between focusing on the parts of history where we long for the Messiah to come (cf. my last post) and the fact that we are a people living in the light of the ressurection. Is it appropriate for us to sing "O Come Emmanual" and "Christ the Lord is Risen Today" on a sunday in advent? Each Sunday is indeed a ressurectional day is it not?

Is the tension resolved if we strictly focus on the second coming of our Messiah? I think part of it is resolved but not fully.

Maybe I should just learn to be content with the whole of the church year being paradoxical. In Advent we have the above tension. In lent we think of ourselves in a pre-easter tense while living in the post-Easter light, and in eastertide we remember before Pentecost yet we still practice the charisms bestowed upon us by the Holy Spirit who came in power on Pentecost.

So maybe the whole church year is paradoxical, maybe that's fine, that still doesn't negate the edification that comes with emphasizing the appropriate things for each season.

On a side note: I put all my christmas music on my computer and separated it into two playlists, one for advent and one for Christmas. I currently have 10 songs in my advent list and about 40 in my Christmas one. This includes having "O Come Emmanual" in there about 3 times by different artists. So when I get a chance I'm going to go through my worship songs and see which ones I can add to my advent list - songs like "Sing to the King," and "These are the days of Elijah." Although these aren't advent songs persay at a casual glance they might fit the theological themes and thus can be effectively used for advent. We'll see how it goes.

Blessings,

Ben

Some thoughts on Advent: Part I

I will try over the next few weeks to make at least a weekly post about Advent, and since Advent officially started yesterday - I thought today would be a good day to start.

I ran sound yesterday at an "Advent Vespers" choir concert put on by our "Singing Seminarians" (yes it is a lame name but that's what they call themselves) and after the concert JD (our Dean of the Chapel) made the comment to me that it was very Christmasy. I agree, we sang all the good Christmas songs: Joy to the World, the Hallelujah Chorus, O Holy Night, etc. But the point JD was trying, was not that it was Christmasy but rather that it wasn't adventy. Now this was certainly true - the only advent song that we sang was O Come Emmanuelle.

I'm not trying to criticize the Singing Sems. but I do think that their concert is indicative of the general praxis of the Church. We rush to Christmas, we ignore Advent, and for all practical purposes the child is already born. To be sure, Christ was born, suffered, died, was buried, rose from the dead, and now sits at the right hand of the Father, but in the sense of the Christmas season - the Church Year in which we place ourselves - he is not born of a virgin... yet. In the context of placing ourselves in the narrative of Christian history the Child is not born and the messiah has not come into the world. We are still longing, we are still in the dark, as opposed to the light - an image heralded during Advent.

This concept of rushing to Advent got me thinking. Wouldn't be more appropriate if we waited till after Christmas to turn on our lights or plug in our Christmas tree? How about music, wouldn't it me more theologically significant to only sing songs like " O come O Come Emmanuel," or "let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence" until Christmas and then break into songs such as: Joyful Joyful, O Holy Night and the like. Wouldn't it be telling if we stripped our churches instead of decorating them and then usher in the decorations on Christmas morning as a family of faith and truly Deck the Halls? It seems to me that a resounding answer to these questions is YES.

It's these thoughts that have helped me focus my scripture reading for advent. I'm reading through the book of Lamentations during this period. I know that lamentations may be typically associated with Lent, but I also think it may be appropriate for advent - especially if we read it with the thoughts that the Messiah has not yet come. Not only do we read Lamentations as work from the exile period where the people of God are displaced and not beholding the chief signifier of the promise, but they are also without the promised prophet like Moses and Messiah. The longing/morning is chief in this text and I think it may help us (read: me) focus on the absence of Messiah (read: Christ) and then truly experience the Joy on Christmas day.

Usually I'm burned out on Christmas music by Christmas day and don't want to listen to it anymore. I know it's mostlly unavoidable but I'm trying to use these thoughts to spur me on to not listening to Christmas music that is non-advent before Christmas. I think if I compiled the songs that are theologically advent orient from the 5 Christmas albums that I own I may be able to get 5 or 6 songs so I guess that will have to suffice. I may get sick of them, but I think this little experiment into advent will nourish my soul and prove to be life-giving.

If you want to read along with me I'm reading 5 verses of Lamentations a day and also reading two readers: Watch for the Light and Welcoming the Giver of All Good Gofts. Reflections for Advent. Excerpts from the Works of Fr. R. Cantalamessa. (note the second link is all I could find and it is on page 16 of the catalogue).

Well that's it for now, Like I said I'll try to post some advent thoughts on some of my readings or just random thoughts.

Blessings,

Ben

It's coming...Advent is almost here!

A couple weeks ago in church I found out a little something I didn't know about Advent. Advent is actually a time of the year for preparation and fasting. I bet most of you are just as surprised as I was when I found this out. How can advent be a time for fasting when we have fun music, great ammounts of cookies and desserts, lights, candles, and all the other wonderful things? It is now more certain than ever that our pre-Christmas celebrations look like and emphasize nothing like the church seasons ought to.

That brings us to the reason for this post: I think that I want to participate in a fast during this season of advent in order to help focus myself on the true nature of the season but I'm not sure. I think part of me being not sure is that I haven't had time to gear up for viewing the season this way. I have come to love the Great Fast (Lent) and I look forward to it all year so I'm not ignorant of the Christian practice of seasonal fasting but for some reason I'm having trouble parting with my regular advent ways.

Maybe it's because so much more is made of Christmas season in our society. Maybe it's because I haven't had time to ponder it or maybe it's another reason. Either way I'm still thinking hard about what to fast for Advent. This decision is both the joy and the curse of being a traditionally low-church protestant. The joy is that I can set my own boundries for the fast so that it is meaningful and allows me to take incremental steps toward greater sacrafices and the curse is that I have to make this deicision. Inhereting this low-church ecclesiology puts me at the center of the fast rather than us. It also causes me to find the delicate balance between being too strict in my fast and being too lenient. So this is the dilema. Do I set out on a path from which I cannot return and begin to place advent in a more historically celebrated context or do I allow my celebration of advent to be merely reflected in the knowledge of what it is about without allowing my body to partake in that knowledge. If I do fast what do I fast from?

On a side note I am really inspired by the Orthodox approach to this. Their fasting period is longer than our advent and it actually started a week or two ago. During this fast they fast from all meats and a few other things. I find this inspiring in that they fast from all meat during a time that overlaps with Thanksgiving. Talk about a challenge. It seems to me that the real challenge isn't so much the fasting, but rather the implicit message that fasting through a national and often familial holiday sends. The message is simply that the primary community unit is the church and that the true holidays are those that focus our hearts and minds on Christ our God.

This implicit message is truly the message that the gospel calls us all to embrace for our lives. Our allegiance is to God and his kingdom alone. While we may not need to forsake thanksgiving to show this; the mere fact that the members of this tradition align themselves with the historic church calendar and its fasts rather than the national, social, and familial one peaks loudly that the God is the object of obedience.

Please don't misunderstand me I am not calling all to an advent fast or even a lenten one. Although i think these seasonal disciplines are important I do not believe they are mandatory for all. Yes they are helpful insofar as we allow them to reveal to us the mysteries of the Godhead revealed through the church, and her year of services.

I'll take Potporri for 300, Alex

I'm striving to be a little more consistent with my blogging. I don't know how that will work itself out in the coming weeks as the due dates for papers seems to approach at light speed, but nevertheless I will try. In an attempt to not fail in this right after my quite long winded return (see "about time eh?" below) I offer up a short mess of random and somewhat unconnected topics.

Topic #1: Sexist language in sports.

As you all should know (and if you don't I'm wondering how well you really know me) I'm a huge Minnesota Vikings fan (that's an American Football team for those of you not in the US). Part of my rabid fandom consists of spending my free time (or time I spend procrastinating) surfing the internet for any sort of Vikings comments. In my recent internet travels I came across a Vikings blog entitled "Pacifist Viking" - how crazy of a title is that, since vikings are known for raping, pilaging, and burning.

All that to say that while I was on this site the other day I read an interesting take on sexist language in sports. I think that Pacifist Viking (I don't know his name) makes some good points. Although I don't remember using the phrase "man up" in recent years (specifically analagous to "suck it up") he causes me to think about sports cliches. This example made me think of the common basketball phrase "man up" as in play "man to man" coverage (I'm not a basketball expert and except for the Houghton Globetrotters, I loathe the sport - so if i'm using the phrasing wrong I aplogize). Thinking on this I am wondering how we proceed. I am all about gender inclusive language (unless it messes with God language) but it wasn't until now that I realized my double standard when using sports terminology. Does this mean that I have to start using comberson phrases like playing a "person defense" or he's in "person to person coverage"? Can I use man when the sports participants are only men, but must I use woman if the sport consists of women? Although, I doubt I'll really run into the latter case as I don't know if I've watched an all women's sporting event since high school. How does this practically work itself out?

One thing that I thought was very interesting was the experiment that he offers at the end of his post. Thinking about the TAG commercials in this light makes me dislike the product even more than I already do.

Either way I pass this site's article on to you for a short intersting take on sports language. There is also another post here that I found to be an amusing take on sports, total depravity and the prosperity gospel.

In fact, I just realized that I refered to the author of the blog as "he" throughout my whole post. I have no reason to believe it is a he aside from typical gender stereotypes and so I confess I am still working on my gender reconciliation.

Part 2: On Ted Haggard

By now I assume you all have heard about the scandal concerning Ted Haggard, and if you haven't then I feel truly honored that you are visiting my blog prior to visiting the websites of CNN, BBC, or Fox News.

Earlier tonight I was informed about this by a friend over IM and we were talking about it for a bit and here are some of my thoughts.

Sadly I don't know what my first reaction was. It was one of two things. 1) Poor Ted Haggard - Lord be with him. or 2) Oh no, now look at the black eye for christendom. I am truly ashamed that I don't know which was my reaction and am even more ashamed that it may very well have been the second. How heartless and unchristlike can I be?

I want to yell and scream and condem the pastor who allows herself or himself to be in this kind of mess, but then I realize the clique holds true: "there, but for the grace of God, go I" now to be fair I mean that in the general way - not the gay sex or meth way. But seriously I realize my weaknesses and I feel great pain for Haggard despite that fact that I undoubtedly dissagree with him on various theological things like ecclesioloyg, missiology, and sacrametology.

In fact from what little I do know I probably would have listed this man as representing a Christian paradigm that was the complete antithesis of mine. He pastored a large church and was a quasi-church growth guy (if not completley church growth), he was a vocal and popular Christian media voice, and he represented the religious right and was hyper-conservative political in its agenda. Despite all this I feel for Haggard, and pray that he finds healing in the Lord through this situation, whether he did anything or not, and I pray that the christians that looked strongly to him would refocus their faith from leadership to the Christ who leads.

While my heart and prayers go out I cannot help but to look at this situation as an observer and offer some thoughts.

1.) This is obviously not the first time a person in the church has fallen and regretably it will not be the last, however, it is clear that these fallouts become more and more problematic for the church in society as ministers feel the increasing need to become well known in the media. Yes, there will be fallout when ministers fail, but this fallout grows exponentially when are ministers and leaders are media icons. As my friend Greg Sigountos aptly said:

---------------------
"[this scenario is] a great case study. See what happens when you intertwine yourselves too closely with the world? Bang, you're ripe for being picked off, and we have a hypocrite bonfire. This is why pastors need to avoid celebrity at all costs... If there wasn't enough evidence against the celebrity pastor already, and how few, if any, can pull it off, maybe this adds one extra bit of incentive. Stay out of the spotlight- the Spirit worked just fine before the TV cameras existed."
---------------------

or as St. John Chrysostom says in his treatise On the Priesthood

---------------------
if a preacher "is a slave to the sound of applause, again an equal damage threatens both him and the people, because through his passion for praise he aims to speak more for the pleasure than the proft of his hearers...The man who is carried away with the desire for eulogies may have the ability to improve the people, but chooses instead to provide nothing but entertainment. That is the price he pays for thunders of applause....For in fact, if he has already been overtaken by the desire for unmerited praise, neither his great efforts nor his powers of speech will be any use....So a preacher must train himself above all else to despise praise...But if if he has not shaken himself free of it [love of esteem], he involves his soul in an intricate struggle, in unrelieved turmoil, and in the hurly-burly of desperation and every other passion."
---------------------

I quote Chyrsostom here not to make accusations against Haggard, as if he was quilty of violating Chrysostom's exhortations, but because these comments seem to apply to the problem of christian leaders becoming media whores. Ministers may indeed fall as has happened throughout church history. This is not the ideal, nor is it desireable, and the issues that arise around a fallen ministry should primarily be reconciliation, forgiveness, and restoration. As American ecclesiology has shifted from small local bodies to large mega-churches so has the focus shifted from quiet locally known pastors to massive media darling pastors. In fact I think one could make a case that the rise of the media star pastor is directly proportional to the number and growth of mega-churches. Now, because of our media-driven or at best media-recognized pastors our primariy concerns as a church is no longer reconciliation, forgiveness, and restoration, but rather how do we deal with the PR nightmare which this causes. Yes try to focus on the others, but we cannot help but deal with and be consumed with the PR fiasco that arises. Chrysostom's quote is just as aplicable to the churches of today as it is to the ministers of yesterday and today. To the church this quote speaks caution of seeking the approval of the masses. Should we be concerned with how they view us? Only insofar as they see our love for God, them and each other. Our hyper concern with putting a good face forward and offering solid entertainment is unbiblical and certainly uncharacteristic of true church for any age. We will never be able to fully ministry to the world if we are overly concerned with getting the right publicity or being seen in a favorably light. Churches as well as ministers should avoid the the rank of celebrity at all costs so that the message and the witness of the people of God can remain uncomprimised.

2.) One of the articles I read concerning this made the comment that Haggard has confessed his sins to the "overseers" of his church. I have to give Haggard tons of credit for this. He is following the biblical model and submitting himself to the biblical authorities. The question this raises has to do with confidentiality. What happens if for some reason this goes to court and his "overseers" are called into court to testify? We are all aware of Patient-Doctor confidentiality and Patient-Counselor, but what about Clergy-laity? Are his overseers obligated to divulge information that he shared to them in a confessional manner? What about if this was in a high church tradition like Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican? Would the confidentiality issue be different if the confession was done in a confessional, or by ordained members? It seems to me that the possible legal precedent that may be set concerning ecclesial confession has huge ramifications. If they allow these "overseers" to claim a specific confidentiality then what is to stop someone from confessing to any generic religious figure and claiming confessor confidentiality. Let us suppose that these overseers are not officiallly ordained and thus they force them to testify, what does this do for the low church independent church down the street - can the pastor of this church not hear confessions or do counseling without knowing he will have a legal obligation to testify? Does this mean that only ordained people can have this special relationship? If so what about those denomination that ordain elders - do they get this privelage? I dont think these thoughts are too clear, but it seems to me that this Haggard situation has huge legal ramifications if it goes to court for the confessional and counseling ministry of the church - especially in low-ecclesiological protestant churches.

Part 3: Book Excerpt

In preparation for one of my mid-term exams the other day I decided to do some reading. One of our books is: Religion and American Culture by George M. Marsden. I'm not done with the book yet because we only had to read half of it for the exam, but so far I would recommend it. The book is a good outlook on the development of religion in America. It reads much better than a dry account of facts which is most likely due to Marsden's asides that describe how the topic at hand has lead to a current phenomenon or other asides that seem a little preachy in nature. Below is one of the asides that I really liked and found to be the most though provoking.
------------------------
"The United States was the first modern nation systematically to shift public veneration of the government from veneration of persons to veneration of the nation and its principles. Soon the United States developed a set of rituals and symbols that bore a striking resemblance to traditional Christian rites and symbols but in which the nation itself was the object of worship. The flag, like the cross in Catholic churches, was a sacred object. Elaborate rules developed as to when and how it could be handled. Pledges to the flag arguably played the role of crossing oneself in a church. One pledged to a creed. The nation developed holidays (holy days) and its own brand of saints. George Washington, for instance, soon took on mythical qualities. National architecture and shrines provied centers for pilgrimages and worship. Some people have pointed out that three of the most popular shrines in Washington D.C. - those to Washington, Lincoln, and Kennedy - have designs that would be appropriate symbols for each of the three members of the Christian Trinity (the transcendent obelisk for the father, the personal presence of the martyred champion of national reconciliation and charity, and the eternal flame, for the spirit of service to country).... The United States, like all modern nations, demands unswerving allegiance from its citizens. It is to the nation in which one is expected to make the supreme sacrifice. Therefore in American wars, national loyalty has always been demanded above church loyalty." (pg 53)

and one that seems to relate to our celebrity ministers as metioned above

"[George] Whitefield's triumphant journey up and down the East Coast, preaching to large gatherings wherever he went, was one of teh first truly intercolonial events. Whitefield was the first "media star" in Ameican history. His medium was the pulpit, and he had immense skill with the spoken word. His tour anticipated a patter in American culture: Lacking long-established traditions and rituals, American have been susceptible to waves of popular enthusiasm for 'stars.' This pattern had its beginings in revivalism and remains a prominent dimension of American cultural and religious life." (pg 32)
--------------------------

I don't agree with the first quote 100% and I think the thought of the triune nature of the American monuments is a little bit of a stretch but nevertheless it does illustrate a good point. This is a good example of how Marsden gets a little preachy in his book, but I think his assertions are right on target. Personally I have not been able to say the pledge of allegiance for about 4 or 5 years. Once I really began to think of what I was doing I couldn't in good conscience continue to swear my allegiace to a country. My loyalty alone belongs to Christ and to his kingdom. I belong to the US insofar as I live here and they do not forcably violate my religious beliefs. I will not fight for them in a war and I will not pledge my allegiance to any earthly kingdom until the new heavens and the new earth appear and the Kingdom of God is revealed in its fullness on the earth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well, I think that's all that I have to write. I guess the post wasn't as short as I wanted it to be...oh well. Like I said I'll try to be more consistent in posting, but with the impending papers I may have to allow blogging to take a back seat for a month or two. Just incase you were wondering I am writing two major research papers for this semester. The topics for these papers are:

1. Sacramentology in the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings
2. The eternal subordination of Christ - looking through the lens of the early church fathers.

Blessings to you all and as usual thanks for bearing with my incoherent rambling.

~ Ben