Quote that Rad-Trads hate/love?

"In reading the Schema on the Liturgy, and in listening to the debate on it, I could not help thinking that, if the Church of Rome went on improving the Missal and Breviary long enough, they would one day invent the Book of Common Prayer."- Anglican Bishop of Ripon, John Moorman, an observer of the Second Vatican Council (1962-5)

Surprised by Joy

It's funny because I'm supposed to feel somber and solemn these days. My RC chaplain friend is pissed at me, and I have a bunch of papers due, but I can't help it. I'm not sad or scared.

I'm joyful.

I feel so free.

I haven't felt this good in so long. I have hope. I sing with St. Paul: "Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies." (Rom 8:33)

The Reformer of Wittenberg used to sign his name: Martinus Eleutherius, meaning Martin the Free One.

As an Anglican I used to pray daily in the morning Liturgy to the God, "whose service is perfect freedom". I love that phrase. It's beautiful.

I have the whole evening to myself, I could do anything, and I'm going to sit down, put on some pajamas, make some hot chocolate, and grab my biggest bible and a patristic commentary.

Just the thought that God unconditionally accepts me for Christ's sake is too marvellous to bear. This great crucified God, "[w]ho was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification." (Rm 4:25).

Blessed be God forever.

Saturday Evening Thoughts

Today yet another Calvinist tried to convert me on facebook (a really amateur one, who didn't even understand the orthodox Protestant theology, but was basically just a disciple of R.C. Sproul) and I felt the same normal annoyance. Yesterday night our family was out for dinner and I was told I wasn't allowed to mention religion as i would 'ruin' the evening. I mentioned politics and came close enough to doing so anyway.

People really hate me, alot. Almost every Calvinist I know, every arch-conservative/American Republican (I'm a conservative in Canada, which makes me a centrist in the states), and every optimist.

I have an incredibly easy life, and I have suffered little in it, but I was just getting annoyed with life today. I just want to live in Quebec or Rome or something, just somewhere where I can be Catholic without having to constantly listen to hellfire condemnations from Prots and just live happily.

The Anglicans and the Lutherans can be so sophisticated when dealing with us Romans, why can't the Reformed (Excluding Jared and Matt) grow up like them?

Philip Yancey wrote something I found interesting the other day. The verb "to Oppress" in English (according to Yancey - I couldn't find this onlin) comes from an English practice where Catholics were placed under a board and then heavy rocks were placed on top of the board, squishing them gradually until they died or recanted. I guess I have it pretty easy compared to my Anglo-Saxon Catholic ancestors in the faith.

I've been thinking about what Pelikan says about the B.V.M. being Mediatrix in medieval Catholic theology and how disgusted he 'sounds' when he writes. But then I realized, 'hey that's the default, that's what the church universally agreed upon, why should I feel bad for believing the consensus of the church?'

Once again I'm reading Tolkien, and a bit of Chesterton, and planning where I'll go to mass tomorrow.

And I don't care about fighting with anyone, I just want everyone to leave the reprobate Catholic alone, and for God to send me some Roman brothers in the faith...but I'm he most likely won't and I'll be writing similar blog posts for annoyed Protestant friends in a year from now.

st. mary star of the sea, pray for me, I entrust myself to your maternal care this evening, may your holiness be an example to me, and may I be reminded of the sufficiency of God's grace.

Thoughts on Lent: My Ash Wednesday

This is just an excerpt from my journal about Ash Wednesday written at about 1pm yesterday and a picture of me in the Brock library with my faint ashes:

So I just got ashes on my forehead for Ash Wednessday. [a mennonite friend] went with me and I think it was very strange indeed for him, to see me cross myself, etc. A deacon presided, I think he was Roman Catholic, and the Reformed/Anglican (he represents both I think) Chaplain also did readings and prayers. It was ecumenical. I felt strange knowing that there were actually these ‘hidden’ Christians (Anglicans and Catholics in this case) who were devout enough to want to identify themselves publicly. It feels like the University hammer of Atheistic Positivism/Secular Liberalism is somehow striking lighter now. I always felt like it was almost perfect in it’s job at crushing our souls, but today I saw the proverbial ‘remnant’. They weren’t ‘cool evangelicals’ with music that sounds normal, it wasn’t a ‘youth meeting’ where pizza was served. It was an amalgamation of those who recognized the tradition of the church and scripture, and followed it penitentially. Our whispered singing and faltering voices, the general nervousness around the place, as we sung “Amazing Grace” was terribly authentic in the tiny room with students passing by the open door.



It was like the early Christians, huddled together in a room. Afraid of everyone else ‘finding them out’. I think this will be one of the best experiences this year for my faith. It was a blessed time. [my friend] noticed that his pale complexion and the firmness of the deacon made his ashes much more visible – indeed they were – but maybe the worst for me was before I even saw my own, before, when I was so worried what people would say or think, believing them (my ashes) to be visible from miles away ... and then I looked in the reflection of the computer and saw that they were much fainter than I thought, and I could easily move my bangs to cover this marking. It made me realize that perhaps on days like today when all is brought out to the light, that maybe I am in need of an increase of faith and fervor. It’s a preview to judgment day in essence. I used to be very zealous, but time in the world weakens you. In subtle ways at first. But before long you are back into it with everyone else, and you are no longer what scripture calls ‘one of the peculiar people’. Maybe that’s why public penance in the Early Church was good, maybe that’s why the Jews did it. Maybe my entire life it wasn’t the “religion” and “dead ritual” of it all that troubled me. Maybe I was using that as an excuse just to not look funny, to not be peculiar, and to fit in like everyone else."

Thats where my journal left off, but I remember talking with my friend about why on earth he would want to get ashes if he wasn't even Roman Catholic or Anglican and he said it was to try out 'new' religious experiences. But we also discussed how it forces you to be public with your faith. I laughed about how embarrassed I was about it, even though I could argue for Christianity/against atheism in seminars all year long, suddenly this became much more problematic, and how the early christians would've probably excommunicated people like me. So even though I've missed the point of Lent in this post (repentance, prayer, fasting, almsgiving) at the same time I learned a good lesson. Echoed by Saint Paul:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation" - Romans 1:16

I also have to say as a funny story that a guy I met from Campus Crusade for Christ (or whatever new nice name it has) came up to me and saw me reading the bible and then looked at my forehead and was utterly confused. He just looked at me like I had stabbed him in the back and said "I thought you were a Christian?" and I said "I am a Christian, I have been my whole life, but I'm not an evangelical, I go to the Catholic Church". He then proceeded to look at me like a Magic Eye Picture, really confused and a bit troubled. Then he picked up his books and left. lol nothing more scary to an Evangelical Protestant than Traditional Christianity I guess.

Why I'm Not Finished My Journey - Constant Conversion

WARNING!!!!! - Personal/spiritual post rather than Polemical/religious post - Ye who enter here abandon all hope

The Humility of a Hero

"Christ’s death redeemed man from sin, but I can make nothing of the theories as to how!"-C.S. Lewis

As I gave my thoughts on the Substitutionary Atonement and how I had to more or less 'give it up' for Catholicism, I realized that one of my favorite Anglicans had also given it up. Borrowing from another blog: "In The Allegory of Love Lewis referred to a poem whose "theology turns on a crudely substitutional view of the Atonement." In Mere Christianity Lewis indicated that he did not accept the substitutionary view of atonement." (http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2000i/townsend2000e.htm)

But I love Lewis' humility. He was clearly an Anglican/Protestant Arminian and accepted Sola Fide/Faith Alone but he tried to find a middle ground for which all Christians could come together on.

For me, I just need to accept that there is much that I haven't decided on and that this indecision is OK.

What I 'know'

When it comes to Theology Proper (Trinity, Who God is, etc) I think all Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox agree. And regarding Ecclesiology and the Sacraments my position is staunchly Roman Catholic, which of course will never allow me to leave the Church, but will also give me a plaguing of constant fear and guilt until I get to have my first confession, communion, and confirmation.

What I don't 'know':

But even if I am settled in my mind on the Catholic view of Conversion and the work of the Holy Ghost, I still can't actually invision it practically. I never know anyone who actually changes. Just sinner saints as Luther would say. I would completely doubt the truth of regeneration if it weren't for the few months of it I experienced in Bible School 3 years ago, and a few of my friends who are doing much better than I. But all of them aren't Roman Catholic, and many aren't even baptized. So how does that fit with my theology? it doesn't seem to. Again I just don't know.

And just ask me about Creation, Theistic Evolution, Young Earth, Old Earth, etc. I have absolutely no idea. I don't think I fit into any category because I think they all have problems. I could write an entire blog on this issue (maybe I'll do that next), but currently I find the Christian narrative and the Scientific narrative at odds, and I don't like picking sides because I -like Galileo- think science will vindicate God if it is true, and I believe all truth is God's truth. So I'm waiting around right now, and utterly confused on the matter.

So it's ironic that I started this blog saying "I'm a Christian looking for a Church" and now I say "I found a Church, but I'm looking for a Christian".... hmm. I wonder what I'll be saying in 2 years from now. I started off a "saved and justified bible-believing Christian" at the beginning, and now I appraise myself a "repentant Roman Catholic candidate in a state of damnation (mortal sin)".

I'm still in the purgatory between Protestant and Catholic and working out all these glitches as it were and confused ideas. But I knew I was in a Catholic mindset when people asked me 'so are you going to trust Jesus or the Church' and I immediately thought "false dicotemy" and primarily, the Church.

Comfort

There are some things that bring me comfort however.

1. Mere Christianity. That I at least gotten over the worst of the family strife over my conversion - C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity" is now our household religion. My dad and I when we discuss the faith still speak only with regards to this shared grounds. I also make comments about how there are a great many 'unsaved' people in the Catholic Church and him and I agree on it. (though we use slightly different criteria). And I must say that I've never departed the teaching I received as a child that the Lord looks at the heart first, and so we view in my family now, "true Christianity" not as sola fide or sola ecclesia but as a living trust in Jesus. Pope Benedict XVI calls this the "constant call to conversion" that each Christian has. And while I might not be 'sacramentally' in a state of grace, God knows - I am sure - that my heart is in the right place. And I think that's more important than anything.

2. Kyrie Eliesen. That God is merciful - two of my favourite verses in the bible are: "The sacrifice acceptable to God, is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise" (Ps 51.17) - a verse I emphasize when I talk to Muslims and Jews about salvation. And Jesus' promise "anyone who comes to me I will never drive away" (Jn 6:37). I also have taken comfort in the words of St. Gregory Nazianzen "God's joy in giving is greater than our joy in receiving".

3. Hope. While I cynically doubt I will ever be regenerate and suffer from constant feelings of guilt and inadequacy, I still take comfort in hope, which St. Paul says "will not disappoint" (Rom 5:5). President Obama -who ever Christian seems to hate- wrote a book called "The Audacity of Hope". I read some of it, and regardless of political views here, I just wanted to use the title for something. As Christians we do have the Audacity to hope. It is audacious because all signs point to despair. Hope is probably my favourite thing in the world, it's one of those words that for me has special meaning. It reminds me of Tolkien and his writing for Hope against despair. It's like the word repentance (which for many people is bad) which for me is a beautiful word. And so I try to pray each day for the Gift of the Holy Ghost which Jesus says the Father will give to us if we only ask, and maybe I'm already receiving it without knowing, but right now I have the audacity to hope for the zoe the supernatural and indwelling life of Christ, which I long for above all else.

Conclusion:

I'm still on the Journey, I'm not finished, and I need to spend some time enjoying the mystery of God, and I find it appropriate to quote the words of C.S. Lewis again:

"Relying on God has to begin all over again every day as if nothing had yet been done..."

Thus begins another day.

little Anglican Church

I've been going to this little Anglican church for the last 3 weeks and it has been great. I'm going again this sunday, they have a wonderful balance of the Traditions and Scripture, they have long readings, and a good priest. They also have amazing stain-glassed windows.

The Last Temptation of Canterbury

I was thinking about alot recently. I was thinking about my future. I have planned for the last year to be in the ministry. However as anyone who pays attention to my blog has noticed I came to the conclusion that I believed Apostolic Succession to be essential and that I no longer accepted Sola Fide, or Sola Scriptura. Thus I decided that I would join the Roman Catholic Church. No other denominations have really tempted me since my decision, I seem fairly hopeful in my soon to be new faith. I theologically have changed alot and I'm sure I will become more Catholic but at the same time right now I am probably about a High Anglican with Roman Justification and Authority views, with a small but growing reverance for St. Mary.

However the fact that I desire to have a family and don't feel strongly called to the specifically Catholic priesthood means that I can have no future in ministry. I have found that however there still exists one temptation left to me. Anglicanism. I've written so much on Anglicanism on the blog that I don't feel like repeating all of it, but today I was reading Rowan Williams again - the Archbishop of Canterbury and thought about how awesome he is. He is very much an Anglo-Catholic, and basically everything he says I agree with. He seems to be a very intelligent Christian, and the Anglican model of Scripture, Tradition, and Logic is very appealing to me. I love the versatility of the church even if it includes heretical positions (like the whole Gay issue).
It is hard to stick to your convictions when your dream is to be a minister. So today my temptation among others was to go Anglican. My parents said that if I went to any non-Catholic school they would pay for it. That's tempting again. I was just thinking, wow I could move to South Carolina near Hannah and go to an Episcopalian school and study theology. I know lots of the psycho priests and bishops the Anglicans have in their church and am sure I could become an Anglican/Episcopalian Priest and still profess Catholicism mostly and stay gainfully employed and married as well.

However in my heart I know I'd always have problems. I don't think I could be in communion with Actively Homosexual Ministers of Christ - though this has only happened once it seems an inevitability. I don't know if I could work with 'brothers' who do not believe in the divinity of Christ, or the physical resurrection, or the virgin birth.

I knew that (at least today and for the last month) Roman Catholicism is the most defensible position for me, it makes the most sense and if I left it, I would leave the certain authority in the historic faith. If I was an Anglican I couldn't tell someone they were 'wrong' to not believe in the virgin birth. That's also why Dr. Rowan Williams is so tempting (in an entirely non-sexual way) because he believes the orthodox and historic Christian faith. He opposes heretical positions, but he is incredibly loving towards people of other faiths.

The problem again being that the English Government chooses the Archbishop of Canterbury. Caesar in essence is wed to the church. The Roman Pontiff's election (though corrupted throughout history) is organized by the college of cardinals, bishops the succesors of the apostles.
I'm 99% sure I'm still becoming a Roman Catholic as I've received so much grief, pain, and rejection already for it, and the fact that I believe it makes me think I'll become Catholic. However even if/when I do, I will always respect Dr. Rowan Williams and other Anglicans like C.S. Lewis. Williams has a way to answer these questions with such grace and truth it reminds me of what Jesus would be like in a Q & A session. He is one of my spiritual fathers, no matter what church I join.

All this to say that I am immensely tempted with tons of complications on all sides. Hmm maybe I could become a Catholic, and then go to an Episcopal seminary and then figure something out after that. I dunno. I guess prayer is all that will help. In the end I have to be intellectually honest and can't make decisions about my deepest beliefs based on money making etc. But I guess it is a factor.

hmm. at least this is my days greatest problem. I could be starving in some poor country somewhere in the southern hemisphere.

Baptism

"We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins" - Nicene Creed

My entire life I've been taught at our Evangelical Baptist Church that baptism is 'an outward sign, of an inward reality'. I was baptized at 16 and I thought little about it before hand. When I was in the tank I gave my testimony and conversion story and agreed with the whole saved sola fide (faith alone) blah blah, and then the baptismal formula and as I was dunked with the word 'Spirit' ringing in my ears I came out of the water. .... let it be known I'm no charismatic, I have no problem with them at all, but I'm more tempted towards rationalism than anything, I'm a doubter. But when I came out of that water I felt this rush come over me, it was a bit like being shocked, but in a good way. I felt incredibly holy. I was utterly confused and stumbled out of the tank... it did not feel like 'an outward symbol' ...

I am well aware that my personal experience should not be enough to convince anyone, but I find it interesting as I read St. Gregory of Nyssa, and St. Augustine, and the Nicene creed above all else that the early church - in my limited knowledge - seems like it was overwhelmingly in favour of 'regenerative baptism'. Now if you stumbled onto this blog and you aren't one of my theology friends then I'll explain. Regenerative Baptism is the idea that in baptism your sins are washed away, and forgiven. This is an idea within the East Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and some Anglican and Lutheran churches (note *some).

As the Council of Trent says, "If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of our Lord Jesus Christ: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost" (John 3:5) are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema". Anathema means cursed to hell. I'm not sure I would go that far, but those Catholics, they're sticklers for orthodoxy.

I think it's interesting as I've never come close to believing that before, how it seems strangely close to the experience I felt. In St. Gregory's book he likens baptism to the Israelites crossing the Sea of Reeds (or Red Sea for you KJV folks). He says that as the Egyptians were drowned, so our sins are washed away. ... He also says creepy stuff about not being able to sin after baptism, but I'm going to ignore that for this post.

I think it's crazy how we can read those words from Nicea that Baptism is FOR the forgiveness of sins and still disagree with this idea. ... I guess it's like we can read the words "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church" and ignore those as well.

I again am not sure where I stand on alot, I know so very little but I feel like I'm learning tons as I go along. I mean just yesterday I argued for believers baptism with Lance lol, but I think this position is alot stronger. Once again I am left with the uncomfortable feeling that in Protestantism the only place left is the teetering, splintering, liberal theology infested, Anglican communion. God save it.

Pastoral Issues

I've been wondering lately about the whole thing in Evangelicalism where people pick a church by pastor and kind of go from church to church untill they find the best one. I kind of do this as well (though I do study the theology lightly behind each of the churches). I wonder about the role of a pastor is in Protestant churches. The Priesthood of all believers kind of destroys everything Paul says about Bishops and Deacons and Pastors at the church, and having a Congregational polity kind of destroys the idea of God placing leaders in the church to lead the people in the right way, even if it is the unpopular way.

My Pastor and I are a bit at odds lately for lots of complex reasons but I feel like I'll probably end up just finding another church and go there. But there's another problem. The closest church to my house is the 1st Presbyterian church, which is led by a female minister who barely speaks english and preaches at a sunday school level, the music sucks, the pews are rock hard, and there's probably a congregation of 35 people mostly over 60. But because I am my own pope in essence, I can choose to drive 20 minutes to the 'cool' non-denominational church in the town, with friends my age who attend, good preaching and good music. But then again, why should I judge on those characteristics, maybe I should go back to the Nicene creed and find a church that is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, well I don't know if any 'Holy' churches exist these days... Ok so lets remove Holy and go with Apostolic, Catholic and One. I could go Catholic ... but then I'd have to throw away my bible. I could go Anglican... but then I'd have to throw away God (liberal Anglicans in Canada). I could go Orthodox... but then I'd have to learn Ukranian or Greek and make up a fake family tree.

So maybe I'll just give up on theology all together and go Mennonite Brethren...

Abide With Me

"Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing." John 15:5 ESV

In the midst of all my searching for a denomination God has taught me so much, especially the end of John 15:5 "apart from me you can do nothing" ... I memorized that verse at bible school - I actually wrote a song to remember it, I always 'believed' it, but now I really know that I cannot do Anything without him. I have come to the realization that I am helplessly lost, and nothing I can do - save cling to Christ - will save me. The first part was always strange and abstract to me. How do I abide in Jesus? There is no way for me to describe it, perhaps that is why I didn't understand it until tonight. I always thought that it meant reading your bible and doing good stuff, but really it is alot closer related in my mind to Edwards' description at the end of Sinner's in the Hands of an Angry God, when he calls us to fall before God and cling to him. It is the overwhelming sense in my soul that only in as much as I am In Christ am I elected (at least that's what my Capernwray notes say - Mr. Stamford was an arminian).

A couple of months ago my friend Mark died in our basement from a heart attack, he was 40 something but he had such a passion for God. He believed in me so much and I remember having the most wonderful conversations with him about missions and being a preacher. He had a smile and personality that reminded me of Jesus. At his funeral we sang this song which reminded me of the verse I read, and it was there that I heard it for the first time. One of my bitternesses towards growing up in a willow-creek style / seeker-sensitive church is that I missed hymns like these. But perhaps it is a blessing, and maybe God is using it to teach me something from them, now that I'm old enough to understand. The hymn was called "Abide with Me"

Abide with me; fast falls the eventide;
The darkness deepens; Lord, with me abide;
When other helpers fail and comforts flee,
Help of the helpless, oh, abide with me.

Swift to its close ebbs out life’s little day;
Earth’s joys grow dim, its glories pass away;
Change and decay in all around I see—
O Thou who changest not, abide with me.

I need Thy presence every passing hour;
What but Thy grace can foil the tempter’s pow’r?
Who, like Thyself, my guide and stay can be?
Through cloud and sunshine, Lord, abide with me.

I fear no foe, with Thee at hand to bless;
Ills have no weight, and tears no bitterness;
Where is death’s sting? Where, grave, thy victory?
I triumph still, if Thou abide with me.

Hold Thou Thy cross before my closing eyes;
Shine through the gloom and point me to the skies;
Heav’n’s morning breaks, and earth’s vain shadows flee;
In life, in death, O Lord, abide with me.
-by Henry F. Lyte 1847

Henry F. Lyte was an Anglican Priest who contracted tuberculosis and as his health failed, after his last time preaching, he penned this hymn, not three weeks before he died. It is the official hymn of England... So I guess I have been living in a cave so to speak, because I had never heard it before.

I was listening to it tonight as I was realizing all of this, and after I had read John 13-15 in my Grandpa's King James Bible with all his notes written in it. The first verse I read was:

"having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end." John 13:1 KJV

To me that reminded me so much of the hymn and the final lines. My silent prayer this week through all my struggles will be "O Lord Abide with Me"

Christian Ethical Dilemmas and Christ Alone

"When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations... when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy." -Deuteronomy 7

"God blesses those who work for peace, for they will be called the children of God...You have heard the law that says the punishment must match the injury: ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say, do not resist an evil person! If someone slaps you on the right cheek, offer the other cheek also...“You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor’ and hate your enemy. But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. " - Jesus Christ (Matthew 5)

To me it disturbs me as I debate with others who know the bible and that God commands genocide. I know that they were 'sinful', but it still disturbs me greatly. I was watching a debate between Dr. Alister McGrath - a genius Anglican Priest and Scientist, and Christopher Hitchens -all around atheist douchebag (sorry about the ad hominem). Here it is:http://fora.tv/2007/10/11/Christopher_Hitchens_Debates_Alister_McGrath

McGrath keeps quoting St. Paul from Colossians saying that Jesus is the Image of the Invisible God and so he is the final revelation and that he is the final interpretation. He says reading the Old Testament in light of this makes it 'ok'. But how can you read those two statements and reconcile them. Hitchens is smart enough to know alot about Christianity and says that Christianity denounced Marcion who wanted to only leave Luke and Paul's writing in the bible and erase the 'jewishness' and in a way I think he's right that McGrath is a bit guilty of that.

So as I read the commands of God (the Father) in the Old Testament - whom I believe to be of the essence as Jesus (the Son) like any good trinitarian, I am deeply troubled as what appears to be a contradiction in character. Maybe God isn't all good, after all, "from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come" Lam 3:38. This sounds scarily like Calvinism's ideas that God arbitrarily assigns wrath to people and salvation to others... I am not sure if I am capable of worshipping such a God, not because I can disprove this from the bible, so much as it is simply awful.

So my conclusion is that I realize that Alister McGrath, and Karl Barth have taught me alot about Christo-centric theology. It is the idea that Christ is the basis of all scripture and the find their authority in Him. The Bible is only important in that it tells us accurately about Jesus and God's incarnation. This is the Old Protestant ideal: Solus Christus - Christ Alone. Jesus is the centre of everything, he IS the very WORD of God, the Logos, the great icon of Deity, he is the picture of God and his revealed character, it is as St. John of the Cross said "In giving us his Son, his only and definitive Word, God spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word, and he has no more to say".

Homosexuality, the Shema, and the Anglican Communion

I'm reading a book called "The Church in Transition: The Journey of Existing Churches into the Emerging Culture" by Tim Conder and it is really good. He brings up some great points about the captivity of the bible to systematic theology and other things.

However I've been thinking as I go on my perpetual journey for a denomination, what my views on Homosexuality are. I definately believe it is a sin and condemned in Romans, however I want to always remember that Christ is the center of everything. Colossians says he is 'the image of the invisible God'. So what does Jesus say when asked the Greatest Commandment? He replies that it is the Shema Yisrael, and says that it is to Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and that the second is like it to love your neighbor as yourself. And we all know in the story of the Good Samaritan which follows this shows that your neighbour is someone with a different religion (samaritan judaism and samaritan pentateuch) and someone who is unclean.

So we say as Christians two things. The Second greatest commandment is to love your neighbour. Then we have two other lesser commandments: 'judge not lest ye be judged' and the principle that practicing homosexuality behaviour is wrong.

So here's my question. Who has committed the greater sin? A Christian who hates and slanders homosexuals, or a homosexual who is practicing. In my opinion it is the Christian who hates and slanders homosexuals.

So while it is true that the Anglican Communion is splitting over whether or not to bless gay marriages (not even offer marriages, just blessings of them). It is strange how screwed up our priorities are. The conservatives reel on about the awfulness of homosexuals and how debased and sinful they are to the point that I would say it is hate and judgment to the point of sin.

Rob Whittaker - my hero - has written a genius paper on homosexuality and though he is against it, he writes in a very pastoral way that is amazing and very well done. He also taught me that heresy is not just lies, it can be either: 1) truth out of context, or 2) truth out of proportion. I feel like the over-zealous condemnation and rejection of homosexuals is guilty of the second definition of heresy.

So while I still believe that homosexual behaviour is wrong, I believe hatred for my neighbour is a greater sin.

Ekklesia Veritas - The True Body of Christ?

"One holy, catholic, and apostolic church" - Nicene Creed

This creed sent me in search of the true church. I trusted it because it proves the Trinity, but it had led me to at least 2 major problems.

1. It says that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins - which I still haven't even got to yet in my search.

2. The Church as recognized and defined by the early church against the threat of heresy (mainly gnosticism) that it had to be 4 things:

a. One - Unified. What kind of unity? in the gospel? in Christ? in the Holy Spirit? No the Church at the time was unified by a shared communion - like the Roman Catholic Church or the Anglican Church.

b. Holy - Seperated distinct from the people all around - like the Jews were to the Canaanites. It means that the church is set apart, and actively different and morally pure. I don't know if any church fully meets that standard. The Amish are good at the 'set apart' bit, but not at the Catholic, or Aposotlic bit.

c. catholic - universal. Protestants usually just say universal and quickly move on, however this is important. The amish are a great glimpse at an entirely local church. They are not universal. Many protestant denominations are 90% white middle class families, in Canada, US, and UK - that isn't Catholic. Many Roman Catholics argue that even saying catholic means universal is not enough, but that it means in submission to Rome, but since the Greek Fathers might disagree, we'll leave that out for a bit.

d. Apostolic. There is debate here and now because of the Reformation. Protestants believe this means that the church holds to the teachings of the apostles and thus it is apostolic. But it is hard to argue that at the time, many believed this. It has always meant until 1517 that the church has apostolic succession, that the offices of bishops and priests have been passed on to the church today in a direct line to Christ. The only protestant churches that may argue this - though not superbly - are the Anglicans (who have the best case), the Lutherans, and some Reformed (though Calvin was never ordained, unlike Luther).

So for this reason and Paul's writing in Ephesians that there is one church, and his criticism of denominationalism in Corinthians led me to the Roman Catholic Church. I figured unless I would doubt all the other dogmas of the faith I would have to convert. However, it was not that easy. I saw that many of their dogmas even if they had little basis in scripture, still worked (like purgatory). Though they did do many things -which no amount of reading will I think ever change my mind - which I utterly disagree with. The elevate Mary to the place of co-redemptrix and they are tricky with the wording of everything so as to not 'technically' fall into unbiblical heresy. However still, to claim a person was born without sin and ascended into heaven and is a mediator of Christ's grace... to pray to her more than to the Lord Jesus Christ. That is wrong. And it doesn't matter what wording you have. It is clear from Paul in Romans that people have always tried to worship creatures rather than the creator. And the whole 2nd commandment issue - don't even get me started (that's why East Orthodox is out as well). The biggest thing however is the Pope. For I heard one Catholic Theologian say he is 'in essence, God on Earth', they call him the head of the Church - Christ is the head. So I could never be a part of an organization that usurps Christ's titles and pays more attention to his mother than him.

Where does this leave me? Anglicanism. It seemed like the perfect answer. It is one communion, catholic - universal (composed of many poor in central america etc.), apostolic (when the CofE was established all catholic bishops and priests made anglican, and the line has continued). However is it Holy? I am disturbed by many things within the Anglican church. I attended a service at my local Anglican church and the Female Priest said that Paul in 2 Tim was praying like a Pharisee and was too proud and not humble and that already the church had lost it's way. Also my diocese of Niagara was I think the first in the world to bless gay marriages. Homosexuality is wrong. Marriage is a sacrament of the church and should not be put upon even Christians and non-Christians, let alone those who are practicing homosexuals. I have no problem saying Christians who are struggling with homosexuality are as Christian as I or anyone is. But I have a problem with blessing it. The Anglican Church has been destroyed by Liberal Theology. Thus in Canada and the Episcopal Church in the U.S. The Anglican church is nearly brought to nothing. However in England there are many godly leaders and there has been a great history of good Anglican thinkers. You have Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. I think that man is a genius and I respect him highly. You have Dr. N.T. Wright one of the best New Testament scholars around and I love his stuff on the resurrection and the authority of scripture. You have C.S. Lewis, John Stott, and many others. So maybe I could be an Anglican in England or elsewhere? I simply fear there is no perfect church, and that is why I am becoming more and more partial to Calvin and the other reformers' view on the Church. That we find our unity in Christ, that the church is holy because he is holy, that it is universal because every tongue, tribe, and nation will declare Jesus is Lord, and that these confessions of Christ are being made in every place in each church and thus the church is catholic, and that each church is only apostolic in so much as it's teaching agrees with the Apostles and their teaching.