Calling the un-tied!

Homily preached at Eltham College on 5^th and 12^th October 2012 following the Ordination to the Diaconate.

My first homily to the school after my ordination as Deacon.

It’s that little voice again.

You, know the one.

The alarm clock has just rung
         and the little voice is telling you
                “stay in bed a little longer,
                         just a little longer.
                               You’ve got plenty of time.”

The calling of that little voice
            is very persuasive,
                     and so another five minutes in bed
                             seems a perfectly reasonable decision.

Of course five minutes easily become half an hour.

When you realise you’re late, you’re up like a shot.

You’ve gollopped down your Chocolate Cheerios,
             cleaned seven of your teeth,
                    thus giving the mirror a spray tan with Colgate
                          and shot out of the house faster than
                                       Prince Harry from the billiards room.

However, you’ve made it in to the College on time
          thus avoiding that disapproving scowl of the Senior Master
                   reserved especially for latecomers
                                and detesters of Shakespeare.

As you catch sight of yourself
          in the reflection on a window,
                   you notice to your horror
                          that you’ve forgotten your tie!

It goes without saying
          that you happen to bump into each and every member of staff,
                  each of whom questions you
                           about your lack of tie.

Before you are issued with a spare tie
        which looks as if Groundskeeper Willie has used it
               to tie up the compost heap to keep it from escaping,
                           an explanation is demanded of you. 

What then do you say?

 The lack of a tie always demands an explanation.

[PAUSE]

Listening to a call of one of those little voices in your head
         can make a major difference to your life.

The mind is a warehouse for the Butterfly effect.

Just listening to what those voices say
             can make the difference between
                    studying Chemistry at Oxford
                          and Economics at Warwick,
                                  or even prancing about the stage trying
                                            to impersonate the Rizzle Kicks.

 Some perfectly ordinary blokes
         even find themselves called to be Deacons
                     in the Anglican Catholic Church.

[PAUSE]

Called?

Does that mean the onset of madness, hearing voices?

 In some way, we all “hear” voices in our heads
                – little chattering things that give us ideas
                             and suggestions from the depths of our minds.

We sometimes find ourselves presented
            with strange impulses that seem to come from nowhere. 

“Go on, have a bacon sandwich.”

 “Go on, play five more minutes of Assassin’s Creed.”

“Go on, trip up Fred as he runs past.”

 “Go on, don’t buy Drake’s latest album,
          get One Direction’s instead because Harry looks fine.”

Some of these voices do actually give you
            good ideas and spur you on to greater things.

 “Why not try out for the first XV?”

“Why not Oxbridge?”

 “Why not ask for help with your chemistry homework?”

Indeed, many people have gone on
           to do great things because of listening to
                     some insistent impulse deep within them.

But! Other voices are less so.

 “Why not put off revision to the night before the exam?”

 “Why not stick your finger in the Bunsen burner?”

 “Why not get that tattoo of Harry Styles on your arm?”

 With all this chattering inside it is often difficult
          to separate the good voices from the bad voices,
                  especially when some voices are making you consider
                            some of the great choices in your life.

There’s no point in trying for Oxford
           if you know in your heart of hearts
                  you aren’t going to make the grades,
                      but how do you find out
                            what’s in your heart of hearts
                                in the first place?

 Likewise, if you know that Hockey is your game
         and not rugby,
                  trying out for the first XV might seem rather daft.

 Then again, it might be the best decision of your life!

You need time to consider what these voices are saying.

 

 There has to be careful listening,
          consideration of all the consequences
                   and whether this decision is right for you.

For the Christian,
            there is the added belief that God is calling you.

For Moses, the call comes
     in the form of a voice from a burning bush.
 
For the prophet Elijah it is a still, small voice.

 For the Prophet Samuel,
          there is a voice calling him in the middle of the night.

God’s voice will be one of the many
        that we hear in our lives
                  but it will not necessarily be a loud call.

It is highly unlikely that your mobile will ring
        and the voice of the Divine will
           bellow the answer down the phone.
             “Become a Deacon!”

The fact is that we are simply not likely to receive
           dramatic calls of Biblical proportions.

We are more likely to hear our call
         in human voices or find an internal sense
             of purpose or passion
                  that convinces us that we are meant to do something.

For the first Christians
       such as St Peter, St James and St John,
              the call comes from an itinerant Rabbi,
                       a teacher who was influences the world
        with common sense teaching and yet
                     suffers an agonising death on the cross for it.

St Benedict is called to transform peoples’ lives
          through monasticism and his rule is still used today.

 It is St Benedict that we have to thank
          for the system of schooling that we have today.

Blessed Theresa of Calcutta is called to feed the poor in India
                    and her work continues long after her death.

All of these receive what they perceive as a call from God. 

For each of them
      there is a long period of listening
            to the voices around them.

[PAUSE]

Like all of these folk,
          you too have decisions to make in your life
                     based on who you believe yourself to be.

You will need to take time and find space
            to listen to all the voices that you hear in your life.

The ideas that are good for you will persist.

These are the voices that are not satisfied
         with anything superficial
              but create a passion
                    or a nagging insistence
                         at the very heart of your being.

Your calling will be something
        that will both exhilarate you
               and frighten you at the same time,
                     but it will be something that will transform you
                               into the person you want to be.

Answering the call takes time,
       a good ear,  
             wise companions,
                  and much patience.

How exactly are you going to discern your calling?

 

A Questionable God?

Sermon preached at Our Lady of Walsingham and St Francis on the Eighteenth Sunday after Trinity.

 You make your way across the floor to the black chair. As you sit in it, sinking slowly into the upholstery, you feel the bright spotlight hot in your face. Through the light and out into the darkness, you can just about make out the face of your inquisitor. Name? Occupation? Your specialist subject?

What would your specialist subject be on Mastermind?

[PAUSE]

There are some people that thrive with having questions fired at them left, right and centre, but for most of us, it’s an ordeal. Think of those called to give evidence in law courts. While the media rejoices in making the courtroom dramatic and even glamorous, the truth is that it is not as fascinating as one might be led to believe. However, the witness must still answer every question put to him by both the prosecuting and defending counsels. Why is it such an ordeal? If we’re telling the truth, then surely there isn’t a problem. We just answer the questions honestly, and we are allowed to step down and leave.

Things, of course, are very different if you are not just the witness but rather the one on trial too. In this case, you are afraid that one wrong answer will send you to gaol. That’s a problem far worse than not knowing the principal currency of Vietnam at Mastermind. The whole interrogation becomes a deadly game between you and your accuser who is trying to trap you into convicting yourself. How much better if you were able to silence him?

[PAUSE]

These days we face a very similar problem from a more aggressive and anti-Christian society. Have you ever had someone ask you some difficult questions just in order to catch you out? “How can you believe in God. You can’t see Him?” “There’s no evidence for God, why do you still believe that rubbish?” “Aren’t you sexist for not letting women be priests?” and of course the biggie, “If there is a loving God, then why all this suffering in the world?”

St Peter may remind us to be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear. This is fine, but some of these questions have been argued by some very wise philosophers, so how on earth can we ordinary folk possibly answer them?

[PAUSE]

It’s clear that there are and always have been people out to discredit Our Lord’s teaching by trapping him into saying something that either is outright blasphemy or that shows him up to be a fool. They watch him like a hawks looking for some gap in his teaching so that they can swoop down and catch him out!

“Master, which is the great commandment in the law?”

THE great commandment? You might as well ask to sum up someone’s entire life in one single word, to teach an entire law course in half an hour or fit an entire rose garden into a flowerpot.

This is not a genuine enquiry. You can tell simply by the way it’s asked that he is trying to force the Lord into saying something foolish. If Jesus were to pick just one of the Ten Commandments and proceed to justify His decision, then the Pharisees would say, “well, what about the other nine? Isn’t that important enough?” In fact, the Rabbis around Jesus are deeply divided as to which Commandments are greater and which are lesser. If Jesus were to answer one way or the other, then it is going to cause an almighty ruckus among the Jews, and Jesus would be caught for stirring trouble.

Jesus is not taken in for a moment. He does not launch like the Pharisees into some great speech into what makes a commandment great. He puts the Pharisees and Sadducees to silence by careful quoting of Scripture: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. This is Deuteronomy vi.5, one of the books of Moses revered by the Pharisees. But Our Lord doesn’t stop there! Without drawing breath or pausing so that the Rabbis can jump in and say another word, we have the second commandment. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. That’s Leviticus xix.18 Another book revered by the Pharisees. In one fell swoop Our Lord has not just answered the question, but given a great guiding principle for human life

Before they can even reply to this, Jesus turns the tables. He asks them a question from their very own scriptures, and they are stumped. They cannot answer.

[PAUSE]

How can we answer the big questions of Life? It seems that the people of this world want Christians to answer all the questions in one short sentence. It may not even be possible for Our Lord to give us a verbal answer to all the big questions in one short sentence. After all, the Lord Himself says, “If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” We do not even understand the language of our own reality to begin to understand the language of God’s knowledge.

That’s not to say that the Lord cannot give us an answer to the problem of Evil. It is the very Life, Suffering and Death of the Lord Jesus that answers the question but not in a way that leads to an earthly answer and His Death is the inexpressible, wordless, unutterable “No” of God to all things Evil and “Yes” of God to Humanity.

Yes, we may be occasionally be stumped by the questioning of those who hate Christianity. We must give the best answer that we can, but not allow ourselves to be pressured into thinking that because we can’t answer a question, our Faith is worthless. Quite the contrary, how can so great a faith be expressed in words alone?

Deaconed: a grammatical exercise.

Is "Deacon" really a verb, or should one always resort to the proper grammar of "making someone a Deacon"?

You can't go wrong with proper grammar unless you are communicating with those who do not understand proper grammar in the first place. However, I'd like to make a case that being Deaconed is at least a very spiritual proper grammar.

The root of the word Deacon is "kinesis" from which we get the word "kinetic". The word is based fundamentally on the idea of movement, being in motion, doing. Think back to the Early Church with Bishops being virtually inseparable from their Deacons. The Bishop, the spiritual father of the community bids something happen and the Deacon puts it into practice. The Deacon throws himself into motion to ensure that the work of the Church happens well and in good order at the direction of the Bishop and then to the Bishop's deputies who are now what we know as our priests. For the Church, the Diaconate represents the sense of purpose of the Church being put into action. As ikons of Christ the servant, Deacons demonstrate by their ordination the sanctity of God's work in the world.

The modern Church has practically lost its Diaconate by delegating its work to all and sundry. While many church workers are well trained and dedicated to their tasks, their lack of ordination belies the lack of sacramental sanctity, the Real Presence of God in the world. It's true that Readers, Pastoral Assistants, Evangelists and Communian Assistants et c do some marvellous work, and have their services of inauguration and installation, but these are not services of Sacrament. There is no indelible mark of Holy Order etched into their souls.

For many lay folk, this is a good thing. They may be able to do a Deacon's work, but they are called by God to live as Christians in the lay field. They perform their works of service to the greater glory of God. However, the ordination of a Deacon is about the Church and the Sacramental life of the Church. Deacons and Priests are given the title "Reverend" but this does not refer to the person but rather back to Christ who is represented in the Deacon and the Priest in the manner of an ikon. A church that loses its sense of sacrament quickly loses its sense of the Reality of Christ present within its community.

So, from a spiritual point of view, "to be Deaconed" makes much sense when one is given a Divine Mandate to become a verb for Christ. Thus "to Deacon" at Mass is also part of the grammar of the spirit when the Divine activity participates with human activity in bringing God and Man into a Mystical union. We shouldn't then be too quick to insist on good Grammar

On a personal note, I am very grateful to all those who have wished me well following my ordination last Saturday. I may have been on a long journey to get where I am now, but I rather feel myself to be at the beginning of a longer journey who knows where. However, now I have folk with whom to share much of this journey and I am grateful for their kindness.

Francis and the Diaconate

Lord, make me an instrument of Thy peace;
where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,
grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood, as to understand;
to be loved, as to love;
for it is in giving that we receive,
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.
Amen.

This prayer, attributed to St Francis of Assisi, doesn't actually date before 1912. That's not to say it isn't a Franciscan prayer. From what we know of this colourful and yet simple man, these words could easily have poured from his heart. These words are perhaps overused by popular spirituality. Yet they are worth reflecting on.

Can we honestly pray this prayer in full?

Lord, make me an instrument of Thy peace;
where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, let me sow pardon;
where there is doubt, let me sow faith;
where there is despair, let me sow hope;
where there is darkness, let me sow light;
and where there is sadness, let me sow joy.

The question that is now posed to us is how we go about our lives as this instrument of the peace of God. There is pure activity here: a Quietist would be dreadfully uncomfortable praying this prayer because it speaks of human activity that does the will of God.

Our Christian lives abide in a great tension between being and doing, and this tension has indeed gone some way to splitting the Church. Perhaps it's fair to say that being isn't a passive activity either but rather a way of communicating that being to others. While there is such a disfigurement in the human condition by which we are drawn to sin rather than sanctity, human beings are still bearers of the image of God Himself. It is something which every human being has in common with every other - even with our worst enemies!

We cannot get away from God in ourselves. In the 139th Psalm, the Psalmist demonstrates that whether we go up into heaven or into Sheol, or to the East or West, we cannot get away from God. God is within! Not spatially, but beyond what we understand as space. After all, in God we live and move and have our being.

Whether this is a prayer by St Francis or not, we can still understand the depth of his awareness of God in all things. Take the Cantico di fratre sole from which we get the hymn

All creatures of our God and King
Lift up your voice and with us sing,
Alleluia! Alleluia!
Thou burning sun with golden beam,
Thou silver moon with softer gleam!

Refrain

O praise Him! O praise Him!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!

 

Thou rushing wind that art so strong
Ye clouds that sail in Heaven along,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou rising moon, in praise rejoice,
Ye lights of evening, find a voice!

Refrain

 

Thou flowing water, pure and clear,
Make music for thy Lord to hear,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou fire so masterful and bright,
That givest man both warmth and light.

Refrain

 

Dear mother earth, who day by day
Unfoldest blessings on our way,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
The flowers and fruits that in thee grow,
Let them His glory also show.

Refrain

 

And all ye men of tender heart,
Forgiving others, take your part,
O sing ye! Alleluia!
Ye who long pain and sorrow bear,
Praise God and on Him cast your care!

Refrain

 

And thou most kind and gentle Death,
Waiting to hush our latest breath,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou leadest home the child of God,
And Christ our Lord the way hath trod.

Refrain

 

Let all things their Creator bless,
And worship Him in humbleness,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Praise, praise the Father, praise the Son,
And praise the Spirit, Three in One!

Refrain

Perhaps we can see why the prayer to be an instrument of God's peace is so Franciscan. It tries to forge the connections between human beings. We cannot be truly human if we seek only things to happen to us, but rather if we make things happen for others then is our true humanity exposed.

Of course, biologically, we share much with the animal kingdom. We may indeed have an irrevocable affinity with God's creation, but we go beyond it with that reasoning that asks "why?" and that questions our very being. This does not mean we can ever separate ourselves from either the animal kingdom nor from our affinity with the angels. God's Creation is a whole. Human beings are called into stewardship to take care of this world. It is fair to say, we are not doing the greatest job.

The moment we realise that we should not expect the world to come to us, the closer we are to finding God within ourselves. We seek first the kingdom of God by the observation of His rule and all good things are added unto us as we perceive the truth of what God has done in His Creation. Then with a greater understanding of His work, we find the true peace of God which will pass our understanding.

The truth is we can only find God's peace if we are prepared to be instruments of it. But what will we sow?

Fruits of the biological machine?

Sermon preached on the Fourteenth Sunday after Trinity, 9th September 2012 at Our Lady of Walsingham and St Francis

As you walk down Rochester High Street,
 just before you reach the turn off to the Corn Exchange
you see a pillar, about 13’ high and 2’ wide.

 On top of the pillar
 you see a man dressed in rags and tatters,
hair unkempt,
long straggly beard.

It’s clear that he’s been there some time.
 Of course, you’re interested.
 “Hello!” you shout, “greetings friend!”

 The chap looks down
and decides that you are worth
 breaking his silence for.

 “Hello down there!”

In the exchange of introductions
 you find yourself introduced to St Simon Stylites,
 the saint famous for spending
a great deal of his life doing
what you see him doing
– standing on a pillar all day and all night.

Of course, you naturally ask him why.

 Simon explains,
 “I’m mortifying my flesh
so that I can live in the Spirit.”
Mortifying his flesh?

That sounds positively barbaric!
 Something that went out in the dark ages!
 Does this really do anyone any good?

[PAUSE]

We tend to cringe at the thought
 of any form of over-exuberance in this country.
 So someone  standing on pillars,
wearing hair shirts,
 or deliberately beating themselves up
with whips and chains
in order to discipline their bodies
are people that may horrify us,
or at least make us cross the road.

We often regard folk like that
 as being in desperate need of psychiatric help and a wide berth!

 Then again, most folk in this country
find the idea of a Lenten fast as something
 too enthusiastic or obsessively religious.

 It seems terribly overmuch even
 to go without something for 40 days.

What’s wrong with going along
 with what our bodies tell us to do
rather than treat them so harshly?

Many biologists tell us that
Mankind is nothing more than an intelligent ape
– a biological machine.

If this is so
then this would explain our natural desires,
the need to eat,
to sleep,
to mate
and to avoid pain.

Every living organism has these needs
and so it is quite reasonable for human beings
to have instincts for
eating,
sleeping,
mating
and avoiding pain.

This is why it appears unnatural to go in for fasts,
 to say prayers in the middle of the night,
 to live lives of celibacy
or even to go in for acts of physical endurance.

So, why do people balk
at this self-discipline of the religious
in the light of the Olympic Games?

 After all,
athletes withdraw from
eating, sleeping, and many other things
 and put their bodies through some terrible pains
 to become more than physically fit
to achieve something.

To become an athlete is something that our society praises.
Such folk get knighthoods
and honorary doctorates for winning a race,
but people standing on pillars or spending hours
 in prayer and fasting are regarded
as cranks and crackpots
even if the same people
go on to help those in need.

 But then Athletes win Gold medals, don’t they?

What does the self-disciplined Christian get?

[PAUSE]

It is quite clear that we are more than just biological machines.

Our athletes demonstrate
that there are things in life worth striving for
 and that we have things to prize
beyond the basic maintenance of our bodies.

We have other sensations too.

A biologist might ask, “such as what?”
Well, St Paul would say:
 “love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness,
goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.”

If you’ve ever had to feed a cat who hasn’t eaten
for half-an-hour,
you’ll know that cats can’t do patience.

There’s certainly no temperance
with Bonobo Chimps,
David Attenborough will tell you that! 

And yet we know that human beings
can be just like animals too.

 Look at the ten lepers that Our Lord heals.

Nine of them care only
that their misery is relieved and go away.

There is no need for gratitude
when all you are concerned about is
 the continuation of the basic biological necessities.

 It is the one who looks beyond
his physical comfort to see God
 who finds himself truly healed. 

He is healed at the level of his spirit as well as his body.

He is a human being made whole.

Christians aren’t disciplining
 themselves for some physical,
palpable recognition or achievement.

 We are cultivating our awareness
 of the spiritual which
 is intensely difficult in a world
biased towards the physical.

In order to be aware of the health of our spirit,
we have to turn away our attention
from the constant crying
of our bodies to be satisfied.

We hear St Paul remind us that
 “the flesh lusteth against the Spirit,
and the Spirit against the flesh:
and these are contrary the one to the other:
so that ye cannot do the things
 that ye would.”

 He is telling us that
 there is nothing more defeating
to the health of our spirits than constantly sitting,
fat and contented,
watching “Murder She Wrote”
on the telly.

We cannot become aware of God
whose existence is not material
 if our lives are constantly focussed
on the material.

 [PAUSE]

Of course,
our bodies do need food, sleep, love and healing,
 and for their maintenance
we need to take care of these temples
of the Holy Spirit.


But if we want to grow the fruits of the Spirit,
if we want to cultivate
 “love, joy, peace, long-suffering,
 gentleness, goodness, faith,
meekness, temperance”,
then we have to struggle
and experience some pain caused
by denying our bodies the comforts
 that they all too readily receive these days.

[PAUSE]

If we are not aware
 in ourselves of our struggle
between our flesh and our spirit,
then one of them has clearly won the battle.

Flesh or spirit, which one is it?

Communicating Catholicism

The trouble with adjectives is that they can become malleable in meaning. I'm yet really to get into the philosophy of nominalism and discussions about what it means to mean something in my amateur sojourn through the philosophical universe. I notice from Fr Hart's blog that there is a big discussion about the confusion as to what "Catholic" means. From Anglican Papalist quarters, there is the question of what it means to be Catholic when one isn't in communion with the Pope. Indeed when many people hear the word, their mind immediately leaps to Roman Catholic.

Now, the Holy See officially denies the appellation "Roman Catholic" because it believes itself to be THE Catholic Church and all who refuse to be in communion with her to be non-Catholics. Yet for those outside, particularly in the Orthodox and Anglican Churches, the "Roman" epithet is quite reasonable because of the affiliation of the Holy See with the Patriarch Bishop of Rome. It is possible that one could hear of the Antiochene Catholic Church or the Alexandrian Catholic Church, et c, only for these they feel no need to stress the idea of Catholic. It's already part of their make-up.

The squabble is mainly over the ownership of the word "Catholic" and who has the authority both to define it and to make the judgement as to who or what is Catholic and who or what is not. So what does "Catholic" mean?

Many of you who read this will have a better understanding of what the word means than I do and I would be teaching my grandmother to suck eggs were I to make statements that "Catholic" comes from the Greek kath holos meaning "concerning the whole". Again, many of you will be familiar were I to mention the Vincentian Canon that the Catholic Faith is "Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est." Catholicism is to do with wholeness, what the whole Church has always believed everywhere and yet, as Fr Hart notes, the word in Anglican circles is used to separate the "Catholic" High Church from the "Protestant" Low Church. That which is supposed to unite actually divides.

The Church to which I belong is the Anglican Catholic Church. This causes a great deal of confusion to people. Am I a Roman Catholic? Does my Church exist to act as a holding bay for those taking up  the Ordinariate? Shouldn't that be Anglo-Catholic? Are we Anglicans or not?

But look carefully. If my church confuses people by being called the Anglican Catholic Church, then those people ask questions. If they ask questions, then they have started a dialogue with me and with my jurisdiction. I can then talk to them about the beliefs that I share, not just with my Bishop, my priest and my Diocese, but with all Christians who accept the Apostolic Faith as laid down in the Scriptures and in the Church Fathers and the first seven truly Oecumenical Councils. That confusion has been a great vehicle for me to talk to people, to listen to them and what their understanding of things is. I can strike up a friendship, or not, but at least there is an interaction.

Many people want words to mean the same to everyone. They want to say "I'm a Catholic" and for everyone to know what that means. The trouble with carefully defined adjectives is that they end conversation. No-one debates the meaning of what it is for a triangle to be "right-angled" because the definition is precise and pertains to an object which possesses an abstract reality rather than a physical reality.

On the other hand,Human beings are notorious for blurring boundaries of definition, often deliberately. So what a word such as "Catholic"means to one person can be very different from what it means to another. There are calls for Anglicans to fight to take back possession of the meaning of the word. But why? First, with the large number of Roman Catholics, that's rather tilting at windmills to get everybody in the world aware of the fact that we Anglican Catholics are just as Catholic. Second, it's a bit silly when many in the world are unchurched and don't really care what the word means in the first place. Thirdly, and this is my point, to make everyone aware of what Catholic means destroys the possibility of communicating with another person stone dead. The conversation becomes:

A: What religion are you?
B: I'm an Anglican Catholic.
A: Oh.

rather than

A: What religion are you?
B: I'm an Anglican Catholic?
A: Anglican Catholic? Don't you mean Anglo-Catholic?
B: Well,....
or

A: What religion are you?
B: I'm an Anglican Catholic?
A: Are you CofE then?
B: Well,....

or

A: What religion are you?
B: I'm an Anglican Catholic?
A: Is that possible? How does that work?
B: Well,....

The Anglican Catholic Church believes herself to be as properly Catholic as the Roman Catholic Church. We certainly do not believe that we are THE Catholic Church, but merely a visible part of it. Our sister churches of UECNA and APCK have similar beliefs but they are as much part of THE Catholic Church as we are and many other good Catholics who come under many polygrammatic acronyms. We are proud to have the word "Catholic" as part of our name and if this causes confusion among people, then good! We then have something to talk to them about, and, if we're good Christians first, we will talk to them in a way that is kind and generous and more interested in them than perhaps they are in us. Perhaps that way, we can show our Lord Christ according to the whole of our lives and not just in our intellects.

Living Tradition and Dead Faith.

“Tradition is the living faith of the dead, traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. And, I suppose I should add, it is traditionalism that gives tradition such a bad name.” Jaroslav Pelikan

The other day, I overheard someone describe Anglican Catholics as people who want to preserve the English Missal in aspic. It was quite clear that they identify Continuing Anglicanism with Pelikan's traditionalist. This person certainly regards us as having a dead faith. Indeed, I was told by a former Director of Ordinands in the Established Church that I was loyal to a church that had passed away.

So is our Tradition dead? Are we merely observing traditional elements for the nostalgic sake of it? What growth can there be from something so fixed?

I argue that the Anglican Catholic tradition is not only living but living very healthily. There are 7 criteria for determining biological life: regulation of the internal environment, corporate organisational union, metabolism, growth, adaptation to the environment, response to stimuli, and reproduction. While these are biological criteria, it seems very reasonable, given the organic nature of Christianity and its association with a central biological entity (to wit: the Body of Christ), to apply these criteria correctly interpreted to Traditional Anglicanism.

1. Corporate Organisational Union
St Ignatius of Antioch gave the basic organising principle in "Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." There are distinct organs within church which function according to the needs. Every Anglican Catholic, like every Christian, is a unit which belongs to the Church and makes present the reality of Christ in the world.

2. Growth
The fact of Apostolic Succession (i.e. that there is a historical episcopacy according to Biblical principles) forms a principle of organic growth according to the Ignatian principle. This means that the Traditional Church does not grow by simply accreting matter (i.e. people who just call themselves Christians) , but that there is a principle by which the organisational structure of the Church replicates through the formation of parishes and missions. Priests are ordained according to Tradition and unified by adherence to the Church's traditional doctrine. But this is a little theoretical. We have a pattern for growth to occur, but is that growth actually occurring? The answer is yes. In the Eastern Province of the ACC and the African Dioceses there is indeed marked growth. Even in the tiny Diocese of the United Kingdom, there has been a decent growth for several years. The growth is real.

3. Homeostasis
This means that the internal environment of the organism is regulated to maintain a constant state. According to Traditional Anglicanism, the internal environment is maintained through corporate worship. The Gospel is preached and the sacraments administered as they always have been. The fact that people are receiving the same sacraments as the first Christians gives a good genetic link which gives the Church her character and identity.

4. Metabolism
What nourishes the Church and what does the Church reject? An organism requires the ability to take in nutrients by breathing and by ingesting. and then by excreting that which is waste or poisonous to the system. From the outset, the Church has drawn on the Breath of God, to wit the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost inspires but does not contradict what He has given us in Scripture and Tradition. The nourishment of course comes from the Mass and we receive nourishment from being part of the Vine that Christ spoke of. This Vine reaches throughout Christianity and the Lord explains how we need to be part of that Vine if we are to receive nourishment. The Traditional understanding of the Real Presence gives us that nourishment.

But the Church also rejects. It rejects Evil - full stop! The Traditional Church knows what Evil is because it trusts in what has already been revealed to it. A church which starts confusing what to accept and what to reject starts ingesting toxins which slowly poison the life of that church.

5. Response to Stimuli
When a child is born, it is embraced into the Church and incorporated into it through Baptism. When someone sins, they can find comfort in God's forgiveness through Confession. When a man falls in love with a woman, they are united in Holy Matrimony. For every life, the Catholic Church has something to offer: counsel and advice from the storehouse of ages, Sacraments to offer for the comfort of the soul, a Canon for living to help individuals find stability of life and a wealth of teaching to help one on the quest for the Divine. For every stimulus, the Church can make a response from its Tradition.

6. Adaptation
The critics of the Anglican Continuum would see this is where we might fail and the cause of our imminent demise. However, let us consider what it means to adapt. Adaptation means making an appropriate response to the external environment. One can look at History and see how the Church has responded. In many cases, the answer has been "not very well" and the reason for that "not very well" comes from a rejection of Tradition especially that vitally central part of Tradition of "Love thy neighbour" which comes straight from the mouth of God. However, this is where the Church has the potential of making more appropriate adaptation. However, this adaption cannot be radical. A cat cannot immediately adapt by becoming a dog when it finds itself trapped in a dog kennel. One doesn't open the windows to air the room in the midst of a roaring gale. The tenets by which the Church can adapt are at its heart. If those tenets are kept, there will be no be no further Crusades nor witch-hunts.

But the Traditional Church has had to adapt especially when it has been shunted out of the mainstream and Established Churches. Since Traditional Faith does not rely on impressive buildings and stipends, nor on robes, birettas and cruets, it can thrive wherever the will to do so exists. There is a will to do so. Anglican Catholics may find themselves worshipping in Cemetary Chapels and in housegroups, but those chapels and houses quickly become fitting places for the sacraments. There is adaptation in the Traditional Church, but without abandoning those traditions.

7. Reproduction
Ah the Church is sex mad! Well of course it is, though "mad" seems a bit of a misnomer, but then "sex-sane" doesn't sound so meaningful. The Church celebrates life, and life is brought forth through sex. Sex is a real part of humanity and the Church is real. The fact of the matter is that with human reproduction comes the great miracle of life that the Church celebrates. For the Church, there is great joy in seeing a tiny bundle of humanity brought into being out from the warmth of mum into the cold air of the world. What comes next is the responsibility - a hard, but potentially very joyful responsibility - for the nurture, development and happiness of that tiny little person. The Church is capable of reproduction via evangelism, but more through the development of family life. There is no better evangelism than presenting healthy and happy families who live out their faith. Again, is this happening? The answer is yes! The greatest growth in the Traditional Church comes from families. Many atheists would call this brainwashing, but why isn't what the atheists do called brainwashing? The Church that promotes healthy human sexuality can grow. The Traditional church binds together, and does not split things up in some kind of reductionist fallacy.

It seems to me that far from being dead, Traditional Anglicanism is actually alive and life-giving through the grace and provenance of Almighty God..

A traditional game of pass the parcel.

Sermon preached at Our Lady of Walsingham and St Francis on the Eleventh Sunday after Trinity.

It’s Tessa’s birthday party
and you’re sitting in a circle
ready to play pass the parcel.
Tessa tells everyone that
 this is a very special game of pass the parcel
 as the final prize is very unique
and very valuable.
Considering that her dad is a billionaire,
you can be sure when Tessa says “valuable,”
she means valuable!

So the game starts
and after about 6 or 7 goes,
the parcel lands in your lap
 just as the tortured strains
of the Birdie Song stops.

 However, 
just before you take off the next layer of wrapping,
you notice that it looks as if
someone has tampered with the wrapping paper.
 There seem to be some tears in the paper already – big ones!

Of course, you play your part
and take off your layer of wrapping
but, just as the music starts up again,
you notice that the next layer shows
 the same signs of tampering.
Those tears in the paper
may go all the way down
to the box containing the prize.

How confident are you that the special,
valuable prize is still there?
Can it have been stolen
or lost or replaced,
or is it just that the wrapping paper is torn?
How can you tell?

[PAUSE]

It would not be unreasonable
to lose confidence in this game of pass the parcel.
Your enjoyment of the game is a little tarnished
and the possibility that there is no prize at the end
spoils the point of the game.

What has caused you to lose confidence
in the first place?
Well, surely it is those tears
in the wrapping paper.
They are signs that something isn’t
as it should be.
They break with our expectations.

[PAUSE]

It is important for us to be able
 to be confident in our Christian belief.
 Every eleventh Sunday after Trinity,
St Paul hands onto us
that which he has received.
This is the blessing of possessing
 the Holy Scriptures as we do:
we are passed a most valuable prize,
 the Good News of Jesus Christ.

However, there’s a little problem with this Gospel.
 St Paul writes in Greek, not English,
so how do we know that the Gospel
has been translated properly?
Of course the translators of the Greek
passed on what they received
and produced the Gospel
in a language we can understand.

They did not tear the wrapping paper!

 They were steeped in the same Tradition
as St Paul and the Gospel writers,
 passing the parcel faithfully.
The prize is still there and intact.

 This is the beauty of our Tradition.
 If we are faithful to it,
 then the Word of God can go out into all lands
and to the end of the world His message.
Yet things aren’t as simple as that.

[PAUSE]

Every year,
usually around Easter or Christmas,
 there is some archaeologist
or Biblical translator coming in
pushing forward a new interpretation
 of the life of Lord Jesus.

Some will deny that Jesus was ever born;
others will deny that Jesus regarded himself as the Messiah,
and still others will claim
that He married Mary Magdalene,
was crucified and died
without resurrection. 

Whom can we trust?
Are these scholars passing onto us
what they received intact
or are there tears in the wrapping paper?
 Is the prize still there?

We also are faced with the temptation
to change what we believe by making the liturgy
more understandable,
 by taking out the difficult bits of the Gospel
 which others think
are tricky to understand,
are not politically correct or,
to others,
 seem downright offensive.

We are also faced with the temptation
to reinterpret the Gospel to be in line with
modern thinking.

Many Christians do just that and,
 in doing so.
 fail to pass on all that they have received.
Are these all just tears in the wrapping paper,
 or has the long-awaited prize been lost?

[PAUSE]

Our Lord Jesus says to each one of us,
“Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they shall see God”.

 How can we see God
 if we have muddied
the pure, clear waters of our Tradition?
St John tells us that
we shall be like God
for we shall see Him as He really is.
How can we be like Him
if we have completely changed the way we see Him
from what we have received
from the Christians who have gone before us
 in order to make Him fit
our way of thinking?

Can we be sure that our god
is the same God as for all the Christians
who came before us?

It is a fine and marvellous thing
 to hear God speak to us in our society
and in the context of our modern lives. 
It is quite another
to try and interpret His will
to fit our modern thinking and expectations.

Some modern scholars look down
on the thinkers of the past
and give thanks to God
for being more enlightened than they were.
But then. the modern thought trumps
 the thoughts of the past, doesn’t it?

Yet, the Pharisee looks down on the Publican,
and who goes home justified before God? 

Followers of the Gospel of Christ
are convicted of sin by that Gospel,
 but find in that same Gospel
the love and forgiveness of God
in Christ Jesus Our Lord.

In following the Traditions
and the patterns that God laid down for us,
we find ourselves receiving
 the prize of Christ Himself.

It is our duty then to pass
on to the next Christians
what we have received
with care and diligence.
Anything that we add or subtract may be
evidence of hubris and a complete lack of humility
 before God.

If we are faithful to what we receive,
 we will find ourselves
in the presence of the One
 whose Gospel we have spread.
There is no greater prize than that!

[PAUSE]

One day we shall peel off the last layer
of wrapping paper from the parcel.
What will we find beneath it?

St Benedict's Priory Salisbury 2012: Service and Humility

As usual, I spend my retreat with the Monks formerly of Elmore now based at Salisbury. Although, I'm no longer technically in Communion with these gentlemen - one of the casualties of the CofE's break with Tradition - I received much kind hospitality and shared much with them in their Offices and in their day-to-day running of the monastery.

This year, with my ordination imminent, it was seemly that I make the focus of my retreat the nature of Christian Service and Humility. The trouble was that I didn't get much in the way of retreating. With Dom Francis away on holiday, I found myself insinuated into washing up, running errands and playing roles in the saying of the Offices. To be honest, I thought nothing of it until I began to write these words, but it strikes me that the best way is not to think about Christian Service at all but to do it and thank God for it afterwards. Perhaps too often, I think about what I should be doing than actually doing it and perhaps you do too. We can plan grand schemes for our lives based on our qualifications and experiences, but perhaps our greatest ever accomplishment in our lives will be to give a cup of tea to a lonely old soul, to wash up after a monastic tea party, or to make an anonymous donation to a charity.

It is clear that we are not saved by works, i.e. not by what we do. We are saved through the Grace of God and by cooperating with that Grace willingly. If we are given the package of salvation, then we do need to open it! What brings us to God is that we do works of mercy, both spiritual and corporal. This does rather sound that I am rather making more of my kitchen duties than perhaps I should: where's the humility in that?

Well, quite.

My main point is that we do not know what will be our greatest accomplishment in life in the eyes of God. God's vision of us is completely different from our own and levels our accomplishments so that the ones we think are least important turn out to be most so and vice versa. Our humility must be in recognising that we are limited even in the things we think we do well, but it also must be that we have the capability in every limited action of seeing God transfiguring that action into something dear to Him. It's not what we do, it's that we do.

Yesterday was the Feast of St Laurence the Deacon. When told by the wicked Roman Prefect to turn over the riches of the Church, St Laurence brought to him the poor and needy of the region explaining that these people were the riches of the Church. Tradition has it that this is the reason that the holy deacon ended up roasting on a gridiron for this effrontery.

But the point is clear. Things do not have worth in themselves. Money is just metal and paper, gold just a metal, possessions just things - all will disappear when the Sun goes nova. Likewise all the values that we hold, our degrees and knowledge, our sporting prowess, all will die with us. Our worth is extrinsic - it comes from bearing the image of God in our very selves. If we deliberately blind ourselves to this fact that we are of infinite value to God, then there can be no salvation from death.
Likewise our actions, what we do, can be given a worth more than we understand by allowing the Divine Will to consecrate them.

So what are you going to do now?

Worship Groups and Wesley's Rules

John Wesley's rules for singing:

1. Learn these Tunes before you learn any others.

2. Sing them exactly as they are printed here, without altering or 'mending them at all; and if you have learned to sing them otherwise, unlearn it as soon as you can.

3. Sing all. See that you join with the congregation as frequently as you can. Let not a slight degree of weakness or weariness hinder you. If it is a cross to you, take it up and you will find a blessing.

4. Sing lustily, and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength. Be no more afraid of your voice now, nor more ashamed of it being heard, then when you sing the songs of Satan.

5. Sing modestly. Do not bawl, as to be heard above, or distinct from, the rest of the congregation, that you may not destroy the harmony; but strive to unite your voices together, so as to make one clear melodious sound.

6. Sing in time. Whatever time is sung, be sure to keep with it. Do not run before, not stay behind it; but attend closely to the leading voices, and move therewith as exactly as you can. And take care you sing not too slow. This drawling way naturally steals on all who are lazy; and it is high time to drive it out from among us, and sing all our tunes just as quick as we did at first.

7. Above all, sing spiritually. Have an eye to God in every word you sing. Aim at pleasing Him more than yourself, or any other creature. In order to do this, attend strictly to the sense of what you sing, and see that your heart is not carried away with the sound, but offered to God continually; so shall your singing be such as the Lord will approve of here, and reward when he cometh in the clouds of heaven.

I have a lot of time for Wesley. Rule 7 is very typical of his deep passion for seeing God in all things and puts him very much in the company of Du Caussade, Brother Lawrence, St Francis of Assisi, and St Benedict himself. It is tantamount that before we do anything, we first do it for the love of God.

The final cause of a hymn is for the greater glory of God and not, repeat not, for enjoying oneself. If we sing hymns for sensual reasons only then we shall sow what we reap, mere superficiality. My recollection of singing in the last days of my involvement with the CofE was that people sang because they "liked the tune" or because it made them feel happy.
There is an affinity between today's CofE with the Church of the post-Restoration and before the Oxford Movement in that the singing of hymns is accompanied by a band. Often this band is called the "worship group", primarily because it saw itself as leading worship. Yet, what we can often see and hear of "worship groups" is the band doing all the work while the congregation bask in the atmosphere when really it is their duty to join in. According to Wesley's Rules, a true worship group should seek to be of a secondary nature, playing the notes that are written without standing out.

Before I am accused of being musically snobbish, the same is very true throughout the English Choral tradition. A congregation cannot ordinarily join in with the execution of a Mass by Byrd, Palestrina, Ockeghem or Striggio. Their raison d'etre, we are told, is to enhance the worship of the Congregation. But how? By using the typology of heavenly choirs? Given the nature of the Catholic Mass, every ceremonial action and ritual is indeed a sign to draw one closer to Heaven. The choir then must seek to fulfil that type, just as the priest should seek to fulfil the person of the alter Christus in his role.

A hymn or anthem must always begin with the words which have to be sound theological poetry. Too many modern hymns have succumbed to the skill of the prattler of pious platitudes and of the egotist in which the word "I" makes a more frequent appearance than addresses to the Divine. It must mean something and convey truth upon which people can build their lives as well as sing in Church. One can tell the spiritual health of a parish by the quality of the hymns that it sings. A parish that doesn't mind what it sings is not likely to be thinking carefully about how it is approaching worship.

Likewise, the execution of sacred music requires thought. A choir, or worship group, should not seek first for people's enjoyment but rather for their alignment with God. Music that will have them "bopping in the aisles" is distracting from the presence of God. While it is possible for hymns in church to be accompanied by a guitar, often the guitarist treats the situation like a jam session and again people enjoy the music for the music. Of course, music is a gift from God, and musical skill is a gift from God, but it is imperative that one tempers one's musical skill and restricts one's exuberance with careful thought on "how am I going to play in order to bring the reality of God and the truth of His words to the congregation here present?"

Finally, execution of sacred music must allow people to sing with it. Many hymns and songs tend to become solos for someone who tries to emulate the late Whitney Houston by warbling all kinds of melismata over a tune. Some modern songs seems to be written to accommodate these vocal meanderings. The Reformers imposed a "one note to one syllable" rule for Church Music. While this might be rather excessive, it is not a bad maxim. Melismata can be left to the singing of a good choir who can execute them with discipline and the desire to narrow the gap between Heaven and Earth.
Surely that is worth working for!

Good as gold but beware of Trolls!

Know ye not that they which run in a race run all , but one receiveth the prize? So run , that ye may obtain . And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things . Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run , not as uncertainly; so fight I , not as one that beateth the air: But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection : lest that by any means , when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. (I Cor ix.24-27)

I am not a sportsman.

In fact one might make the analogy that I understand sport as well as Richard Dawkins understands the need for Religion. I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Cricket, Foot Ball, Ice Hockey, Basket Ball, Dwile Flonking et c. leave me completely cold. I don't get dancing either. I didn't watch the opening of the Olympics. I don't get the thrill of winning nor the disappointment of losing. Medals mean very little.

One thing that I do get, though, is that people get a thrill of winning and a disappointment of losing. I understand that people do benefit from sports, find great comfort from the team and find some direction in their lives. In some ways, perhaps, I'm missing out on some remarkable experiences, but then we are all made differently. That's where the analogy with Richard Dawkins breaks down. I don't see sport as a force for evil, by any means, though some aspects do disturb me.

 I read something today that saddened me very deeply. The young chap pictured above is Tom Daley who I believe is a swimmer. Apparently, he missed out on a medal, and has now been at the receiving end of some absolutely atrocious comments for not achieving his goal. I am led to believe that his motivation is to win a medal, not only for his country, but also for the memory of his dead father. Noble sentiments. So how is it then possible that someone can broadcast the message to this young man in his disappointment that he has let down his country and his dead father by not winning the medal?  I may not quite see the connection between medals and glory, but I cannot understand why he needed to be pilloried like this.

 Surely Tom's efforts and training and intention and desire has been to do well at every stage, to give of his all and to discipline himself carefully. But he is as fallible as any one of us. If he has not achieved a medal, then it I very much doubt that it is for want of dedication.

What then has happened?

I think it is a question of identity and identification. From what I see from my students and ex-students in their rather more playful rivalries between football teams, there is very much an identification of the individual with that team - an extension of oneself into the team and, given the number of Chelsea foot ball shirts I see, an extension of the team into oneself. One shares in the successes and defeats of the team.

However, there is a problem. One is not actually part of the team that we support, otherwise we would be actually competing, not cheering from the sidelines. There is a necessary distance between the supporter and the competitor which cannot be realised physically. However, there is an emotional investment which perhaps the supporter and competitor share more fully. When the competitor fails to achieve the goal, she suffers great disappointment, frustration and perhaps some (largely unjustified, in my opinion) anger at herself for failing. If these emotions are shared, then the supporter must feel these sensations too though they will not necessarily correlate with the emotions felt by the athlete. The danger then is turning these emotions onto the competitor. This is what has happened. Anger and emotion have not been controlled. Poor Tom has become the unwarranted object of emotions that are not his and which have not been controlled by a disciplined mind. His Troll is rightly to be censured and sanctioned for not exercising a fragment of the self-discipline and self-control that Tom has.

Rudyard Kipling reminds us:

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two impostors just the same...

First place and last place are as much imposters as Triumph and Disaster. It takes reason and discipline and thought to realise this especially when one is caught up in the moment. The trouble is that the Media whip up the emotions so readily that each of us does get caught up more emotionally than is actually good for us, and I am as guilty of being emotionally whipped up by the Media as any. I very much get the impression that the team for the UK Olympics is being pressured to succeed, not supported, by the Media and subsequently by the ordinary supporters.

Support requires a stable base, standing still, like a diving board. It is the diver who uses the diving board to make his dive. It is not the job of the board to push back otherwise it ruins the dive. If people are going to support Tom, then they should let him find confidence in their support and acceptance of whatever the outcome should be. When we support a team we should be aware and respectful of the distance that separates us from our competitor however much our emotions seek to bridge that distance.

I gather that Tom will be swimming again at some point. I certainly wish him very well: he has my admiration for his self-discipline and training and I am sure that his father would be very proud of him whatever the outcome. I sincerely pray that he will get more joy out of his next competition than can be provided by winning any gold medal.

Adoption, identity and scotch eggs

Sermon preached at Our Lady of Walsingham and St Francis, Rochester, on the eighth Sunday after Trinity.

Bill is playing on his Xbox 360
when his Mum calls him
 to the table for his tea.

As he tucks into his scotch egg,
 he is very much aware of
a certain awkwardness in the air.
Mum has something to say,
and it’s clearly not easy for her.

“Bill,” she says finally,
“I have something to tell you.
 I think you’re now old enough
to understand this and we do owe it to you
 to tell you the truth.

Your dad and I love you very much, but…”
Mum pauses;
 so does Bill, his mouth full of egg.

 Mum breathes a heavy sigh,
“You’re adopted, Bill.
We aren’t your real parents.”

A scotch egg will never
 taste the same again.

What do you expect Bill to do now?

[PAUSE]

Well, this surely depends
on how Bill is feeling,
and there are many different emotions
 that could be crashing through
 his head at this time.

You might guess that Bill
could be suffering from an identity crisis.

Everything
 that he believes of himself
seems to be false.

All those holidays to Port Lympne,
 the birthday parties
and the games of kickabout in the back garden,
all seem strange and distant.

Those cards he made at school
 for Mothering Sunday and Fathers’ Day
seem to be a bit of a lie.
Where is Bill’s true identity?

[PAUSE]

We begin to find out who we are
at home with our families.

We learn by interacting
with our parents and brothers and sisters around us.

 The people who bring us up
show us how to live,
what values to treasure
and what we should and should not be doing
...not that families always get that right!
The first crucial experiences
that we have in life colour
how we see ourselves and,
further, how we live our lives.

If we find out that our parents
 really aren’t our parents,
then perhaps we are justified in thinking
that the way that they bring us up
 is not the way we should be brought up.

 Is Bill going to reject the people
 he has called Mum and Dad for all his life?

 Is he going to reject what they have taught him?
But this raises another couple of questions.

What would Bill think of his real parents?
Would he trust their values?

Not all parents are good parents after all!
Bill faces big choices.

He can accept the people
 he’s been living with as his family.

 Or he can reject them
and try to find his real family.

Or he can reject both and go it alone.
 Now that’s not an easy choice to make.

What is the right answer?

[PAUSE]

We do have to remember
the example of Our Lord Jesus Christ here.

 We cannot know precisely
how he knew that St Joseph
was not His real father.

We do know that He was thought of as “the carpenter’s son”.
Yet throughout His ministry,
 Jesus demonstrates quite clearly
 that He is not the son of Joseph.

Is this a rejection of His parentage?

Well, in one way it is.

The Lord tells us very clearly,
 “If any man come to me,
 and hate not his father, and mother,
and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters,
 yea, and his own life also,
 he cannot be my disciple.”

How does that make you feel?

Should we reject our parentage to please God?

[PAUSE]

If that’s true then we run up
against the commandment
 “Honour thy father and thy mother”.

The Lord cannot be contradicting
 His Heavenly Father, can He?

 The key to understanding
 what Our Lord is telling us
 is to understand what he means
by “hating” our parents.

 In fact, the Greek word
 that is being translated as “hate”
means “to love less”.

It’s the opposite of preferring.

The Lord tells us very clearly
that God is Our real Father before our earthly parents
and that only in serving Him
 do we truly honour our parents,
especially if they have brought us up
 to love God.

 We do not reject our parents
by choosing God;
we choose to see them first
 in the light of the Eternal parentage of God.

Indeed it is only within God
that we find our true selves.

 St Paul tells us,
” For as many as are led by the Spirit of God,
they are the sons of God.”
The more we love God,
 the more do we find in Him
our true lovable identity.

 To reject God as our adopted Father
means that we reject everything
 that is real about ourselves.

We thus accept an identity
which is distorted by our own preconceptions
and disfigured irreparably by our sins.

 Or, in rejecting God,
 we assume a false identity which is given to us
by other people
and which will alter and perish with them.

Our lives must be spent in rejecting anything
that attempts to draw us away from the reality
of our adoption.

[PAUSE]

The fact that Bill is adopted does not change his past.
 It changes only how he sees his past.


 If he looks back and sees love there
in the birthday parties,
in the holidays
and in games of footie in the back garden,
 then nothing has changed at all.

His cards for Mothering Sunday and Fathers’ Day
 keep all their meaning and perhaps have gained more.

Likewise,
if we realise that we are the adopted children of God
and adopted by His love for us,
 then we stop seeing the world
as children of the world
with all its evil, sadness and decay.

We look beyond it
to the Eternal face of God’s only true Son,
 the brother who signed our adoption certificate
in His Blood.

And although we might be adopted children,
we are offered, through Christ,
 the opportunity to develop a true family likeness
of our Heavenly Father.

How well have you accepted the fact that you’re adopted?

St Mary Magdalene: Guilt, Evolution and Purity

Today is the Feast of St Mary Magdalene, a woman whose reputation has suffered as much after her passing as before. At Mass in Rochester this morning, we were reminded that it is not good to speculate on other people's past sins, especially when it is not recorded what they were. We need to focus on her devotion to God and to emulate her humility and love.

If we should not speculate on the past sins of St Mary Magdalene, then we should be equally careful when we consider our own past sins, especially when we have confessed, repented and been absolved from them. We will still bear the scars of sins past which will haunt us if we let them. Yet do we use the memory of our sins to help us to be transformed by the love of Christ?

I believe firmly in Evolution. That's not to say that I can be certain that Evolution as THE way that things happened - no-one can. However, the scientific evidence is sufficiently compelling for me. Indeed further, the mechanism of Evolution is incredibly beautiful and, for me, actually provides further evidence of the existence of God who not only kicked the process off but wrote the rules for Evolution. There are still gaps in the theory, especially how puddles of amino acids managed to spark spontaneously into life: maybe we'll find out the truth, maybe we won't. With the discovery of a particle bearing properties predicted by the Higgs Boson, we can certainly find exhilaration that our theories fit the facts. It's worth exploring!

We must be careful of hubris though.

Evolution demonstrates that past actions dramatically affect the future. A moment's weakness in the past evolves gradually into the twisting and warping of lives, the tangling of the threads of our beings, our relationships and our views of the world. Species change, alter and adapt to fit the surroundings. Those that fail to adapt die out. Evolution implies growth, and that growth can be healthy or it can be malignant: it can allow us to grow fully into happiness or we can die out abjectly.

Thus it is that by failing to recognise our weaknesses and strengths in a spirit of honesty and reflection, we condemn ourselves to allowing our weaknesses to evolve within us and thus to twist our humanity into painful and grief-filled shapes which will remain part of us forever unless we allow the Eternal Gardener to prune the malignant growths out of our lives.

The other extreme is to become so aware of our sins that we wallow the guilt of them to consume us. We look at our tangled and twisted shape and believe that this is what we were meant to be, with no way out. Some Christians hold on to the guilt even after they have confessed and confessed and confessed. We do not allow ourselves to be forgiven. even if we are told so clearly that God does not desire the death of a sinner but rather that he might turn from his sins and be forgiven. To disallow God to forgive us is as much pride as denying that we have no sin in the first place.

St Mary Magdalene shows us the way out. Her redemption comes purely from her love and devotion for the Lord Jesus. Her sins are forgiven because she loves much. She does not have her future destiny in mind, nor does she desire to hang on to sins of her past. Her mind and heart are focussed on one person, Jesus. To be intently focussed on Christ is precisely what it means to be pure in heart. Indeed, blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.

That which is pure evolves purely. The memory of past sins may linger but, seen through a pure heart, those sins cease to have a negative effect, lessons can be learned without guilt and our lives seen to be untangled from that which seeks our destruction. All things work for good for all who love God. In purifying ourselves, as Mary Magdalene did, we shall see the truth and effect of the Resurrection of Christ and allow our lives to evolve around this, and after this life we will find our final form to which our evolution has been tending: full human beings in loving union with God in Heaven.

Benedict, Augustine and Osmund: Pilgrimage by staying still

I really ought to have blogged last Wednesday being the Solemnity of the Feast of Holy Father Benedict. As it was, there was a lot happening that day, not all of it very happy, but certainly a day of growth - a day of pilgrimage.

One of the big differences between being a member of the Anglican Catholic Church and being a member of the CofE is that one doesn't usually have an ACC Church on your doorstep. I could walk 100 yards to the nearest CofE Parish Church, but as it is, I have to travel a not inconsiderable distance to get to the parishes which I serve as Lay Reader. However the fact remains that I should not be measuring distance in terms of miles but in terms of belief.

This produces a dichotomy of which Dualists would be proud. The measurement of distance in miles is a physical measurement, it possesses quantifiable units (miles) which can be traced with pedometers or tracked by GPS systems and broadcast on Facebook. Spiritually the system of measurement is far different. I suppose one could say that one's belief is 10 miles west of Rome and thus give some impression that one's understanding of Christianity is very nearly Roman Catholic, but it doesn't specify what those further 10 miles are, or even if they are continuous!

How can one measure one's spiritual distance? Is it wise to do so? Is it wise to try?

Well, Saints Benedict, Augustine and Osmund would say "yes".  All of them regard life as a journey or a pilgrimage back to God. While all three made not inconsiderable journeys in their lifetimes, their focus was on the inner journey back to God.

St Augustine is chronologically the first. His philosophy and theology are filled with this idea of the sinfulness of Man casting him very far into the dark moors from which in grief he must work his way back to the light of God. His little Augustinian Rule forms the basis for Dominican spirituality, but it is a Rule none the less. A measuring stick by which one can measure one's progress back to God.

Next comes Holy Father Benedict and his magnificent Rule designed to take away the stifling distraction of the practical ways of living so as to free the spirit into climbing the ladder of humility back to God. Even then, in his last chapter, he says that the Benedictine Rule is just a starter, just the first foot out on the journey back to God.

And then there's St Osmund. Why on earth have I pulled him into this discussion? Well, it being his feast day, I was struck by his short readings in the Monastic Breviary. St Osmund is an 11th Century Norman nobleman and Chancellor who becomes Bishop of Salisbury. He finishes construction on the Cathedral and then suddenly withdraws from the world in order to concentrate on study and contemplation. He is also responsible for the Sarum Liturgy but on completely conservative principles - no innovations or deviations allowed. There is no place for St Osmund's thought in the CofE! For Osmund, the Sarum Liturgy is to provide stability for the English Church.

St Osmund's withdrawal reflects precisely the withdrawal that both St Augustine and St Benedict espouse. This is a withdrawal to a stable base from which a spiritual pilgrimage can be made. By reducing the number of worries that distract them, they purify their lives so that they have light spiritual baggage for a long interior journey. Stability becomes the springboard into the uncharted regions of the soul the Rule of Life becomes the road map into the unknown; the light of the Holy Ghost shining in the Lantern of prayer lights the way.

Every Sunday, I make my pilgrimage to my spiritual community. While I must travel physically quite a way, I am never far away from what is, for me, a spiritual caravan moving purposefully toward the light of God. In that caravan, distractions can be laid aside and the interior journey can continue with priest and people to the Divine Light - a journey that is simultaneously accompanied by a myriad myriad of saints and angels and yet nevertheless completely solitary and lonesome. Commitment to stability and fidelity will help us to hold that great paradox together.

SS John Fisher and Thomas More: Heroes, Heretics and Hard hearts

Eleazar, one of the principal scribes, an aged man, and of a well favoured countenance, was constrained to open his mouth, and to eat swine's flesh. But he, choosing rather to die gloriously, than to live stained with such an abomination, spit it forth, and came of his own accord to the torment, As it behoved them to come, that are resolute to stand out against such things, as are not lawful for love of life to be tasted. But they that had the charge of that wicked feast, for the old acquaintance they had with the man, taking him aside, besought him to bring flesh of his own provision, such as was lawful for him to use, and make as if he did eat of the flesh taken from the sacrifice commanded by the king; That in so doing he might be delivered from death, and for the old friendship with them find favour. But he began to consider discreetly, and as became his age, and the excellency of his ancient years, and the honour of his gray head, whereon was come, and his most honest education from a child, or rather the holy law made and given by God: therefore he answered accordingly, and willed them straightways to send him to the grave. For it becometh not our age, said he, in any wise to dissemble, whereby many young persons might think that Eleazar, being fourscore years old and ten, were now gone to a strange religion; And so they through mine hypocrisy, and desire to live a little time and a moment longer, should be deceived by me, and I get a stain to mine old age, and make it abominable. For though for the present time I should be delivered from the punishment of men: yet should I not escape the hand of the Almighty, neither alive, nor dead. Wherefore now, manfully changing this life, I will shew myself such an one as mine age requireth, And leave a notable example to such as be young to die willingly and courageously for the honourable and holy laws. And when he had said these words, immediately he went to the torment.  (II Maccabees vi.18)

I hate, with a passion, the English Reformation. Please don't misunderstand me: I do agree that there was some need of reformation to address prevalent issues which were subsequently discussed at the Council of Trent (though without the presence of English Catholics). However, with the establishment of the Church of England comes the charge of treason for dissenters and with Treason comes torture and death regardless of service, good character and position. Many, many good Christians die as a result of reforming the English Church: some are orthodox, some are heretical, but all have a legitimate claim to martyrdom. I hate that these good men die without some council, some discussion, some reasoned discourse to air the conflict of doctrine. While I understand Henry VIII's desire to stabilise his dynasty and broker some peace in a land still recovering from the Wars of the Roses, there are other, better means and thus he is still very far from being my favourite monarch despite being the product of his time.

We celebrate SS Thomas More and John Fisher today, two men who are willing to stand up to a king who forces men to choose between their country and their religion. Their choice is to remain with the Church of their birth, not to recognise the king as Governor of the Church, but rather to continue allegiance to the Primacy of the Pope. Thus it is that they face the tide and are swamped by it, albeit temporarily. Yet as G. K. Chesterton says, "A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it."

There is much in common with these two men, Eleazar and St Polycarp, all of whom stand against heresy despite the venerability of their ages and offices. The word "heretic" has negative overtones, primarily because people like to think of themselves as being orthodox, in the right, or justified in their beliefs. The word literally has the sense of a choice, an option between many alternatives. However, with choice comes consequence and one cannot avoid what happens as a result of what one chooses.

In this day and age, we are overwhelmed with choices of what to do, what to wear, how to live, who to live with: we relish our freedom to choose and to change our minds when our choice does not have quite the outcome that we hope for. Indeed that freedom to choose is very much a mark of what it means to be truly human. Yet it is a freedom that we do abuse.

Each choice that we make really does affect others. Our little choices can affect the major life-changing choices of other people. If one person chooses to buy their coffee from Costa's, it could potentially be the loss of a sale that causes the closure of a branch of Starbucks with the resulting loss of jobs. For want of a nail... This sounds like a slippery-slope argument but slippery slope arguments are about future consequences; History is about examining the minute causes of large scale events.

Henry VIII did not change the doctrine of the first Seven Councils, though he did tamper with the Canons. This is no problem in Christianity because it is merely a question of governance, not of belief. If one takes the Canons of the Second Council of Nicaea at face value, every Bishop should know the Holy Scriptures by heart. Since then, the availability of printed Bibles and prayer-books have rendered that Canon obsolete, much to the relief of every episcopal heart. Note carefully, though: it is the law that has changed, NOT the doctrine of God. It was Cranmer and his Protestant influences under the juvenile king Edward VI who sought to change the doctrine of the newly established church. Cranmer is indeed a heretic in the real sense of the word but,  in my view at least, a most lovable heretic, and I do spare a thought for him on March 21st on the anniversary of his martyrdom. Despite his heretical beliefs, he did bring forth a prayer-book which now allows and tolerates Catholic teaching as well as Protestant.

This is the rub. In many of the choices that we face in our religion, we have the choice between what is orthodox and what is heretical. Our duty is always to choose the orthodox and thus choose to travel with God on His terms rather than ours. To choose God places a limit on what we can choose to do in our lives. We are bound to follow Christ with our cross - indeed the word "religion" has at its heart the notion of being bound and restricted. The "lig" is the same as the "lig" in ligature. This is something which the secular world cannot grasp, for the secular world seeks to make a choice out of every aspect of life and curses any attempt to restrict the freedom of choice.

In many ways, that is noble. Everyone should have the freedom to choose how to live and to paint their lives onto the canvass of Spacetime. This is the freedom with which God has created us and in which He rejoices. One must remember that the same God Who created the universe has a great interest in the lives of every sentient being and, being of an Infinite Majesty, can and does care about what each individual does. To deny this, is to deny the omnipotence of God.

Yet our choices need limitation in order that we can live with each other. We are limited beings who easily make false absolutes of our own wills. Whether we puff ourselves up with the grandiose conviction of our righteousness or constantly wallow in the abject abnegation of any good within ourselves, we still exhibit the sin of pride that our will and choice takes precedence over the judgment of God Who often convicts us of the contrary. Our hearts harden when our choice is restricted and we push back. Again, we see this in the Reformation as the pendulum swings between Catholic and Protestant, each side almost gleefully making martyrs of their heretics. Nonetheless, the cause of heresy is pride and its cure is the return to the Catholicism of the Seven Oecumenical Councils and to the humility of the hassock.

It is worth pointing out, though, that pride is a very prevalent sin and does not always manifest itself in heresy.

We see this now in the Church of England as it attempts to find some kind of order from the chaos of trying to ordain women as bishops. This is heresy in its technical sense - it certainly is not Catholic doctrine. Yet the Synod wrestles with trying to have its cake and eat it. This is the result of too much choice and of not allowing oneself to be bound by religion. The hardness of heart from the so-called inclusive majority is forcing out the orthodox minority. I honestly wonder if WATCH and FiF have ever actually sat down together to discuss this between themselves rather than use the Synod as their platform.Perhaps they have, but certainly no good has come of it. FiF will label WATCH "heretic" in a more pejorative sense, just as WATCH labels any dissent from the "priesthood" of women as "misogynist".

There will be lesser martyrs on both sides from the fallout of this synod. Treason is no longer punishable by death, but rather by ostracising, denouncing, excommunicating and demonising. The question is whether one is simply going with the flow, or standing against it. However, let us not be hard-hearted in our dealings by rejecting the heretic with the heresy, but rather exercise our charity in humility even in walking apart. Indeed, walking apart may be the most charitable way forward.

Vision on, vision off

Sermon preached at Our Lady of Walsingham and St Francis on Trinity iv 2012 based on St Luke vi.36

Rolf Harris is painting a picture. It’s one of those large scale works on an orangey-ochre canvass upon which he daubs thick black paint. He’s putting patches here, flicking paint there and generally moving faster than an octopus after fifteen cups of coffee. You can bet your boots that when the picture is still practically unrecognisable, he’ll turn to the camera and utter the immortal phrase, “can you tell what it is yet?”

How would you feel if he just stopped there, the painting unfinished, and you with no clue as to what it is? Is it a hamster in a cage, a picture of Pope Innocent X, or some landscape from the Australian outback? Don’t you find that just infuriating? What can you do with an unfinished painting?

[PAUSE]

The infuriation comes because we’re not in a position to see fully. We can’t get into Rolf’s mind to “tell what it is” because he hasn’t finished communicating with us. His picture tells us something and until it’s finished, we’ve not got a clue.

Well, that’s not true. We’ve got some ideas. First of all, there doesn’t appear to be a recognisable figure at the moment. This makes it unlikely to be a portrait of Pope Innocent X. We can’t rule that out though. That bit there looks like a bit of fence, so it’s more likely to be a landscape of the Outback. So there are some things that we can say about this picture with confidence. We might not be certain, but we have a good idea.
[PAUSE]
Science works in much the same way. We collect data and information from measuring carefully. We make and test predictions and there is a lot that we can say about our world. However, there are limits to what our instruments tell us, so we cannot know things for certain. We can however, be confident that our theories are reasonable, give a clear picture of what we observe and produce results that we can predict some future events.
That’s how we live much of our lives - taking in what’s around us and making judgments on what we see. But what if there’s something wrong with your eyesight?
[PAUSE]
Losing your glasses can be a frightening affair. Things become vague and distorted. You get some impressions of the world around, but they are not accurate. Nonetheless, if you see what you think is going to be a ditch then you still try to avoid it where possible. Likewise, if you see someone heading for what you believe to be a ditch, you can still warn them to look out. What you may not be able to do is judge the size of the ditch accurately. Someone could conceivably come closer to that ditch than you are comfortable viewing.
If you are completely blind to the ditch, then you can say nothing. As Our Lord Jesus says, “Can the blind lead the blind? Shall they not both fall into the ditch?”
Why then do we forget this principle in the way we live our lives?
[PAUSE]
If we see our worst enemy standing over the dead body of our best friend with a smoking pistol in his hand, what can we say? What would our witness statement to the police be? Well, obviously we can say nothing more than what we have seen, despite our feelings and emotions in the situation. We didn’t see the murder, but that’s assuming that it was a murder in the first place. We make too many assumptions based on what we’re feeling. Our view has been narrowed to what we believe to be one possible scenario. If we are honest, then we can only say what we see and no more. Our vision is not good enough to judge and we have to leave the judgment to one more competent than ourselves.
Our Lord Jesus tells us that we cannot make judgments until we appreciate the limits of what we can see. We need to be humble, looking at ourselves objectively and honestly so that we do not pass judgment on what is beyond our field of vision.
If we truly know that our vision is limited then we know that we have to trust someone to lead us in the right way. The idea of trusting another is not a popular idea – we prefer to rely on our own judgment.  Humility tells us that we can’t always rely on our judgment and that we must seek help from others who see things better. Going to Church becomes of great importance for help and encouragement along the way. We need to go to Church to feel our way through life in our blind spots, to help and to be helped.
[PAUSE]
Suffering, too, can narrow our vision too far for us to see God at work. In our times of extreme pain and suffering, all the more do we need to cry out for God for the ability to cope with our blindness.  Indeed, part of our pain is in not being able to see the end of the suffering or its purpose. It is easy to lose sight of God when we at our lowest ebb because his purposes are veiled from our sight and we lose heart. In looking to the cross of Christ and His suffering for us, we see another who lost the vision of God’s goodness and His promises. That doesn’t mean that suddenly they vanish, they have been eclipsed for a while.
[PAUSE]
As Christians, we have been given a vision of our life beyond, where all human suffering is suddenly given explanation, transformation and dignity in the Eternal presence of God. That vision is not perfect – we see only through a glass darkly - but we have a good idea of God’s Holy Word. How can we make sure that we clearly see what He is showing us?