Per Christum

Be glad this guy isn’t the music minister or director of liturgical dance and abuses at your parish :):

Today is the Feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, the Forerunner of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Our Savior gave John the highest praise, saying that there was “none greater born of Woman.” In the Church, after Our Blessed Lady, the highest veneration goes to John the Baptist. In the East his ikon is prominent on the ikonostas before the Holy Table and in the West he is confessed to in the traditional Confiteor…”I confess to Almighty God…to Blessed John the Baptist…” And yet, Jesus said, “the least in the Kingdom of God is greater than he.”

What?!! The LEAST in the Kingdom is greater than the Great Prophet?! I promise you, Our Lord was not denigrating His cousin; He was driving home a Great Truth: John was still in the Old Dispensation, the Old Covenant, dying before the Lord’s Crucifixion and Resurrection; we, believers post those events, have become partakers of and witnesses to the fulfilment of all God’s promises in Christ. We have become partakers of “the Divine Life through Him”, as St. Peter tells. We are not, in ourselves, greater than John the Baptist, but filled with the Holy Spirit and being part of the Body of Christ, we have become a priestly and prophetic People, the Kingdom of God. As Pope St. Gregory tells us: “Christians! Be conscious of your dignity!” We, through Christ, have become equal-to-the-prophets…even the least of us. Thanks be to God!

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes.” Malachi 4: 5

Holy John the Baptizer, Elijah’s spiritual return, pray for us! Amen.

A blessed St. John’s Day (and traditional Midsummer Day) to one and all.

There is some interesting discussion about Ann Redding, the Episcopal priest in the diocese of Olympia, who claims to be a Christian and a Muslim at the same time, over at Titus One Nine. Apparently the Episcopal diocese of Olympia initially publicized this, but now is backtracking after the negative publicity.

I have made a few comments over at T19, and quite frankly, I feel this woman is being offensive to both Episcopalians and Muslims. I can’t help but think that only in postmodern America would someone be so brazen as to claim to be both a Christian clergyperson and a Muslim at the same time. I can tell you with certainty, that it is impossible to be both a true Anglican and a true Muslim at the same time, and one side, or both, is going to suffer. Apparently, Redding does not believe in the Trinity, or the deity of Christ. I do think a priest could, in certain circumstances, claim to be an orthodox Christian and somehow embrace aspects of other faiths, but one cannot be a member of a faith that believes in the Trinity, and at the same time be a part of a religion that abhors the Trinity.

These are some excerpts from the original story that demonstrate Redding is really creating a faith of her own making, an American trend (and right) perhaps, but her “buffet” approach to religion is incompatible with both classical Anglicanism and Islam:

Redding’s views, even before she embraced Islam, were more interpretive than literal.

She believes the Trinity is an idea about God and cannot be taken literally.

She does not believe Jesus and God are the same, but rather that God is more than Jesus.

She believes Jesus is the son of God insofar as all humans are the children of God, and that Jesus is divine, just as all humans are divine — because God dwells in all humans.

What makes Jesus unique, she believes, is that out of all humans, he most embodied being filled with God and identifying completely with God’s will.

She does believe that Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected, and acknowledges those beliefs conflict with the teachings of the Quran. “That’s something I’ll find a challenge the rest of my life,” she said.

Mind you, I am all for interfaith activities. However, I can’t help but think Redding is cheapening interfaith dialogue and interaction by claiming two labels, both very meaningful to those in each faith, at once. Personally, I have too much respect for people of other faiths to claim to be a true believer in their religion, unless I actually were to genuinely and truly convert. If I were to do so, I would feel as if I were cheapening the other person’s faith. For example, I would hope a Muslim would have enough respect for Catholicism to not claim the label, unless he or she could, in good faith, affirm the Teachings of the Church. I would not cause offense to my Muslim friends by claiming to be a Muslim while remaining a minister in a trinitarian church.

I think this is an issue of order and discipline. If Redding is having a crisis of faith, then that is her prerogative, and that is quite normal and understandable. However, I think the genuine thing to do is to take a sabbatical, or if she doesn’t volunteer so to do, her bishop, if he decides to act like a bishop, should insist she take one. And if she decides she will continue to claim to be somehow both Christian and Muslim, then she should not be an Episcopal priest. I am not being mean, or “exclusive,” just insisting on respect for both faiths involved.

Shortly after noon on Fridays, the Rev. Ann Holmes Redding ties on a black headscarf, preparing to pray with her Muslim group on First Hill.

On Sunday mornings, Redding puts on the white collar of an Episcopal priest.

She does both, she says, because she’s Christian and Muslim.

Redding, who until recently was director of faith formation at St. Mark’s Episcopal Cathedral, has been a priest for more than 20 years. Now she’s ready to tell people that, for the last 15 months, she’s also been a Muslim — drawn to the faith after an introduction to Islamic prayers left her profoundly moved….

Redding’s bishop, the Rt. Rev. Vincent Warner, says he accepts Redding as an Episcopal priest and a Muslim, and that he finds the interfaith possibilities exciting. Her announcement, first made through a story in her diocese’s newspaper, hasn’t caused much controversy yet, he said.

Read it all

I wish I were creative enough to make this stuff up!

You never know what you will find at flea markets. I was shopping at my parish and school’s flea market the other day and found a few interesting books. First, I found a nice copy of the Catechism. Second, I found Francis: A Biography of the Saint of Assisi by Michael De La Bedoyere, and finally, Theotokos: Mary Mother of Our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ by Melkite Archbishop Joseph Raya. The late Raya was an Eastern Catholic Archbishop, who retired in Canada at Madonna House. The copy of his book I now own was originally a library copy at Madonna House, so I wonder if the bishop himself ever used this copy. It is a great book explaining Mary from the Eastern perspective.

All-in-all I think I made out pretty well: three books for a grand total of 75 cents!

Pontificator (who has a new blog location by the way), recently posted a fine article entitled Renewing the “Renewed” Liturgy. There is some good discussion over at his blog. Here are his ideas for making the Western Liturgy more sacred. What do you think?

(1) Abandon the versus populum, immediately! Let priest and people face God together. The single most destructive feature of the “renewed liturgy” is its anthropocentric orientation. The people of God are sanctified by worshipping God, not by celebrating each other.

(2) Restore the chanted liturgy. Prayers are to be sung according to the ancient forms.

(3) Ban the musical compositions of Marty Haugen and David Haas and anything similar. Gregorian chant must be restored as the primary music of the Latin rite. Given the magnitude of the problem, it is probably best to simply ban all music composed after 1960. Perhaps one day the good music that has been composed during the past forty years can be retrieved, but that day is not now. Catholic priests and musicians today do not know what sacred music is.

(4) Restore the use of incense.

(5) Eradicate ritual informality.

(6) Drastically reduce electronic amplification.

(7) Encourage eucharistic adoration both within and outside the Mass. Let the people prostrate themselves before Christ Jesus in the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar. A bow of the head is not sufficient!

After much thought, I have finally become persuaded that all Catholic priests should be authorized to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, despite the inevitable confusion this will create. While I personally believe that liturgy should be normatively celebrated in the language of the people, I also believe that the practical abolition of the Tridentine Mass was wrong and destructive. We must retrace our steps and attempt to undo the blunders of the post-Vatican II Church. In one way or another, we must forge new connections to the liturgical tradition and the Mass of St Pius V.

I was reading this article on Titus One Nine about an Anglican bishop who does not believe in the miracle of the Virgin birth. Now, I am not sure whether he recites the Nicene Creed weekly, or if he bothers to recite the part that mentions Mary being a virgin, but it raised a question in mind, which is:

Why would you recite a creed that you do not believe in, and in some cases, openly teach against?

Remember, a creed is a statement of belief. Traditionally, it is a statement that all Christians within a particular denomination are expected to believe. Of course, modernism has muddied these waters, and there exist many reasons why a person can recite a statement of belief but not actually believe what he is reciting. Some of these reasons for saying one thing and believing another are rooted in faith and submission, while others seem to be disingenuous.

It is common knowledge that many pastors and leaders in the mainline Protestant denominations publicly deny major Christian creedal beliefs (including the virgin birth, resurrection, and Trinity), although I am sure some Catholic leaders do the same thing. Why would church leaders recite a creed that affirms the very ideas they deny? Note that I am not referring to casual doubters here, but church leaders who, by their position, are expected to teach and defend the creeds. Also, I am not referring to individuals who have moments of doubt, ignorance, or weakness, but folks who have given these issues enough thought to have theological and philosophical arguments against classic Christian doctrines. And yet, many of these individuals still recite the creeds, and still remain leaders in denominations that are supposed to be based on the creeds.

As I write this, I think there are two genuine options in the case of those who cannot honestly recite a creed: either face/work through personal doubts (perhaps even over time) and, through faith, submit to the teachings of the creed in question, or join a church/organization that does not adhere to the particular creed that you cannot affirm. Related to the latter, I think many folks say the creed while doubting, faithfully seeking the Church’s guidance through the doubt, seeking the gift of faith amidst unbelief. I think this is a genuine option, one that recognizes the importance of submission to Christ and His Church, while facing what comes naturally to man: doubt. This, in my opinion, is different than being a church leader and openly denying/teaching against the beliefs contained in the creeds. I think if a person reaches a point where he proudly, openly, and publicly denies creedal beliefs, the latter option (finding another church) is more genuine.

I remember being driven batty by this issue when I was in seminary. That a future minister could trash a classic Christian doctrine in class and then affirm the doctrine by reciting the creed during worship irked me. However, I did meet some students who recognized the disconnect between what they believed and were expected to affirm in the creeds. One lady became Episcopalian because, even though she quit believing in doctrines like Jesus’ deity or his birth from a virgin, she liked singing in the local Episcopal parish choir. Even though I think that this is a poor reason to join a church, I will give her credit on one point: she did not recite the creeds because she didn’t accept their content.

So, what do you think? Is it genuine to recite a statement of belief and not believe what you are saying?

Greetings, all,

I have recently received a very kind message from Bp. Fred Fick, sometime CEC bishop of the Great Lakes.

Bp. Fick informs me that while he participated in some of the preliminary discussions which led to the formation of the Communion of Christ the Redeemer; after much prayer and discernment, he has declined to participate in that endeavor. Instead, he is seeking the fellowship of conservative Anglicans within the Continuing Movement.

I pray that Bp. Fick and his family and friends find the Will of God for their unique situation, as I am sure that they continue to pray for us.

God bless you, Bp. Fick.

This probably won’t come as a shock to anyone, but I find David incredibly handsome. Whether he is dressed up, working out, or relaxed, there isn’t a look I don’t like on him. But of all his “looks” the one I love the most, the one that is most attractive to me is when he is praying especially in church.

Maybe it’s the light from the high ceiling lamps, filtering down in a warm glow. Or maybe it’s the light that comes from within a devout man as he participates in the sacrifice of the Mass. Or maybe it’s just being in God’s presence that makes everything more beautiful (or handsome).

Whatever it is, there is something incredibly attractive about a man viewed under church lighting.

Faith is a beautiful thing.

cross posted from: totus tuus

Today, as many readers here know, is Trinity Sunday, a day set aside to specifically celebrate the blessed Trinity, the three-in-one. The Trinity is the belief that one God exists in three persons. Muslims, Jews, Unitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and enlightenment rationalists misunderstand or even mock this ancient, cherished dogma. The Trinity is probably one of the most difficult Christian dogmas to grasp. Of course, that is why many of us are drawn to the doctrine of the Trinity: it is beautifully paradoxical, understood primarily by faith and worship, only known in part by the rational mind.

Many of the great saints recommend not over-focusing on understanding the Trinity, but rather simply appreciating the grand mystery. As St. Hilary of Poitiers writes:

Penetrate into the mystery, plunge into the darkness which shrouds that birth, where you will be alone with God the Unbegotten and God the Only-begotten. Make your start, continue, persevere. I know that you will not reach the goal, but I shall rejoice at your progress. For He who devoutly treads an endless road, though he reach no conclusion, will profit by his exertions. Reason will fail for want of words, but when it comes to a stand it will be the better for the effort made.