Per Christum

Last night I went to a youth gathering called Xlt. Our diocese will be implementing the program starting next school year. These will be monthly youth gatherings at different parishes, consisting of music, preaching, and adoration, modeled after what takes place at World Youth Day and other Church-sanctioned events for youth. I am always a little cautious when participating in programming like this, but I thought the event was well-done. Why am I cautious? Because in the past I have seen programming that was so silly and trendy compared to regular parish worship that it was embarrassing.  At any rate, we started out with singing, then two priests talked about Eucharistic adoration, and the evening concluded with actual adoration (including singing the Divine Praises). This was a preview for parish and school leaders, although we brought some youth along.

I think Xlt is a good idea, even if it may be a tad trendy. The more I actually deal with youth on a regular basis, the more I think young people need to be able to connect with Catholic peers, and have Catholic teaching reinforced at events like this. Ideal or not, many teens are not learning the faith in the home, and events like this may be the only exposure they get to solid Catholic Teaching. Also, it is good to see young people getting into adoration, even if it takes a special event like a monthly gathering to get them into it. There was even quite a bit of Latin included in the songs. On the way home a few students asked about the Latin, and what the phrase meant. It was a good springboard for discussing Latin and Latin prayers. I admit that I am a teacher, and could never make it as a youth leader, but I applaud the youth leaders that planned this event!

The author of Retractiones has posted some great rebuttals of common myths about what people in the Middle Ages actually believed. For instance, did all people before the enlightenment think the world was flat? Nope. In fact Thomas Aquinas quite clearly says the world was round (some ancient Greeks believed it was conical, if I remember correctly). Were medievals burning witches all the time? Not by a long shot. Did popes invent Friday abstinence to strengthen the fishing industry around Rome? Umm…who makes this stuff up???

For more myths, stroll over to Retractiones and have a look at the whole post!

Well, we have made it through the heart of the Church Year, and are liturgically now in Ordinary Time. I have to admit it: once Ordinary Time progresses into the late summer, I get a little tired of the season. I am ready for a change of color and a change of season. I yearn for the penitence of Lent, the magic of Christmas, or the joy of Easter.

But then again, I am ready for Ordinary Time now. I know it sounds weird, but I am glad we are in Ordinary Time. I have enjoyed using the beginning material in the Liturgy of the Hours for Lent, Easter, etc, but I am also excited about just getting back to the basic antiphons, prayers, and responsories of Ordinary Time for awhile (this may not make sense to those unfamiliar with the Liturgy of the Hours).

Of course, Ordinary Time is not meant to be a break from the Church Year. I remember growing up people would often take a summer vacation from church. Church attendance would thin out as people did other things on Sunday morning. We must resist this, because summer Ordinary Time is not meant to be a vacation from the mysteries of Christ’s life. Rather, the Church views Ordinary Time as “devoted to the mystery of Christ in all its aspects.” Many feasts and holy days fall within Ordinary Time, so there are still many chances to experience the things that make other seasons of the liturgical year so memorable.

So I wish everyone a blessed Ordinary Time!

I was thinking the other day about the reasons I became Catholic. I have been Catholic for almost four years now, and have been interested in liturgical Christianity since about 1999. One thing that attracted me to liturgical Christianity and Catholicism is how Trinitarian our life, worship, and theology really is.

Growing up, I was fascinated with the Trinity and took it upon myself to defend the deity of Christ against its critics (like Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc). When I returned to my faith in college, I once again became interested in the Trinity. However, in both evangelical settings I found that the Trinity was usually only mentioned when we started talking about apologetics or Christian distinctives. Our everyday worship and education was not overly Trinitarian, although the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were all mentioned, although not really in an orthodox Trinitarian framework. It wasn’t that the references to the Father, Son, and Spirit were purposefully heretical, it is just that often the three persons were not connected in any meaningful fashion. The Trinity was especially absent at the “contemporary” church I attended in college. There was no Trinitarian Creed, no Trinitarian hymns, no Church Year, no real catechesis about the Trinity beyond what may have come up in Bible Study, and no prayers that ended with …”who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God…” Perhaps a sermon or two throughout the year might mention the Trinity, but you couldn’t even count on that. Had you asked the leaders of that church if the Trinity was important, they would have said, “Oh, of course!” However, you wouldn’t have known it from the worship.

When I began studying Catholicism and Orthodoxy I found two Churches that were immersed in Trinitarian theology, that not only helped formulate the doctrine at Nicaea, but that also looked to the Trinity to shape their ethics and practices. Even the most basic Catholic/Orthodox prayer, the sign of the cross, was deeply Trinitarian. Upon attending liturgical services for the first time, I remember thinking, “wow, this is very Trinitarian!”

Today is Pentecost in the Western Church, and also happens to be Mother’s Day in the U.S. I would suspect that in many evangelical churches, the latter is more celebrated (despite being a secular holiday). Even though I think in liturgical settings the Church calendar should take precedence over secular holidays, I have nothing against Mother’s Day, and will be celebrating it by taking my mother out.

That Pentecost and Mother’s Day fall on the same day this year got me thinking about how celebrating Pentecost is really celebrating a type of motherhood. After all, the birthday of the Church at Pentecost is the celebration of the founding of the Church, the body of Christ, and our symbolic mother. There is a long-held Christian tradition that the Church is our mother. St. Cyprian (3rd century) suggested that we cannot have God as our Father unless we have the Church as our mother. In other words, it is impossible to separate God from the community of believers that he established. The Catechism speaks to Church as mother too:

Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: “We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation.” Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith (169).

The Church, “the pillar and bulwark of the truth”, faithfully guards “the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints”. She guards the memory of Christ’s words; it is she who from generation to generation hands on the apostles’ confession of faith. As a mother who teaches her children to speak and so to understand and communicate, the Church our Mother teaches us the language of faith in order to introduce us to the understanding and the life of faith (171).

Catholics also understand that Mary, the mother of our Lord, is a symbol of the Church as mother. The Catechism states it like this:

At once virgin and mother, Mary is the symbol and the most perfect realization of the Church: “the Church indeed. . . by receiving the word of God in faith becomes herself a mother. By preaching and Baptism she brings forth sons, who are conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of God, to a new and immortal life. She herself is a virgin, who keeps in its entirety and purity the faith she pledged to her spouse” (507).

As the mother of God, Mary is also our mother as well, which the Catechism addresses:

“Mary is “blessed among women” because she believed in the fulfillment of the Lord’s word. Abraham. because of his faith, became a blessing for all the nations of the earth. Mary, because of her faith, became the mother of believers, through whom all nations of the earth receive him who is God’s own blessing: Jesus, the “fruit of thy womb.”

Thus, Catholics have a rather full understanding of motherhood that includes, but goes beyond mere earthly motherhood. The Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Church (itself functioning in faith and humility as did the Virgin Mary), function as mothers to us. So this year, while certainly not forgetting your biological (or adopted) mothers, remember your spiritual mothers as well, the Church, and the Blessed Virgin Mary. Give thanks to the Church, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and your earthly mother, for their prayers, guidance, patience, and love!

Jennifer and I are currently house-hunting, and have even made an offer on a home that is about 1/4 mile from school, meaning I could easily walk to work on nice days. We are finding that we have picked a good time to hunt for a house (because of the weak market and pretty low interest rates). We ask your prayers, and even friendly advice if you have it (I know that Chad recently bought a house).

Saint Joseph, Pray for us!

Image (not the house we are looking at…obviously!) from: wildcru.org/aboutus/tubney/tubneyintro.htm

…because of high gas prices. Are Americans starting to think a little smarter?

Well, I guess doing something beats constantly complaining about high prices and doing nothing about it, which has seemed to be the trend among American drivers for too long. I like my 32 mpg car quite well, even if it doesn’t give me the “status” that a Hummer would give me, but I’d prefer the extra $$ in my pocket at the end of the month to any so-called status.

[Let it be known, that growing up and living now in a rural area, I know that some folks need big vehicles for agriculture and transportation.]

The United Methodist church recently upheld its current position, which is that “homosexual practice is incompatible with Christian teaching.” This was a part of a minority report that was adopted. The “majority report” (apparently not representing the majority of delegates) wanted to substitute the “incompatibility” language with “faithful, thoughtful people who have grappled with this issue deeply disagree with one another; yet all seek a faithful witness.” They also wanted to ask Methodists “to refrain from judgment regarding homosexual persons and practices as the Spirit leads us to a new insight” (emphasis mine). The delegates also voted to retain language preventing Methodist pastors from performing gay “marriages,” and rejected language suggesting “civil unions” were a human right. The UMC also affirmed the dignity of all persons, regardless of sexual orientation. As you can see from the photo above, not everybody was too happy with the current decisions.

So basically, Methodists have again rejected revisionist (and I use this not as a slur but for those who want to “revise” the discipline of the UMC) appeals for changes regarding appropriate Christian sexual morality. Of course, the progressives will not stop trying. They will continue to disobey the rules regarding sexuality, stressing “dialogue” and “living in tension,” and being “prophetic,” until that is, they “win the day,” and they can start literally enforcing the rules when conservatives break them! Maybe I am being cynical, but this is pretty much how it has happened in the Episcopal church, another mainline Protestant church dealing with sexuality.

However, the window to officially change the UMC in a more liberal direction may be closing. As is the case in most churches, the Methodist church is growing rapidly in conservative Africa, and declining in liberal conferences in the U.S. Apparently conservative conferences are growing in the U.S. Thus, the future of the UMC is likely going to be traditional, at least in terms of sexual morality. I grew up UMC, and have quite a few Methodist friends. In the West Ohio Conference, the bishop when I grew up was Judith Craig, who was extremely liberal, and from what I understand, was part of the Reimagining Conference (communion with milk and honey, prayers to Sophia, etc). However, the new bishop of the West Ohio Conference is known to be conservative, and many pastors from Asbury Theological Seminary (a conservative Methodist seminary in Kentucky) are in positions of power. Thus it seems like things are turning around for conservatives even in the U.S.

My dad is a UMC minister. I remember him telling me stories about UMC liberalism. The first ministry commission he went before refused to approve his ordination, because my dad insisted that belief in the bodily resurrection was non-negotiable. Oh, the heresy!! At any rate, it seems like the Methodists have stood firm. John Wesley would be proud.

UPDATE: Young progressives protest the conservative vote by initiating a 24-hour drumming circle next to the convention center, followed by a protest luncheon (no joke!). It’s my grad school all over again!

Image from www.umc.org

In July 2003, I was preparing to enter seminary to study for the Episcopal priesthood. That same summer, the Episcopal diocese of New Hampshire elected a man in an openly gay relationship, Gene Robinson, as bishop. I knew the sparks were going to fly at General Convention a few months later, since the convention had to approve the election. As a “closet conservative,” I was bothered by this, quietly mind you, for fear of getting kicked out of the postulancy process. I was baffled by the lack of concern about Robinson’s consecration at my local seminary, and in the wider Episcopal church. I eventually came to the conclusion that the Episcopal church really was Protestant, and willing to “go it alone” for the sake of its own view of “social justice” (heck, the word “Protestant” was in the official name of the Episcopal church up until a few years ago…that should have been a clue). So I decided to attend local American Anglican Council gatherings, banding together with a few other traditional-minded Episcopalians in the Southern Ohio area. I made quite a few friends during this time. However, in 2004, after concluding that the “Network” of conservative Anglicans was more talk than action, more process than result, I finally became open to the Catholic Church, and became Catholic in August of 2004. Almost five years later, it is interesting to see where everybody in our original group of orthodox Southern Ohio Episcopalians has ended up

[Note: this list is not meant to be comprehensive of all Southern Ohio conservative Episcopalians. However, this covers many of the people on a Southern Ohio AAC priests, seminarians, etc, email list I used to belong to, and includes those I knew at least somewhat personally. Those that I had never met or whose whereabouts I am unsure of, I didn't mention].

- One priest, Fr. David, the smartest of all of us, and a reader of this blog, is still an Episcopal priest in Southern Ohio faithfully doing God’s work under the radar. At Fr. David’s initiation, a few of us entered into some internet discussion with progressives in the diocese, to see if we could find some “common ground.” Sadly, this endeavor showed us that progressives and conservatives in the diocese truly were fundamentally opposed to one another on a variety of issues. Should we meet for someone Speedway coffee soon, Father?

- One of the group’s organizers left his local Episcopal parish in 2004, and now works with an Anglican group that meets (or at least used to) at a Reformed Episcopal parish. He still seems to be involved in the Southern Ohio American Anglican Council. Andy’s former parish, once pretty conservative, now goes out of its way to emphasize how “inclusive” it is, and how the congregation has transformed itself in the last few years to become more diverse (a buzzword-rich way of saying they don’t think homosexual sex is a sin anymore)…which is what happens I guess when a good chunk of conservatives leaves a parish.

- A former priest (and friend) of mine now pastors an Anglican parish (with the AMIA I think) a few blocks down from the old parish I once attended. I notice the former parish has declined in numbers quite a bit, down to about 20-30 on a given Sunday. I decided to become Catholic around the time this local church split. I believe Fr. Rick and his congregation are meeting in what is (was?) a Christian coffeehouse.

- Another friend, and former priest, at an Episcopal church in London, Ohio, became Catholic around the time I did, and his wife (also an Episcopal priest at the time) eventually joined him, obviously giving up any possibility of her being ordained in the Catholic Church. Rick is now studying for his PhD at a Catholic University. Interestingly, he started out pretty “progressive,” but after immersing himself in Scripture and the Church Fathers, came to a more traditional view of sexuality. Rick, Fr. David, Jonathan, and I were on the Theological Commission of the Southern Ohio American Anglican Council (it sounds more official than it was; it was mostly all of us getting together for some coffee and good discussion).

- Early in the controversy, a deacon in the Southern Ohio diocese left and joined the Vineyard. At this time I cannot recall her name.

- I am not sure what became of Deacon Will. Last I knew he was considering more evangelical options, if he ever decided to leave the Episcopal church.

- I haven’t heard from John for awhile. During his transitional diaconate he was functioning in the same parish that was sponsoring me for postulancy. He left the Episcopal church for Rome, I think just before I did, but I can’t recall exactly. He is currently studying for ordination under the pastoral provision. I asked my current bishop, Bishop Campbell about John a few months ago, and he responded, “he is still in the process.” I found a link to a letter John had written to his Episcopal parish right before he became Catholic.

- One priest, a lady with what is typically a man’s name, left the Episcopal church for what I believe was a Baptist or maybe even charismatic church.

- Fr. Ron, another member of our group, seems to be in the midst of some controversy right now. As he and his situation have been mentioned on Stand Firm, I don’t have a problem mentioning his parish. It is interesting right now, because Saint Matthew’s Anglican and Saint Matthew’s Episcopal both have websites, and both claim the same address. Apparently, the Episcopal loyalists get the Saint Matthew’s building back on June 1 (if a bulletin text from an Episcopal parish in Oxford, Ohio is right…I worked with the rector of this parish quite extensively, and even though I now oppose women’s ordination, I recognize the good work she is doing for the Lord). The Episcopal Diocese of Southern Ohio’s website lists Fr. Ron as “temporarily inhibited.” I figured Stand Firm or Kendall Harmon would be all over this, but apparently negotiations are happening under the radar.

- Jonathan and I became Catholic in August of 2004. We both now teach at Catholic high schools and operate various Catholic websites

Why did I write this post? The other day I was thinking back to those times, and how much I was struggling with my place in the Episcopal church, and within the Church in general. I didn’t struggle alone, but with friends and companions in the fight for orthodoxy. Nonetheless, I realized that over the last (soon-to-be) 5 years, most of us have left the Episcopal church, and many of us have left Anglicanism. It is kind of depressing in a way, but I know for a fact that many of our little group that have left are happy with the decision, and those who have stayed are joyful in their calling as well. It also shows just how many self-described orthodox in Southern Ohio have left the Episcopal church; If this is happening all over the country, TEC is most certainly moving even more leftward by default.

I often think maybe we should all get together for some coffee in London, Ohio, just for old time’s sake?? We’ll just have to make sure it isn’t Speedway coffee, for Fr. David’s sake, because Speedway coffee is rank heresy.

Today is the Solemnity of the Ascension, at least in many parts of the Catholic world. Some dioceses (including most in the U.S.) translate the feast to the following Sunday, and our Orthodox brothers and sisters on the Julian calendar celebrate it later in the year, since they just recently celebrated Easter.

The Ascension feast was highly symbolic to me when I began reading the Church Fathers and discovering the Church Year in college. Along with the Epiphany, the Feast of the Ascension was a thoroughly biblical holiday that I hadn’t celebrated as an evangelical Christian. It became a symbol to me of the incompleteness of the evangelical church year, which in my experience at the time (in college), generally consisted only of Christmas and Easter (as days, and not seasons). Growing up, I remember observing an expanded church year, celebrating Advent and (sometimes) Lent.

When I began researching the Ascension feast, I discovered that the Ascension was very important in early Christian theology, and it was regularly portrayed in art. In fact, the lion (Jesus) conquering the dragon (Satan) is a symbol of the ascension in early Christian artwork. As a part of the paschal mystery, along with the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Ascension constitutes an important part of the mystery of our salvation. This holiday gives us a chance to reflect on this important part of Christian theology.

I want to note that it was around the time I was discovering the Ascension feast that I encountered criticisms of the biblical ascension, e.g. claims that the Ascension was based on outdated science, which pictured the universe as three-tiered, Hades below, heaven above, and earth in between, literally. C.S. Lewis and others have addressed this concern, reminding us that whatever cosmology the biblical writers may have had, the Ascension event was supernatural, but had to be rendered in natural language. Thus, even if the biblical writers did conceive of Jesus going “up” to heaven (either based on what they observed, their cosmology, or both) this is not to say Jesus is still floating in space somewhere!

Image: “Ascension” by Giotto

I know it is a little late for an “earth day” post, but I wanted to point our readers to a nice Catholic resource related to the environment: The Catholic Conservation Center. The center has as its goal to “promote ecology, environmental justice, and the stewardship of Creation in light of sacred Scripture and living Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church.” Lest the word “environmental justice” raise a red flag, note that the site strives to be loyal to the Magisterium of the Church (and wants to be emailed if they aren’t). I think this is important, because some Christian conservation sites seem to be environmentalist first, and Christian last. One does not have to be a neo-pagan, pray to Gaia, or support PETA, to believe in the conservation and care of God’s creation.

I definitely support conservation and caring for the earth. I enjoy nature, and being out in it, and like many Church Fathers, I believe that we can know something about our Creator from His marvelous creation. I lament the destruction and exploitation of our world, although I believe it is our right to use the earth’s resources justly for our benefit.

When I was growing up, some in my evangelical church were suspicious of my enjoyment of nature; if someone enjoyed nature (or wanted to care for it), then he was deemed too close to paganism! However, when I became Catholic I entered an Incarnational church, a sacramental Church, where the physical is not divided from the “spiritual.” Fortunately, the Catholic Church has a solid understanding of the role of creation that is neither idolatrous nor semi-Gnostic.

Image taken by me, April 2008

I know this question isn’t too religious or of a religious nature, but I am curious. Since many of us in the U.S.  will be getting rebate checks in the mail soon (not me yet…since my accountant still hasn’t filed yet, although she did file an extension), what do you plan to do with yours?

I am thinking of depositing mine in the bank and viewing it as a “gas rebate” for the year. I spend about 70 dollars in gas a month (I don’t drive much and work is 1 minute away), so $600 goes a good way to cover that. So I will probably place mine in the bank, and mentally earmark it for gas. I also will probably give some of it to some kind of charity. I admit I am not too sure that this is going to do too much for our economy, or if it is a good idea for an already debt-ridden government to be spending more money, but I rarely benefit from government handouts, so I will be a grateful receiver. So what about you? What are you going to do with yours?

Food prices have been rising quickly as of late, the fastest rise in prices in 17 years. There are a variety of reasons why: increase in biofuel use, greater demand from developing countries, weather issues that have hurt crop yields, high energy prices, the weak dollar, speculators and hedge funds buying into the futures markets, and so forth. Whatever the reasons, the increases in food and energy costs are squeezing a lot of Americans financially, but worse, causing people to starve in developing countries, where folks have less disposable income. People are starting to even hoard food. I think we are finally starting to realize that we can’t have our cakes and eat them too. If a lot of people all over the world want a lot of something (food, energy, etc), then the price is going to rise. It is basic economics!

I have wondered what we can do about this. One thing I can personally do is cut back on the food I eat, and buy food items that haven’t risen recently (for example, potatoes). We can also make sure we increase our giving to groups providing aid to the poor. Does anybody have any ideas?

A new poll shows that the unchurched (those who haven’t attended church for 6 months, except for religious holidays and special events) prefer traditional church architecture to contemporary looking churches, by nearly 2 to 1. And the interesting part of the survey? Young people ages 25-34 showed the greatest preference for traditional church architecture! I am almost 30, and even though I attended a church that architecturally resembled a conference center for about six months, even as an evangelical, I was strongly drawn to more traditional looking church buildings.

The authors of the survey admit that gothic and other traditional looking churches are still in decline. This is because factors other than exterior appearance influence the decision to attend a church, but nonetheless, it shows that despite claims for years that churches had to “look modern” to attract modern people, people still prefer traditional architecture. Hopefully surveys like this will encourage Catholic parishes and dioceses to look to the past when looking for church architectural design ideas, instead of assuming modern people want plain churches!

I am a little suspicious of this survey, and its implications, for a variety of reasons. First, like the authors of the study admit, the exterior look of a church probably doesn’t have a whole lot to do with church growth. Even if people prefer the look of a gothic cathedral, the evangelical mega-church next door to the gothic cathedral may very well be thriving while the cathedral is declining, because the evangelical church actually makes an effort to reach out to people! Second, people are unchurched for a variety of reasons, and basing our choices of architecture, worship, etc, on the unchurched raises serious problems. While we need to certainly reach out to those who are not churched, Christian practice and belief are not negotiable based on their appeal to the masses. Regardless, I think this survey shows that what some church leaders assume people want (the new, the innovative) is often different than what people actually want. As someone who prefers more traditional looking churches (although I am not interested in trashing all modern looking churches, or boycotting them, etc), I am glad to see others agree, even if they are unchurched!

Image from: friend.ly.net/~kellybr/ireland_2001/index.htm

…the only problem is, the passage she often quotes isn’t there.

Apparently Pelosi is fond of saying, “The Bible tells us in the Old Testament, ‘To minister to the needs of God’s creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.’” The problem is that biblical scholars aren’t really sure what she is referring to. I have read the Old Testament through, and taken Scripture classes, and I am not sure what verse she has in mind. Perhaps she is referring to a concept embedded in the Old Testament. I am not pretending to be an Old Testament expert, but I haven’t found that particular idea in any part of Scripture, that caring for creation is an act of worship. However, I am interested to hear opinions on this. Where did Nancy Pelosi get this idea?

This is not to say I don’t believe that Scripture addresses care for creation. While I am no radical environmentalist, I am concerned about overuse of fossil fuels, energy use, pollution, etc, and I am interested in part because we are supposed to be good stewards of God’s creation. Our dominion over creation does not mean we have the right to trash what God created. We are not supposed to be a bunch of frat boys who destroy their parents house while “caring” for it for the weekend.