Powers that be

Sermon for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany

Be subject to the higher powers? Can St Paul mean that? We have just remembered the dreadful events of the Holocaust and honoured those who suffered at the hands of a government committed to evil purposes. Surely, we need to stand up to evil rulers when they seek to hurt and destroy people? 

Does this mean that God gives power to evil governments?

[PAUSE]

This is a very difficult question. You might as well ask why God allows bad things to happen to good people. 

Certainly, when St Paul is talking about submitting to these powers and rulers, he has Jesus' words in mind. He hears "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's." St Paul also hears that, if you are compelled to carry a burden one mile, carry it to. He hears Jesus tell us that if someone wants to take our tunic then to let him have our cloak as well. We are to turn the other cheek. 

This is how we are to approach powers that try to control us: we submit to them but in a way that shows that we do so out of love for God.

But what about the Holocaust? That's not an easy question to answer but what lies behind it is where we see true power to lie. 

We trust God.

We trust God to bring good out of evil and he does.

One who embodies this attitude is St Maximilian Kolbe. He goes the first mile by submitting himself to being placed into Auschwitz. He goes the second mile by deliberately taking a condemned man's place in the gas chamber. He takes control back from the unjust power of the Nazis by choosing the same death that Our Lord chooses Himself. He chooses to trust God in the face of Evil and loses his life knowing full well that he will receive it again in the hands of God.

[PAUSE]

While we are fortunate enough not to live in times of obvious evil power, St Paul would bid us pay our taxes, follow the law, and respect our leaders. But rather than see their power over us as an enslavement, we should see it as an opportunity to draw closer to God Who makes the same choice as He walks with us on Earth. An evil government will fall never to rise, but God's authority is supreme and will triumph.

Why does God allow evil governments to arise? That may be unanswerable. If we trust God fully to bring good out of evil then maybe that question doesn't need an answer.

Happy birthday Diocese!

 

The Anglican Catholic Diocese of the United Kingdom is thirty today!

Arguing Ikonography

Sermon for the third Sunday after Epiphany

Social media is filled with arguments. They can be as trivial as "which was the best Doctor Who?" They can be as serious as "who do I vote for?" The internet is filled with comments and debates that get heated and, sometimes, quite nasty. Christians aren't exempt from this. Sometimes, Christians can be the worst at arguing. Indeed, it's not a new phenomenon, either. Some of the great Oecumenical Councils had periods of Christians throwing insults at each other. The story of St Nicholas punching the heretic Arius may not be completely accurate but there is probably a grain of truth present. 

Why do we get into arguments? Is it sheer competition that we like to win? Do we see ourselves as knights in shining armour ready to defend the truth from the infidel?

[PAUSE]

St Paul warns us not to become wise in our own conceits, nor to recompense evil for evil. This is something that gets easily forgotten in debates on social media. The reason is clear: in a social media argument, it doesn't look like you're arguing with a person. It looks like you are arguing with a machine. 

Even if this is true, we do have to think about why we are arguing in the first place, especially when passions begin to run high. For the Christian, presenting the Christian Faith and giving our testimony is vitally important. People need to hear the Gospel. There will always be those who do not want to hear the Gospel. There will always be those who want to stop the Gospel from being heard. One nasty little trick of the Devil is to make the argument seem more important than the person we are arguing with. There might come a point when, all of a sudden, we become the only one who can save the Faith. This might be true of someone like St Athanasius, but the one who is truly faithful to God will still see Christ in his opponent. 

The screen can rob us of seeing the face of Christ in the person we disagree with most. This is another trick of the Devil to take away our humanity and rob us of the image of Christ.

[PAUSE]

Ikons are so very important and sometimes we forget their significance. With an ikon, we see the Holy look back at us. We glimpse into Heaven itself and all its realities. They say a picture paints a thousand words but an ikon reflects what is true. And we must remember that we are ikons too. We reflect God's humanity because God partakes of it so that we might partake of His divinity. We must therefore always learn to see the face of Christ in our opponent. 

We need to stop wanting to win arguments and rather tell the truth without taking away the humanity of the one we're arguing with. Sometimes, it is best to step back and stop the argument before it begins to become heated, allowing our opponent the last word if necessary. Other times, it is better to imagine the face of our opponent. Better still is to have an ikon of Christ on or near your screen so that His eyes can see you and you can gaze back at His humanity and remember the humanity of the one you're arguing with. 

[PAUSE]

Producing an irrefutable argument is nothing in comparison with working the love and mercy of Our Lord in the world. The Gospel is found on the lips, in the hands and in the heart of those who love God. At all times, those outside the Church must be able to say of us, "see how these Christians love each other!"

Sometimes, in a argument, to lose is to win and he who wins shall lose. We cannot lose Christ if we see Him in the face of everyone we meet, even online.

St Agnes and our Children

 

How to reclaim purity and innocence once more.

DUK Birthday Preparations

 Very shortly, the little Diocese to which I belong will be thirty years old and I am truly grateful to God that we are still here and in rude health. Given our ups and downs, I see it as a true grace of God that we remain. I do my best to defend my Diocese from its many detractors but, truth be told, I am not very clever. Indeed, my lack of learning in Canon Law is quite embarrassing and something that I desperately need to improve upon. As a priest in the Anglican Catholic Church, I am often asked about my relationship with the “Anglican Communion” and I have to answer that, along with former Archbishop Rowan Williams, there is no longer a consensus as to what the “Anglican Communion” is. Bishop Williams likens it more to a (dysfunctional) family. So how do I understand the separation of the ACC from ECUSA in 1978? I shall try to give an answer, though I suspect I will be corrected by those who know better either by virtue of knowledge or by experience of actually being part of that wonderful Congress. In what follows, I use the word “heresy” in its technical sense of departure from the Catholic Faith. I have no wish to vilify any single human being in doing so and am content that, if one calls oneself Catholic I will recognise them as such until they demonstrate evidence to the contrary. For the record: as is very well known to my readers, I believe the attempt to ordain women to the sacred priesthood is heretical.

Let me begin at the middle of the beginning. The Continuing Anglican Churches owe their existence to Bishop Albert Chambers, former bishop of Springfield, Bishop Francisco Pagtakhan, Bishop Charles Boynton and Bishop Mark Pae. Although only Bishops Chambers and Pagtakhan consecrated Bishop Charles Doran, Bishops Pae and Boynton sent their consent via letter. Here it is to be noted that  Apostolic Canon I, together with evidence from St Bede in his Ecclesiastical History states that it is possible for valid Catholic Orders to be conveyed by fewer than three bishops onto the consecrand. This may be a departure from the norm for Post-Reformational Anglicanism but not for Pre-Reformational Anglicanism which the ACC also seeks to continue. If Anglicanism itself seeks to continue the Early Church, as evidenced in the 1549 Book of Common Prayer, and the Apostolic Canons are part of the Early Church then the Apostolic Canons are part of Anglicanism. If the ACC intends to continue Anglicanism (albeit as the legitimate continuation of the Oxford Movement) then the Apostolic Canons are part of the Continuing Anglicanism. Following the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, three bishops are the norm but the sacrament is certainly validly conferred by two. St Bede’s evidence shows how it is possible that a letter of consent (in this case by the Bishop of Rome) makes up for there being fewer than three. Given the political pressures and ill-health on Bishops Boynton and Pae for their inability to attend physically, their intention is clear and the Chambers’ succession is valid.

What about the vexed question of jurisdiction. Well, first, one may legitimately ask what is meant by “jurisdiction”. According to Rhidian Jones’ Handbook of the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England (T&T Clarke 2000) this is the power of governance. Is this power conferred on the bishop at his consecration as part of the sacrament, or is it merely a legal assent by the Church? Can a bishop lose that power by virtue of retirement which is a legal state and not a sacramental state?

Bishop Chambers certainly once possessed ecclesial jurisdiction as Bishop of Springfield. If the power conferred to him is part of the grace of the Sacrament of Episcopal Ordination which may not be repeated and places an indelible character on the recipient, then Bishop Chambers could never lose that power and this means that “Personal Jurisdiction” is meaningful for a Catholic and Anglican, since it is the Church’s recognition of that Episcopal Grace embodied in the person of Bishop Chambers. By what authority could this grace be laid aside if it is indelible?

If the power conferred is merely legal, then “Personal Jurisdiction” becomes the recognition of the authority of the bishop by the faithful. In the event of an heretical or schismatic bishop, the nearest orthodox bishop becomes the authority as attested in Canon III of the Oecumenical Council of Ephesus. This is in accordance with the definition of Catholicism as put forward by St Ignatius of Antioch and St Cyril of Jerusalem who understand the Church as being the people gathered around orthodox bishops faithful to the Catholic Faith. Any ecclesial body that possesses no orthodox bishop cannot be properly Catholic even though it may be faithful in its intention to worship the Risen Lord. In either situation, the idea of “Personal Jurisdiction” is well-defined and well-founded.

While the General Convention of ECUSA had legitimised heresy, not all bishops immediately consented to this act. Thus the Affirmation of St Louis contains the statement that:

“We affirm our continued relations of communion with the See of Canterbury and all faithful parts of the Anglican Communion. WHEREFORE, with a firm trust in Divine Providence, and before Almighty God and all the company of heaven, we solemnly affirm, covenant and declare that we, lawful and faithful members of the Anglican and Episcopal Churches, shall now and hereafter continue and be the unified continuing Anglican Church in North America, in true and valid succession thereto.”

This requirement was dropped when, in 1994, the See of Canterbury ordained women as priests for the first time. Incidentally, this is when Bishop Br John-Charles Vockler was received into the ACC in his episcopal orders and became its archbishop in due course.

Nonetheless, the clear intention of the then-ACNA-now-Continuum was to remain in communion with ECUSA as far as it could. Thus although Chambers et al, did not officially join the ACC, the ACC was still in communion with the orthodox parts of ECUSA. Thus there was no repudiation of jurisdiction on the part of Bishop Chambers et al. because members of the Continuum still saw themselves as part of the orthodox ECUSA. Likewise, with Archbishop Vockler, the legitimacy of the ACC was strengthened as the See of Canterbury fell to heresy and he was received into the ACC. Archbishop Vockler was the Chief Consecrator of Bishop Rommie Starks who, in turn, consecrated Bishop Damien Mead who ordained me nearly a decade ago.

This, to me represents the legitimacy of our walking apart from the Anglican Communion. Others may disagree but I must assume that they have their own understanding of Christian integrity. There are many Christians out there who do not see things the way I do but, as the Affirmation of St Louis states, we each have to take responsibility for the state of our souls. If I can be of any spiritual help then I will endeavour to do my best. I still remain committed to the growth and health of my Diocese and my Church which I truly love.

 

Humans differing

Sermon for the second Sunday after Epiphany

St Paul says to the Galatians, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." 

Does this mean that we are all interchangeable? If we are all one in Christ, does that mean it doesn't matter who does what, just as long as it gets done? 

Many people seem to think that when St Paul says this, we can conclude that anyone can be a priest because we are interchangeable. This cannot be right. If your wife were replaced with a man something would be wrong. If men and women are interchangeable then there can be no children because two men cannot have children, nor two women.

But if we are not interchangeable, how can we be one in Christ? There is only one Christ, so if we are one then our differences aren't really differences, are they? If our differences aren't really differences, then we must all be the same.

[PAUSE]

This cannot be what St Paul means. He says:

"Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness."

Clearly we are meant to do things and each human being has been equipped with different gifts to do the will of God. God has created us to be individuals but he has also created us to be in community. We are the water jars that stand in the kitchen at the wedding in Cana. We are all individuals but the water of our human nature becomes transformed into wine when we allow the same Holy Ghost to dwell in us. This is the beauty of the sacrament of our Baptism. We are baptised with water but Christ transforms that water with the same Holy Ghost that He breathes out onto His disciples. Although we are different jars, we have the same spirit dwelling in us. This doesn't mean that the Holy Ghost replaces our soul. It infuses our soul. The water is still in the jar but Christ adds to it to make wine in the same way as the tea-bag turns hot water into tea by infusing it.

And this is how we are united in Christ. We are different; we have different rôles to play; we have different gifts to do the will of God. But Christ adds to us His very self in order to unite us, like the hub unites the spokes of a wheel. There are differences in gifts, and differences in function, but the same Spirit of God. In Christ, man and women are united but not confused; slave and free are united but the world will view them no differently; Jew and Greek are united but the Jew will follow the Torah and the Greek his reason to worship God.

[PAUSE]

Only when we pass through into Eternity will we see how united we are with each other and appreciate how much we need and love each other. If we are to be united but remain different then we have to anticipate that we may be united with people who hurt us: we don't get that choice. We just have to trust that whatever God adds to us and to the ones who hurt us will make perfect reconciliation. We have to be open to this reconciliation. We have to forgive even as we are forgiven.

In Christ, our differences will be united, but not confused. We will be who we are, but better.

Unity in Trinity in Charity

 A reflection on St Hilary of Poitiers and I Cor xiii.

Keeping it in the family

Sermon for the Holy Family

Is there really a Holy Family? We might think of Jesus, Mary and Joseph as the Holy Family, but does Jesus think like that? 

It would appear not.

[PAUSE]

The Boy Jesus would prefer to leave His parents in a panic in order to visit the temple. It would appear that He has little regard for the love that Mary and Joseph have for Him. 

Indeed, it is also He Who says that, in order to enter the Kingdom of God, we have to hate our parents.

It would seem that the Holy Family is an illusion and that families are a necessary inconvenience to Salvation.

[PAUSE]

Yet, Our Lord is profoundly pro-family. Those who hear Him and follow His teaching are to be nothing less than His family. He teaches us about God our Father, and fathers are supposed to be part of the family. On the Cross, the Lord entrusts His Mother to St John. 

And Our Lord preaches about love - unconditional love. In a family, there should be no conditions on love: you are part of the family whether you like it or not - family relationships just are. For some, that is a truly horrible prospect: some families are dysfunctional to the point of abusive. Nonetheless, the Lord is clear: family does matter, but God has to be part of it.

[PAUSE]

Mary and Joseph are on a learning curve too. Parenthood is not something that clicks in the moment the baby is born. Just as children need to learn their place in the family, so do the parents. At twelve years old, Jesus is finally able to do what He needs to do and visit His Father in the temple. Mary and Joseph know that He needs to be with His Father, but they haven't understood what this entails. And yet, even if they don't quite understand, they roll with it and Jesus submits Himself to their authority as His parents. But they have learned that there are five persons in this family.

[PAUSE]

This shows the reason as to why families become dysfunctional. Each member of the family must be able to count the three persons of the Godhead within their family. Each member of the family has a role to play and each member of the family must submit themselves to that family. This means being obedient for the good of that family; it means allowing those with responsibility to be free to be responsible; it means recognising that  we are accountable to the family wherever we have responsibility. And that includes our obedience, responsibility and accountability to God.

In the Holy Family, Our Lord Jesus Christ demonstrates His obedience, responsibility and accountability to Our Lady and St Joseph and, more obviously, to God the Father Who, with the Holy Ghost, is as much part of the Holy Family as any other person. That family relationship is based on giving, honouring and loving.

[PAUSE]

Our families need to become ikons of the Holy Family. This can only happen with three extra persons being present with us in how we live our lives together.

A surprise Epiphany

 

Prepare to be challenged by the same Truth!

Naming names

Sermon for the second Sunday after Christmas

Have you ever wanted to change your name? How would you feel if someone changed it for you?

It is still common practice for women to adopt their husband's surname on marriage, though this is not as frequent as it once was. Many women feel that, if they do change their name, then they become the husband's property. The fact is that this is precisely how women have been treated. Not changing your surname says that you are no-one's property. It says that you are a human being in your own right, but at what cost?

[PAUSE]

Human beings are very good at taking a fine institution and breaking it. You might wonder if God is thinking, "this is why we can't have nice things!" The whole point of the surname is to bring people into one family. In that sense, there is ownership. If we belong to a family then that family owns us. That is not the same sort of ownership as owning a horse or a potato. It is ownership in the sense of belonging, of being an integral part. If we are in a family then we are looked after and we play our part in looking after others. There is a mutual recognition of each others' dignity and worth as a human being. You might all share the same name, but you are still an individual person within that family and you are loved for that. That's how it ought to be.

But "ought" isn't "is". Fallen humans mean fallen families.

[PAUSE]

Jesus wants us to be His family. He tells us to call God, Our Father. But, if you think about it, God Himself needs no name. If He had decided to create nothing then there would only be Him: no names are necessary when there is just you. Perhaps this is why He gives only the great name "I AM" to Moses, because God is the only one whose existence depends on nothing other than Himself. A name isn't necessary when there is only one of you. But then names aren't necessary when there are just two of you and you are always present to one another.

 Names only become necessary when there are three or more persons and you want to distinguish between them. To give a name to things does show some ownership or perhaps control over those things. We see this when God and Man sit down together and name the animals. Man plays a part in that because Man needs names. God doesn't. Man needs names because he cannot communicate with every individual directly at the same time. God can.

Until God becomes a man.

[PAUSE]

God is made Man and Man is limited to one place at a time. God suddenly needs names. The Father names the Son, Jesus and we have learned to call Him, Emmanuel - God with us. And Emmanuel gives us a surname of Christian to be part of one family. Many people think that Christ is Jesus' surname. It's His title for He is the Anointed One. But it might as well be His surname because, through Baptism, we are anointed into His family and receive the surname of Christ. 

God Who doesn't need to be named is given a name so that we can belong to Him and to each other. We are owned, not to slavery but to freedom. Our name exists precisely for other people and not for ourselves. How do we use our own names  to declare the name of God With Us?