Thu - January 4, 2007
Mistaken
I thought this was going to be the last entry in
this category. Then, I received this great little book for Christmas. It is a
collection of letters and stories of priests (mostly AngloCatholic) and other
Anglicans who have converted to Orthodoxy. I highly recommend the entire book,
and could go wild with quotes. Of course, it wouldn't take long to violate the
fair use provisions of copyright law. So, I'll just settle for a couple. The
reasons I like them is that they capture much of the thought processes I had to
address. They aren't necessarily the gentlest statements. The authors try, but
there is no gentle way to tell someone else they might be in the wrong place.
So, here is a quote from Fr. Olnhausen, a priest in
Wisconsin:
"My chief message to my dear Anglican friends is that we're alive and well and enthusiastic about living in the Holy Orthodox Church. I wish you were here, too. I respect and admire those of you who are suffering and fighting for the Faith in the Episcopal Church. For purposes not clear to me, God may have some reason for keeping you there. Who am I to pass judgment?
But isn't it obvious that Anglicanism itself has failed? Why do you want to preserve a system that has become a hindrance to the Faith? Instead of being consumed by trying to defend yourself from a jaded, increasingly post-Christian Anglicanism, you could be working to convert people to Orthodoxy, to a Church which defends and supports her members in the Faith."
Then, the following, from Fr. Reeves, a priest in Texas:
"The theological liberalism of the seminary was not the only difficulty for me. Another deeply disturbing fact was that Anglicanism, unlike the other major Churches of the Reformation, was not a confessional body. It had no Book of Concord, no Westminster Confession. Culture was its glue; the via media (the middle road) its hermeneutic. The Creed was but a relative statement of faith. A Church which allowed a Bishop Pike to function with a mere censure after denying the Virgin Birth, the Trinity, and the Resurrection was a Church which was more concerned about compromise than truth...
The Elizabethan Settlement still prevailed, whether the matters were political, doctrinal, or moral. Revelation, at least Anglican-style, was culturally determined. As the culture continued to decline, so did Anglicanism's message. Abortion, homosexuality, and inclusive language all determined the content, since the Church had to let the world set the agenda for her. The Anglican ethos was founded on a matter of political correctness in the sixteenth century. For me it became painfully obvious that political correctness remained its dominant feature four hundred years later."
"My chief message to my dear Anglican friends is that we're alive and well and enthusiastic about living in the Holy Orthodox Church. I wish you were here, too. I respect and admire those of you who are suffering and fighting for the Faith in the Episcopal Church. For purposes not clear to me, God may have some reason for keeping you there. Who am I to pass judgment?
But isn't it obvious that Anglicanism itself has failed? Why do you want to preserve a system that has become a hindrance to the Faith? Instead of being consumed by trying to defend yourself from a jaded, increasingly post-Christian Anglicanism, you could be working to convert people to Orthodoxy, to a Church which defends and supports her members in the Faith."
Then, the following, from Fr. Reeves, a priest in Texas:
"The theological liberalism of the seminary was not the only difficulty for me. Another deeply disturbing fact was that Anglicanism, unlike the other major Churches of the Reformation, was not a confessional body. It had no Book of Concord, no Westminster Confession. Culture was its glue; the via media (the middle road) its hermeneutic. The Creed was but a relative statement of faith. A Church which allowed a Bishop Pike to function with a mere censure after denying the Virgin Birth, the Trinity, and the Resurrection was a Church which was more concerned about compromise than truth...
The Elizabethan Settlement still prevailed, whether the matters were political, doctrinal, or moral. Revelation, at least Anglican-style, was culturally determined. As the culture continued to decline, so did Anglicanism's message. Abortion, homosexuality, and inclusive language all determined the content, since the Church had to let the world set the agenda for her. The Anglican ethos was founded on a matter of political correctness in the sixteenth century. For me it became painfully obvious that political correctness remained its dominant feature four hundred years later."
Posted at 11:12 PM
Wed - December 20, 2006
What Would I Do with $53MM?
That is the question raised over the significant
bonus paid out to the CEO of Goldman Sachs.
Others in the firm will be getting bonuses closer to $100MM, for what is, by any
reasonable measure, a year of stellar performance for the firm. I began to
think about how nice it would be to receive a bonus of that size. You know, in
that way that we do, sort of begrudging the individuals a bit. I mean, can you
just spot me a couple of mil? Part of this thought process also figures in the
feeling, completely unjustified as I know nothing of the people in question,
that they wouldn't spend it as "well" as I would - being that I'm so morally
superior to them.
You know, I would give 10 million to this charity, 10 million to that, etc., etc. It would all look really good, and I would comfortably keep probably about 10 million. And I wouldn't feel at all guilty about it, and, in fact, probably bask in the accolades of those around me for my philanthropic spirit. Therein lies the problem. I don't really need ten million dollars. I would very likely change my lifestyle. Buy a nice sports car and a beach house somewhere. And keep basking in the accolades. Oh sure, I might resist the urge to have my name put on a building somewhere, but that wouldn't change much about my attitude. Then I'm reminded of the story of the widow's mite , and realize how much that would apply to me - and frankly does now. I see people who are filthy rich, and am a bit jealous, really. I'm not motivated by the desire to do good, but rather to increase my abundance. I want more money, not because I don't have enough, but because I want to spend more (and already do, which is another story).
No, its a good thing that I don't have to really face the question of what would I do. Because I don't think I like the answer. What I would do with 53 million dollars, is probably be jealous of those who got the $100MM bonus. Then, if I received the $100MM bonus, I'd have to find something else to be jealous about.
You know, I would give 10 million to this charity, 10 million to that, etc., etc. It would all look really good, and I would comfortably keep probably about 10 million. And I wouldn't feel at all guilty about it, and, in fact, probably bask in the accolades of those around me for my philanthropic spirit. Therein lies the problem. I don't really need ten million dollars. I would very likely change my lifestyle. Buy a nice sports car and a beach house somewhere. And keep basking in the accolades. Oh sure, I might resist the urge to have my name put on a building somewhere, but that wouldn't change much about my attitude. Then I'm reminded of the story of the widow's mite , and realize how much that would apply to me - and frankly does now. I see people who are filthy rich, and am a bit jealous, really. I'm not motivated by the desire to do good, but rather to increase my abundance. I want more money, not because I don't have enough, but because I want to spend more (and already do, which is another story).
No, its a good thing that I don't have to really face the question of what would I do. Because I don't think I like the answer. What I would do with 53 million dollars, is probably be jealous of those who got the $100MM bonus. Then, if I received the $100MM bonus, I'd have to find something else to be jealous about.
Posted at 08:38 AM
Wed - December 13, 2006
Salvation, Orthodoxy, and the ECUSA
I've been following a relatively new blog lately, which I highly recommend. This
priest is truly inspired.
If you follow the link, you'll get directly to an article on the Orthodox view of salvation. There are some follow on articles, as well, on atonement, etc. One point that is made along the way is that the Westernized view of the angry God that needs to be placated by sacrifice is an unfortunate caricature, and the not the view of God worthy of worship. You'll have to read the blog and the comments to really enjoy the fullness of the conversation.
Now, what does the ECUSA have to do with this? Well, many of the liberals in the Episcopal Church get a lot of grief over their apparent inability to engage the nature of sin. More specifically, they focus on God becoming man (or to be PC, human), and seem much more interested in the relationship, the healing, the love. Unfortunately, they do this at the expense of the notion of our sinful nature. What I suspect is happening is that this is precisely a reaction to the medieval "angry God" bit. In fact, its in some ways incorrect to assign this notion to the middle ages as Marcion held that the God of the OT was a perpetually angry God. This led him to establish that the God of the NT was an entirely different God. I think in many ways that modern liberals have followed suit, and have created a new God that is more consistent with the Christ they see in the NT.
So, in some ways, the modernists are being Orthodox. They rebel against the construct of placating the angry God. Unfortunately, in so doing, they throw the baby out with the bath water. They forget that sin is very real, and that is separates us from God. Not because God kicks us out, but rather because that is where we place ourselves. It is unfortunate that at precisely the time when modernism was rearing its head in this country, Orthodoxy was not readily available to provide answers.
If you follow the link, you'll get directly to an article on the Orthodox view of salvation. There are some follow on articles, as well, on atonement, etc. One point that is made along the way is that the Westernized view of the angry God that needs to be placated by sacrifice is an unfortunate caricature, and the not the view of God worthy of worship. You'll have to read the blog and the comments to really enjoy the fullness of the conversation.
Now, what does the ECUSA have to do with this? Well, many of the liberals in the Episcopal Church get a lot of grief over their apparent inability to engage the nature of sin. More specifically, they focus on God becoming man (or to be PC, human), and seem much more interested in the relationship, the healing, the love. Unfortunately, they do this at the expense of the notion of our sinful nature. What I suspect is happening is that this is precisely a reaction to the medieval "angry God" bit. In fact, its in some ways incorrect to assign this notion to the middle ages as Marcion held that the God of the OT was a perpetually angry God. This led him to establish that the God of the NT was an entirely different God. I think in many ways that modern liberals have followed suit, and have created a new God that is more consistent with the Christ they see in the NT.
So, in some ways, the modernists are being Orthodox. They rebel against the construct of placating the angry God. Unfortunately, in so doing, they throw the baby out with the bath water. They forget that sin is very real, and that is separates us from God. Not because God kicks us out, but rather because that is where we place ourselves. It is unfortunate that at precisely the time when modernism was rearing its head in this country, Orthodoxy was not readily available to provide answers.
Posted at 10:37 AM
Tue - December 12, 2006
Having Some Fun
With the Intel Macs comes a tool known as
ComicLife, which allows you to do things like this (I used Gimp to cartoonize
the photos, but ComicLife to set the pages and do the words,
etc.):
Posted at 09:59 AM
Sun - December 10, 2006
Bah Humbug
Okay, time for what is an annual grump for
me.
One thing you can't seem to escape, even in Orthodoxy is the unfortunate impact of the secular Christmas on the parish. Historically, the Orthodox Church fasts throughout the period leading up to the Nativity (that is from November 15th until the 25th of December) as a means of both preparing for incarnation of the Lord and for his second coming. Realistically, the big feast is the Epiphany/Theophany on January 6th. If you're Old Calendar, Christmas doesn't even happen until January 7th - so there is probably a little bit less confusion.
So, what did we do today during the preseason of the Nativity (known in the West as Advent)? Well, pretty much the same thing that we would do at our last Church - have a Christmas Pageant. To make matters worse, the Church was decorated with Poinsettias and red ribbons adorned the outside. Then, they were to have a Christmas luncheon, complete with Santa Claus!
This is likely the result of Greek immigrants a long time ago, seeking to fit in with the American culture. Unlike with Lent and Pascha, where there is a significant number of special services etc, the Nativity was never so significant that anything like it sprung up around it to offset the crass commercialism of America. I don't begrudge people the desire to celebrate and have fun, but frankly the loss of the penitential period before the Nativity reflects the protestant notion that we need do nothing with respect to our salvation. The concept of the ascetical struggle, and of Christianity as a process of cure , is missing entirely from the protestant tradition, so there is no point in periods of preparation. What was most upsetting of all, was that this pageant was taken from some protestant source, and so the concluding speech had the usual heresies about just accepting Jesus in your heart and you'll live with him in heaven forever.
Well, its a good thing that I have my own collection of faults and sins that far outweigh this unfortunate event. I should really not be so much angry as disappointed because this habit of ignoring the preparation period will lead so many astray. Perhaps our new priest will slowly make changes in this custom. We can only pray.
One thing you can't seem to escape, even in Orthodoxy is the unfortunate impact of the secular Christmas on the parish. Historically, the Orthodox Church fasts throughout the period leading up to the Nativity (that is from November 15th until the 25th of December) as a means of both preparing for incarnation of the Lord and for his second coming. Realistically, the big feast is the Epiphany/Theophany on January 6th. If you're Old Calendar, Christmas doesn't even happen until January 7th - so there is probably a little bit less confusion.
So, what did we do today during the preseason of the Nativity (known in the West as Advent)? Well, pretty much the same thing that we would do at our last Church - have a Christmas Pageant. To make matters worse, the Church was decorated with Poinsettias and red ribbons adorned the outside. Then, they were to have a Christmas luncheon, complete with Santa Claus!
This is likely the result of Greek immigrants a long time ago, seeking to fit in with the American culture. Unlike with Lent and Pascha, where there is a significant number of special services etc, the Nativity was never so significant that anything like it sprung up around it to offset the crass commercialism of America. I don't begrudge people the desire to celebrate and have fun, but frankly the loss of the penitential period before the Nativity reflects the protestant notion that we need do nothing with respect to our salvation. The concept of the ascetical struggle, and of Christianity as a process of cure , is missing entirely from the protestant tradition, so there is no point in periods of preparation. What was most upsetting of all, was that this pageant was taken from some protestant source, and so the concluding speech had the usual heresies about just accepting Jesus in your heart and you'll live with him in heaven forever.
Well, its a good thing that I have my own collection of faults and sins that far outweigh this unfortunate event. I should really not be so much angry as disappointed because this habit of ignoring the preparation period will lead so many astray. Perhaps our new priest will slowly make changes in this custom. We can only pray.
Posted at 02:30 PM
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
Archives
XML/RSS Feed
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Published On: Jan 04, 2007 11:40 PM
Published On: Jan 04, 2007 11:40 PM