You Believe What?!

All Saints Day

It has come to my attention that many believers who are new to the liturgical traditions of the Church may be unfamiliar with the Feast of All Saints. The tradition of commemorating those who have gone before us extends back to the very early days of the Christian Church. By the early 200’s evidence suggests that it was already common for local churches to celebrate and remember the martyrdoms of their various members, lauding them as examples of following Christ even unto death. It was not long however before there were indeed so many martyrs throughout the universal Church that remembering each separately became impractical (remember that Christianity was illegal for most of the first 400 or so years of the Church’s history), thus the Church began to condense its commemorations. By the early 700’s it would appear that November 1 was selected as a day to remember the examples of all those who have gone before.

In 807 Gregory IV extended the celebration from strictly the example of martyrs to celebrating the example of all the saints that have entered ahead of us into rest and glory. This was indeed fitting since the word that we translate as saints, hagioi, simply means holy or set apart ones. The New Testament applies this word to all of the faithful in Christ. Therefore it is appropriate to celebrate on this day not only those historically significant exemplars of the faith but ALL the saints, the holy ones in Christ who have entered into eternal joy.

The Feast of All Saints is a feast of the Resurrection. Thus the church is decorated in white and gold and baptisms are traditionally performed. As St. Paul notes in 1 Corinthians 15:20-23 “But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ.” At Easter we celebrate the resurrection of Christ, the ‘firstfruits’. On All Saints we celebrate the fact that in Christ we all shall be raised to Life because we belong to Him.

The Church affirms in her ancient Creeds that we believe in the “communion of saints, the resurrection of the dead and the life everlasting.” In the book of Revelation chapter 7 the Apostle John, peering beyond the veil that separates Heaven and Earth, sees a great host of white robed saints from every people group on earth worshipping before the Throne of God. Likewise the author of the book of Hebrews tells us that we are “surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses” who are cheering us on in the race as we carry the baton of faith in our own day. Together, these texts affirm that while the souls of those who have died are awaiting their bodily resurrection upon Christ’s return, they have not ceased to exist but are still very much alive in the Lord, worshipping in His Divine Presence. Hebrews also suggests that they are apparently well aware of the trials and challenges of those of us who are following Christ here upon the earth and are therefore cheering us on. Thus we affirm in one of the prayers from the Burial Rite in the Book of Common Prayer, “For to your faithful people, O Lord, life is changed, not ended; and when our mortal body lies in death, there is prepared for us a dwelling place eternal in the heavens”

So also we pray on All Saints Day, “Almighty God, you have knit together your elect in one communion and fellowship in the mystical body of your Son Christ our Lord: Give us grace so to follow your blessed saints in all virtuous and godly living, that we may come to those ineffable joys that you have prepared for those who truly love you; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who with you and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, one God, in glory everlasting. Amen.”

This Collect (prayer) for the day perfectly sums up all that we have said. All Saints Day is a celebration of the life beyond the grave that is ours in Christ. As we celebrate we affirm that all those faithful who have died in the Lord are with Him awaiting the consummation of all things at the coming of His Kingdom. It is also a day to recognize, remember and celebrate the example in Christ that these have set for us. With those thoughts in our hearts and minds it is my prayer that we can all enter into the Feast together as we affirm, “O God, in the multitude of your saints you have surrounded us with a great cloud of witnesses, that we might rejoice in their fellowship, and run with endurance the race that is set before us; and, together with them, receive the crown of glory that never fades away.”

Sorry for the Silence

October has been a busy month here in Fort Collins. I apologize that I have not gotten anything up all month. Look for a new post shortly.

SPH+

Why Do you Do That?!

What is Confirmation anyway?

Last week we kicked off the Angli-whaat?! class at Christ Our Hope, the overview of Anglicanism that I teach every year which was the starting point for this blog. The class also serves as the only Confirmation/Reception class that we offer at Christ Our Hope. So while the class is open to anyone, those seeking Confirmation are required to attend.

Well, last week a very important question arose before I got into any of my prepared material. What is Confirmation anyway? So here is a brief posting on the foundation and practice of Confirmation. I will talk about Confirmation in three senses.

First and foremost Confirmation arose out of a pastoral need. As you likely know, in Anglicanism we baptize infants and young children of believing parents. But just because one was baptized as a child does not mean that as they grow and mature they will continue to walk in the faith. We all know plenty of "lapsed" or "backsliding" Christians. So, speaking into this need the Church in Her wisdom developed this service as an opportunity for those who were baptized at an early age to confirm their faith by making a mature profession of it. Thus the first act of Confirmation is an examination by the bishop who asks, "Do you reaffirm your renunciation of evil? Do you renew your commitment to Jesus Christ?" In this way the candidate is able to confirm their faith in the Lord Jesus.

But there is a second sense to confirmation which comes with the laying on of hands by the bishop. It is a Confirmation of the Spirit's Power and Presence. We know of course that all those who are baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have received the gift of the Holy Spirit. But we also know that the Spirit grants gifts and riches that take a lifetime to receive and learn. We are, all of us commanded to be baptized (the Greek, baptizo meaning to be immersed) with the Spirit. Confirmation is just another opportunity for the bishop as a minister of Christ to pray that the flame of the Spirit would be kindled and rise up in the heart, life and ministry of the individual who is being confirmed. It is a confirmation and a calling forth of the Spirit's Power.

And finally, along with this Spirit-kindling comes an empowering and a commissioning of the individual as a member and therefore a minister of the Body of Christ. All of us are ministers. All who have the Spirit have received gifts that need to be shared with the Body and with the World. So Confirmation in this third sense means the bishop is confirming the candidate as a qualified minister of Christ's Gospel.

So there you go. Confirmation in three senses. It was a good question. Are there any others?

You Believe What?!

Who Gave You the Right?!

I was at a dinner party last night when the topic of authority came up. One of my friends was arguing that they do not accept or receive any authority accept for Christ and the Bible. This is of course not a new line of argument. It has been present in the Church since the time of the Reformation. But the problem with that line of thinking is that frankly, it's not true. We may have trouble, in our fallen sinful nature accepting authority, but we all do follow authority to one degree or another. The only question then is WHICH authorities do we receive and follow.

Allow me an example. I would venture to guess that when all of us come to a stop light we stop. The laws of the land and the rules of good driving dictate that we must stop at a red light. Without that law, and without general adherence to it there would be far more motor accidents than there already are. We accept the authority of the government and society at large to dictate certain things to us. We do not drive however we feel (or at least we shouldn't if we value life and limb). To disregard all authority is anarchy and there are very few if any who have ever been able to live consistently as true anarchists.

But to keep going with my driving example, there are plenty of us who choose to fudge on the speed limit. I am fairly certain I am not the only one who has ever heard someone invoke the "five over rule" (ie I can get away with speeding a bit, and I won't get pulled over if I'm just going 5 over or so). We know the authorities have set the speed limit, but this is an authority that many believe is somehow negotiable. But even here, while some do choose to speed excessively (and if you have ever driven on I-25 you know this is so), most adhere to some semblance of the speed limit.

So the question I come to is this, why do most citizens adhere to traffic laws and speed limits? Because we have a sense that they have been set in such a way for the common good; for our good. So again, the question is not whether or not we can accept authority but which authority we are willing to accept.

In the case of the Christian Church I would humbly submit that we are called to adhere to certain godly authority. And furthermore, most Christians have throughout the centuries, and all Christians should submit to such godly authority on the same grounds as our submission to the speed limits; because such authority is granted for our own good and that of the community. Anarchy is hard to live out in society - it is impossible to live out in the community of Christ.

In his final instructions to the Church the Author of the Letter to the Hebrews says this, "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you." (Hebrews 13:17) There is a clear teaching here. Leaders are submitted to Christ, the Church must submit to those in godly leadership. And here is the connection with my earlier examples; when both sides of that equation are working properly it is to our benefit.

The Anglican Reformers understood this need to retain some semblance of godly authority within the Church. They did not embrace the ethos of "me, my Bible and the Holy Spirit," that eventually came out of other Protestant traditions. Hear again what the Anglican 39 Articles of Religion have to say on the matter.

The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation.

Do you see the beauty and balance that reflects the Hebrew's admonition here? The Church has been granted God given authority. There are decisions to be made about how we organize ourselves, how we worship and how we clarify what it means to understand the Scriptures rightly and apply them in our own day. Yet the authorities of the Church are under Authority themselves, they are accountable, expressed here in the Article as an accountability to only teach what is in accord with Scripture and to enforce only that which is taught there plainly.

Authority is a good thing. It is necessary and it is God given. We all live our lives in submission to some authorities. The question is which ones. The answer for the Christian is fairly simple.

Romans 13:1-2 "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. "

"Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you." (Hebrews 13:17)

You believe What?!

Towards an Understanding of the Eucharist Part 2: Anglican Understandings of the Lord's Supper.

Following up on my previous post about the nature of a sacrament, let's look more specifically at what the 39 Articles say about the Lord's Supper.

The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another; but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ’s death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ. Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith.

To translate this into colloquial terms, on the one hand the Articles reject the “Memorialist” view first espoused by Swiss Reformer Huldrych Zwingli. This is what I like to call the “real absence” model. Nothing spiritual or supernatural is thought to be happening here. Churches that hold this theology go out of their way to communicate that absence too. It is seen merely as a visual aid in contemplating Christ’s death in this view.

But for Anglicans that view is simply out of bounds. We hold that the Sacrament of the Table is definitely more than just a mere token. It is a Sacrament – so there is, by definition, an invisible grace being imparted. It is a true partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ – an experience of spiritual union not only with one another but with our Lord. Yet, the Roman Catholic idea of Transubstantiation[1] goes too far in the other direction. Here again, as the Article says this view, “overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament.” The means by which we receive is faith, it is spiritual food, the substance of bread and wine does not change. So, both memorialism must be rejected on the one extreme and transubstantion likewise rejected on the other. Both though are rejected for the same reason, they do violence to what a sacrament means by definition.

Anglicanism on the other hand seeks to preserve that definition and fit our understanding of the Sacraments to it. Anglicans espouse what I prefer to call the Buffalo Springfield view, “There’s somethin’ happenin’ here. What it is ain’t exactly clear…”[2] Do you see the theme of known unknown reemerging here? We know what the Sacrament is not – it’s not real absence, and its not transubstantiation. We know it is a means of communicating spiritual grace in some way. But as Anglicans we consciously choose not to define it any further than that. This theological view is most often called, the “Real Presence” view. Christ is really and truly present in the Eucharist. We know not how, we simply receive it as a mystery and partake of it by faith.

This view leads to a great deal of freedom and several valid sacramental sub-theologies within the Anglican view. There are “high church” subscribers who hold the actual substance of the sacrament in higher regard for they feel that the Presence of the Spirit is somehow attached to the bread and the wine itself. This view, high though it is still distinguishes itself from Transubstantiation because the high church Anglican should still maintain that the Presence is a spiritual and not a literal one.

On the other hand there are those who hold to a more receptionist model. In this view the Presence comes to the heart of the believer as they are receiving the Sacrament. This emphasized the work of the Spirit in the heart upon reception (thus the name) rather than attaching the Presence in a tangible way to the elements themselves. Here too they do not go to the extreme of Zwinglian “real absence.”

---

[1] This is the view first proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas and it is based on the Aristotelian metaphysics which divide the essence of a thing from the accident. In other words, the essence of the bread and wine is changed though the accident, or form, appears unchanged. Through this view the Roman Catholic holds that they are actually eating the literal flesh of the Lord and literally drinking his blood because though the elements still appear as bread and wine, their essence is changed into the actual Body and Blood.

[2] From the sixties protest song, For What It’s Worth by the band Buffalo Springfield.

You Believe What?!

Crazy Uncle Fester

Every family has that relative they frankly sometimes wish they didn't have to claim. You know the uncle or cousin who shows up at EVERY family event and just says the rudest, or the most inane thing, or just doesn't pick up on the social cues or whatever. Well, the Anglican family too has such a relation. But nevertheless, if we fail to claim him we will doubtless do ourselves a disservice and fail to live up to everything the Lord wants His Church to be.

Contemporary Anglicans, self included, make much of the three streams that flow together to form orthodox Anglicanism. Much has been written and discussed about the nexus of the catholic, Evangelical and Charismatic traditions as they converge in contemporary Anglican movements. But there is a fourth stream that we need to remember, however uncomfortable it may make us. Because traditionally within Anglicanism there has always been what Anglican Historian, The Rev. Dr. Leslie Fairfield has called, "a legitimate liberal impulse."

Throughout the history of the Church believers have taken seriously the call to remain engaged with the surrounding society. Whether that took on the form of early Christians caring for the victims of famine and plague or Evangelicals working tirelessly for the abolition of slavery. However, as Evangelical Christianity has come in recent centuries to lay greater and greater emphasis upon the salvation of one's eternal soul, it has unfortunately come at the price of de-emphasizing the "salt and light" role of the believer within her society.

As a response to that sad exclusionary motion the liberal church emerged. Now, I would be quick to follow Dr. Fairfield in pointing out that his language was carefully selected - there is a legitimate liberal impulse. This does not claim that the liberal church is legitimate, lock, stock and barrel. Unfortunately, alongside social engagement this movement within the Church also came to embrace the worst of German higher criticism, secular humanism, Eastern religion and the theology of men like Marcus Borg, Bishops John Shelby Spong and JAT Robinson before him. Sadly today many liberals have departed from the fold of orthodox, biblically based, credal Christianity.

Nevertheless, whether we get along with Uncle Fester or not, he has something legitimate to say. As Christians who are obedient to our Lord to seek His Kingdom first, we do have a role in declaring and even enacting that Kingdom in the midst of this present age. So for my part, it is my prayer that we as Anglicans would be a truly Three Streams Church which remembers the small but mighty tributary of legitimate social engagement as well.

You Believe What?!

Toward and Understanding of the Eucharist Part 1: The Nature of a Sacrament

Frankly, the theology of the Sacraments is what simultaneously places Anglicans squarely in the stream of the ancient holy, catholic and apostolic Church; and yet it is also in some ways what marks us apart from both Roman Catholics and a good number of our fellow Protestants. So it is important to understand just where Anglicans come from on these issues.

This leads us back again to our trusty guide the 39 Articles and Article XXV, Of The Sacraments, in particular.

Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God’s good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him.

That is a dense statement which requires some unpacking. The Sacraments are not just external signs. They are not just tokens of our faith like a Redwings T-Shirt is a sign of my team loyalty. But they are witnesses of God’s grace – that is they speak to us of our cleansing from sin, they speak to us of the reality of our Union with Christ and one another, they speak to us of the Covenant that God has formed with us through Christ’s blood, they speak to us of the great sacrifice that Christ made on the cross to purchase all of that. But we cannot stop even here. For they are not witnesses only – they are also effectual signs through which God works invisibly within us to quicken, strengthen and confirm our faith. In other words, if you asked me – does baptism leave a person different after the fact than they were before they entered those waters, I would respond absolutely. Does receiving communion leave a person different – to be sure. It is the spiritual food that feeds and nourishes our soul just as natural food feeds and nourishes our bodies.

We will look more at the specifics of the Sacrament of the Table in a future post.