Open Communion

The Anglican Journal covers this one for us.
My emphases and comments.

Should we invite persons who are not baptized to receive Holy Communion? [all the kewl kids are doing it!] The church is discussing this question today. [in order to be relevant, me thinks!] Anglicans traditionally have believed that the eucharist [editorial warning...this article will never Capitalize the word Eucharist even though it is our central, oldest, and most unifying Sacrament ordained by Jesus Christ] is a family meal, reserved for members of the church through baptism. [...again with these Sacraments not being capitalized, let alone designated as HOLY...I see a pattern (cough, smell an agenda)] Those who are not baptized are not members of the church; therefore, they cannot participate in the family meal.

This exclusive view of the eucharist has a long history. [Damned old traditions again!] St. Paul warns against eating and drinking in an “unworthy manner” (I Cor. 11:27), though he seems to leave the decision whether to partake in the meal to each person’s conscience (I Cor. 11:28). Closed communion is standard practice in some Christian churches, including the Roman Catholic and Orthodox. [and we have no clue as to why--those mean ole bullies! Oh, shoot, my cousin is a Lutheran and they're meanies too, sniff, sniff] However, many Anglican churches throughout the world now practice open communion. There are good reasons, both missional and theological, for doing so. [okay, let's all hold our breath until his discusses the unpleasant (cough, unorthodox) consequences* for doing so...]

The Missional Case
Consider the fact that most Anglican churches now celebrate the eucharist every Sunday at every service. [okay. credit where it's due. this is a great post-conciliar correction.] Yet many people are not baptized. How do we reach them? [Read, "How do we get around that, rather than do anything about it?"] Do we invite them to church for Sunday dinner [pass 'em 'er biscuits, Merle!] and tell them they cannot eat the food? [never mind the wedding garment thingy...no parables about that...so...]

How, in our multicultural and pluralistic society, can our churches be places of hospitality if we exclude table fellowship with the non-baptized? This is not an academic question. [Winning clarification, that!] In Canada, a growing number of the population is not baptized. [No! we shan't do the work of evangelization! that would be exclusivist and bigoted.] Included are people from different religious traditions or people with no religious affiliation at all. Quite likely, some are our grandchildren or great-grandchildren, whose parents neglected or refused to have them baptized. [I knew this paragraph was going down hill]

How can the church effectively minister in a post-Christian world where a significant percentage of the population is not baptized? [chirp...chirp...nope, can't think of a single way] Some Anglican churches are attempting to meet this challenge by becoming open and inclusive faith communities, [OPEN and INCLUSIVE are always good things, right?] ready and willing to support people in their spiritual journeys. [because it's all about the journey] They understand that the Anglican tradition has never been content to adopt a sectarian mentality, to insulate itself from culture or to refuse to connect with an unchurched population. [The word adopt occurs in his narrative...yet no connection to Holy Baptism...how splendidly relevant!]

Open communion increasingly is seen [just allow us to show you...yawn] as a way to build a bridge [bridge? I'll leave the Latin word for that alone] between the church and the unchurched. [because, of course, there really is no other way] If people are “spiritual but not religious” as several sociological studies indicate, then the desire for transcendence experienced in sacramental worship may well draw them to church. [unless the un-capitalized 'church' has quit being The Church. In which case they might just fly home to experience private sensations without other individuals interfering with the reception]

There is a pattern here:[oh, you see one too, do you?] experience, community, and faith—in that order. [and ALWAYS in that order...money quote if there ever was one] In this organic process, experience is foundational to faith. I term this “experiential evangelism”—offering people an experience of God that draws them into the Christian community and leads to faith in Jesus. There is precedent for this model. Solomon Stoddard, the father-in-law of Jonathan Edwards [notable Anglican worthy...not] and himself one of the great New England Puritan pastors, referred to Holy Communion [kudos on the dignified attribution] as a “converting ordinance” in which the experience of receiving communion served to transform the heart of the recipient. [which is just what Edwards meant, you see]

We now live in a post-modern world that places heart over head, feeling over thought, intuition over logic and image over words. [Oh thank heaven we've all grown up and cast off those nasty nannies--head, thought, logic, and words] “We have a generation that is less interested in cerebral arguments, linear thinking, theological systems,” observes Leith Anderson, author of Dying for Change. Instead, they are “more interested in encountering the supernatural,” he says. It is by an experience with the supernatural that people enter into community. It is through community that people come to faith. [contra Anselm it's the new way to come to church]

To be sure, this is a significant shift in the way Anglicans usually have thought of Christian formation. The traditional model holds that believing leads to belonging—you believe the faith of the church in order to belong to the church. In this model, the church made confirmation a prerequisite to communion. However, an emerging model reverses the order, and holds that belonging leads to believing. Insofar as people belong to a Christian community, they come to believe in the faith of that community. [each and every time this is true!...funny there is no footnote or quote from a trusted authority that has performed actual research into this] In this model, communion leading to baptism may complement the still normative practice of baptism leading to communion. [sure, it just may. let's all wait and see]

This new model of Christian formation is consistent with church growth methodology. “The old paradigm taught that if you have the right teaching, you will experience God,” writes Leith Anderson. “The new paradigm says that if you experience God, you will have the right teaching.” [I promise I'm not making this up!]

Open communion played a major part in the rapid growth of my parish in Southern California. I saw the same scenario repeated many times—non-Christians receiving Holy Communion and experiencing God in a powerful way, leading to a desire to be baptized. Therefore, I ask: might we not see the experience of receiving communion as a way of drawing people to faith in Jesus?

The Theological Case

There is, however, another consideration. Who is the host of the Lord’s Supper? God is. God welcomes us. Even before we ask for food, God spreads a table before us. God’s all-embracing hospitality is a hallmark of the meal we call eucharist. [hey, he's capitalizing God, if no one noticed]

One of the most powerful witnesses of God’s inclusive love is the welcoming table, so prevalent among southern black churches in the United States. At these fellowship dinners, held on church grounds, a large meal is prepared for anyone who might come: rich and poor, black and white, stranger and church member. [taking nothing away from these events which I love, that is not a Eucharist] In the days of the segregationist south, when legal measures were ruthlessly enforced to prevent different races from eating together or even sharing a water fountain, the welcoming table was a powerful witness to God’s inclusive love. [?]

Might not the Lord’s Table in Anglican churches be understood as a welcoming table? Is it possible for us to see the altar as a symbol of inclusion rather than exclusion? Anglican biblical scholar John Koenig and reformed theologian Amy Plantinga Pauw have argued separately that the most pervasive image in the Bible is the banquet table, with God serving as a generous host. Salvation is feasting in the kingdom of God, where people will come from north and south, east and west to sit at table together. In Isaiah 25:6−9, for example, the banquet is a symbol of salvation, with the invitation extended to “all peoples” and “all nations”—not just Israel.

This table fellowship is at the heart of Jesus’ ministry. Jesus welcomed all kinds of people to his table: rich people, poor people, good people, sinners, tax collectors and prostitutes, you name them, and they came to eat and drink with Jesus (Mt. 9:9−10; Luke 14:12−23;19:5). [how many of them were at the first Eucharist? how unjust and exclusivist of our dear Lord!] United Methodist Bishop William Willimon has said that Jesus’ open invitation “manifested the radically inclusive [not just inclusive, but radically inclusive] nature of his kingdom, a kingdom that cuts across the barriers we erect between insiders and outsiders, the saved and the damned, the elect and the outcast—barriers often most rigidly enforced at the table.”

Jesus welcomed all sorts of people to his table. [He was invited to their tables in the book I read] Might we also welcome people with the same openness and acceptance as he did? [oh, why not?, nothing is sacred anymore!] After all, it is the Lord’s Table, not ours. Who are we to exclude the very people that Jesus includes in his ministry? [while we're at it let's teach the unbelievers to serve this Holy Group-Meal and clean up afterward]

The Rev. Dr. Gary Nicolosi is the rector at St. James Westminster Anglican Church in London, Ont.

*edited from reasons.

Very Positive Developments in the ACNA!

clipped from a Fr. Foster in Ft. Worth. Add his blog to your list and enjoy this entry from last Saturday.
******************************************************************************************

Very Positive Developments in the ACNA!: "The Living Church has a report on the recently concluded ACNA annual meeting. It reports a number of encouraging bits of news (italicized emphasis added by me).

Officials of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), which launched a year ago as an alternative to the Episcopal Church, are reporting significant progress in their efforts to share Eucharist with other churches and to do evangelism alongside messianic Jews.

In a report delivered at the ACNA’s annual meeting in Amesbury, Mass., on June 9, ecumenism task force chairman Ray Sutton listed a series of recent milestones that show how the ACNA is forging connections outside mainline Protestantism.

Dialogues with the Orthodox Church in America have reportedly knocked down one of the centuries-old barriers that have kept Anglican and Orthodox Christians from sharing Eucharist. The big concession: when sharing Eucharist, the ACNA would confess that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and not add the phrase and the Son, as Western Christians traditionally do in a formulation called the Filioque.

RWF: When I appeared before the Commission on Ministry to receive final approval to be ordained a priest the chairman asked me if I believed everything in the Nicene Creed. (It is good that they ask that question around here multiple times during the ordination process!) I told him I believed every single word of it with all my heart. But, I added, if the price of unity was the Orthodox Churches was our jettisoning the Filioque clause I would do it in a heartbeat as the West really had no business adding it unilaterally in the first place. So I consider this a great step in the right direction. May God hasten their efforts!

What’s more, the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod has lined up four meetings with ACNA representatives at seminaries later this year as the two denominations explore potential for Eucharistic sharing.

RWF: After I came to know Christ our Savior in my twenty-third year among the first works of theology I read were Luther's three great essays of 1521. Brother Martin's thought has deeply marked my own. (I will wager that I am the only clergyman in the diocese of Fort Worth who has taken a four-week 'Footsteps of Luther' study tour in Germany.) I would be absolutely delighted if this dialogue with the Missouri Synod bore fruit.

The ACNA is also inviting 17 messianic Jewish groups to a September summit to explore “how we can do ministry together,” Sutton said.

“We could get their congregations together with our congregations to fellowship, to pray and to seek ways that we be able to evangelize together among Jews and Gentiles,” said Sutton, rector of the Church of the Holy Communion in Dallas. “I think it will be a powerful witness for Jew and Gentile to stand together and proclaim Christ to our constituencies. It’s what happened in the New Testament.”

RWF: Interesting. May many people of all backgrounds coming to saving faith through this initiative.

Sutton’s report, which delegates received with rousing applause, comes as former Episcopal congregations now affiliated with the ACNA seek to establish a distinct, non-Episcopal identity. In addition to building bridges with other Christian communities, the ACNA aspires to define itself as a dynamic movement by planting 1,000 new churches within its first five years.

The ACNA is growing, albeit not as fast as some would like. Archbishop Robert Duncan, in his state-of-the-church address to about 100 delegates and bishops from across North America, noted that the church has swelled from 703 congregations a year ago to 811 now.

RWF: And now the bombshell:

Prospects for further growth, Sutton said, include welcoming as many as 150 Evangelical Lutheran Church in America congregations that are considering a move to the ACNA.

RWF: WOW! I wonder how this affects plans for the North American Lutheran Church.

The theologically conservative ACNA continues to tread in controversial waters as it carves a niche. Evangelizing Jews, for example, would put the ACNA at odds with most mainstream Jewish groups, which oppose the practice as an affront to Jewish identity. Also, whether to ordain women to the priesthood remains “an issue that divides us,” Duncan acknowledged in his address. Women’s ordination was on the agenda for panel discussion at the June 10-11 College of Bishops meeting, which was closed to lay delegates and press.

For now, the ACNA shows little appetite for internal conflict. Content to tolerate diversity of practice on women’s ordination, delegates to the Provincial Council avoided the issue and characterized their movement as more about unification, rather than fragmentation, within Anglicanism.

“We’re coming together, not splitting apart,” said the Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns, founding missionary bishop of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a mission of the Province of Nigeria. “The Reformed Episcopal Church is now here after having been apart for 130 years. So we’re actually seeing the reversal of the fragmentation thing.”

Preserving certain strong relationships within the Anglican Communion proved to be a priority at All Saints Anglican Church, Amesbury, as the ACNA marked its first anniversary. The Rev. Lynne L. Ashmead, a deacon and the ACNA’s registrar, cautioned that dioceses need to follow specific record-keeping protocol in conformity with Communion-wide standards. Delegates likewise signaled deference to the Province of Rwanda when they affirmed the Anglican Mission in the Americas as a “ministry partner” that would remain under Rwandan jurisdiction rather than the ACNA’s.

"

Jesus Prayer

I am finishing a course on Anglican Spirituality. In this course we are brought up to speed on the history of spirituality and shown how our Anglican context applies proficiency at the parish level. As a future minister this is important. But applying it comes only after living it. It has been well said, "the only way to preserve values is to live them."

Also as a future minister, it is important that I am the example to anyone that I attempt to direct spiritually. This has scared me to death ever since the great fish spat me back onto the shore. I left the pursuit of God's call just after my first seminary experience. When I returned I had picked up some major seaweed! Mostly that was evident in my attitude, but as often it was obvious that I had lost my sense of personal piety. The Evangelical machine caused me to question ALL its results. That was not fair of me. To be a holy man is still expected of all ministers. The Evangelical method may be misguided along the way...but they are still on the way.

The best way to explain this failure of piety is to point out one's language. I have come to regard off-color language quite like body-odor. If a man is a bit skunky, he can easily remedy that...so don't question his piety every time he turns up with b-o. Likewise a man's language is easily curtailed if he is too profane. Don't judge by that alone. I began to apply this to myself liberally. Just ask my wife. She began to hear words from my mouth that don't suit a man committed to following Christ. Jesus' words about the filth coming OUT of us being more important than the food that goes IN seemed to slip my mind. In our culture how do you bring this up to someone?

Guidance and Direction
That is what is missing in the Evangelical Church that I left. If I don't have mastery of Sin then I have no business advising others how to overcome damaging thoughts and behavior. "Blind leading the blind" ring a bell? We all need to live by rules...we all need guidance...we all need direction. We don't need people making up their own rules and foisting them legalistically over others. So I have picked back up another weapon in the fight for my soul. That tool, or weapon, is the Jesus Prayer.

Oh, Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner.

Anytime I encounter a tempting thought or image, I now say this prayer. No, that does not make it a talisman nor the foot of a rabbit. I puts me right where I need to be in relation to The King of Glory. In a book I'm reading we are advised, "Whenever Sin knocks, let Jesus get the door." He already proved that He can tackle, trample, repel, overcome, and rid Sin...why not let him help me? By the way, doesn't that quote sound like the cheese you could get from the local Christian bookstore self-help section? Why do I like it so much?

When you begin to struggle (that's opposed to simply wallowing in Sin) against temptation, you are quite wise to take the yoke of Christ and let him pull. Just knowing that you are stuck in a dank squalor is proof that you cannot get out alone. You never could do, and you never will. Also since the tempter is crafty, he will leave you be until you are alone. He don't much like crowds. So temptation is sharper when you are isolated. Who better to call upon than He who is Lord of creation...able to join you at any location, in any situation?

But there are other warriors ahead of us, ready to instruct. We call them pastors, or shepherds. They are best suited to dispense the grace of God as well as 'reign in' wayward sheep.

I want to blog more about spiritual direction after my last class session.

St. Ignatius of Antioch and the Renewal of the Anglican Episcopate

I found this interesting article today on my favorite Bishop and Martyr for Jesus Christ.

St. Ignatius on Discipleship, part 3

Discipleship and Eucharist

Ignatius employs creative bread and wine metaphors to relate the Eucharist to discipleship. For the early Church, only those who were fully accepted into the community through Baptism partook the Eucharist. Some misunderstand his language regarding being part of a new Eucharist. His language of becoming ‘pure wheat of God’ sounds too much like he considered himself to initiate a perpetual sacrifice in the lives of Christian martyrs. No doubt he felt that his own death was somehow connected to Christ’s. But his words on the holy Eucharist convey his belief, like baptism, that individuals participate in obedience only under the bishop.

Ephesians 13:1. ‘Take heed, then, often to come together to give thanks to God, and show forth His praise. For when ye assemble frequently in the same place, the powers of Satan are destroyed.’ The form ‘eucaristw’ in early Christian literature is closely connected to the idea of Eucharist. Of the times it seems on to refer only to thanksgiving to God, this occurrence should be seen to refer to the Lord’s Table, at which the faithful come together. This connects discipleship again to the community of faith. We come together, not in solitary, to give thanks and taking the elements.

Trallians 8:2 “Wherefore, clothing yourselves with meekness, be ye renewed in faith, that is the flesh of the Lord, and in love, that is the blood of Jesus Christ.” Faith and Love!

Philadelphians 4:1. ‘Take ye heed, then, to have but one Eucharist . . . that so, whatsoever ye do, ye may do it according to [the will of] God,’ and ‘I have confidence of you in the Lord, that ye will be of no other mind. Wherefore I . . . exhort you to have but one faith, and one preaching, and one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of the Lord Jesus Christ; and His blood which was shed for us is one; one loaf also is broken to all, and one cup is distributed among them all: there is but one altar for the whole Church, and one bishop, with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants.’ Clearly the point to these two lines is unity. Just as baptism could not occur outside the Church, the Eucharist was disallowed unless the community was present under the head of the bishop. He connects the bread to Christ’s body, referring to the action of breaking the bread and passing it to one another. Apparently there was only one loaf to begin with, describing the unity of Christ’s person. Even by taking the cup and breaking the bread, they displayed their discipleship through obedience. For the Eucharist could not be considered worthy of God unless it was administered by the bishop. How do this apply to Christian discipleship? Suppose believers want to explain their faith to their neighbors, yet without the stigma of the assembly. Could they use the sacraments to display the gospel to those interested? No because the gospel must remain in the Church lest it be invalidated. For those actions would be outside the ordained manner of worship, thus disobedient.

Smyrneans 7:1. ‘They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again.’ In this interesting polemic against false teachers, Ignatius describes to the Smyrneans how heretics did not come to the table to celebrate the gospel because they did not believe correctly about Christ. The implication is that those who believe the message will obediently join the Church’s worship. Correct discipleship affirms correct doctrine. Apparently this applies to the preceding verse in that those who cannot follow the teaching of the apostles corrupt the gospel and disobediently incur wrath.

Smyrneans 8:1. ‘Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it.’ This verse simply extends the sacrament to anyone whom the bishop has entrusted the sacred rite. Perhaps in this way, the Eucharistic celebration could be employed on the mission field by someone commissioned by the Bishop, like a parish Priest.

When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, ²¹ for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. ²² Don't you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the Church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not! 1Corinthians 11:20-. The Eucharist is the proclamation of the gospel in Corinthians. The gospel and the Eucharist are the property of the Church.

"Silence of the Apostles"

Several bloggers within the Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox faith have similar posts challenging the Protestant notion of tradition and history. Since I am a protestant I have delineated the issue farther out to the Radical Reformers...[cough, deFORMERS].

This came to my mind while preparing the next post on Blessed Saint Ignatius of Antioch, Bishop and Martyr for our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church. It is a serious challenge too. I really want to know how a convinced Baptist/Presbyterian scholar [or any Christian that operates outside of the Apostolic Tradition] deals with the question. Here's the question.

If the Incarnation of Jesus Christ began the new Humanity into which we are all Baptised, and if the Son of God succeeded in His promise of granting the Church and the Apostles His gift of the Holy Ghost, and if the missionary activity of the Apostles and their disciples is in fact evidence of the Lord expanding His Kingdom and His Church [I'm trying not to be prolix]...
then when and HOW did they botch the job thereby losing the 'true' teaching of Scripture somehow recovered during the reformation?

If they did not lose it, then why should anyone remain separated from the Body for which Jesus died, and which Body is the mystical company of those that have kept the Apostolic Tradition of Sacraments, creeds, three-fold orders under the Bishop, and liturgical fidelity [to name a few]?

Yes, I am reading Pelikan's The Vindication of Tradition.

Why St. Ignatius?

St. Ignatius, Bishop and Martyr of Antioch, was the focus of my senior paper at seminary in 2002.
Let me tell the story of why I chose him to research, and why that changed me.
For the sake of keeping it brief, one needs to read the short letters of Ignatius. There are but 7. Okay, now that you've done that read on. Either in 2000 or 2001 I completed a course in the Early Church Fathers. During that seminar-style class, every student had to produce a presentation on a character from that period. All the big names were already chosen--NO that's not true! It was simply by chance that my group assigned Blessed Ignatius to me.
When I presented material for his 7 letters I knew what kind of reaction I'd get. You see I went to Dallas Theological Seminary, finishing in 2002. The standard evangelical seminary student cannot be prepared for the shock of St. Ignatius. [that fact btw was an initial chisel for me to question the evangelical claims-more on that soon] Some of the students literally gasped aloud at the content of the Bishop's letters! [Okay it's time for you to go read them-gotcha] He, quite like N.T. Wright describes St. Paul, sounds more like a fanatical terrorist than a gentle shepherd to the 21st century Western ear. I knew my classmates would misunderstand him, but it was my job to explain him to them. That is very complicated.
First, the DNA of protestants is to distrust every notion after the death of the last Apostle. Ignatius' sick descriptions must have confirmed their disdain. [surely you've gone and read him by now!] Really, it's in the DNA. They don't teach that at most evangelical seminaries! But it lingers under the surface, controlling assumptions as we study the Bible, Theology and History. The Church, say they, held its breath until the reformation when the 'true' faith was recovered by (insert the father of your protestant tradition). So Ignatius' advice to the earliest believers must have been skewed because he never mentions 5 solas...just one.
Second, Ignatius is incredibly Catholic. Yea, that Ignatius. Chances are you know him by that reputation. He is the one who championed the local Bishop being central to true Christianity. Protestants don't operate with Bishops, so that sets his teachings at odds with something they hold dear--democratic or representative leadership. 'Bishop? Hmmm...catholics don't understand the Bible like the Spirit enables me to do so.'
Third, Ignatius is not romantic, but rather graphic. He never mentions having, or inviting, Jesus in your heart...or being His private friend when you are alone. He seems to enjoy the fact that he will go to the circus, though. Only, this circus will be his end... his flesh and bones food for animals. That presents another hurdle for protestants. We don't seek martyrdom...rather victory! God forbid that we should make sacrifices. In our worldview a willing scapegoat makes no sense [except for baby Jesus]. Protestant evangelicals don't make the crucial connection that my thesis will demonstrate.
That thesis posits that St. Ignatius contains the vital link for us to read both the New Testament [mostly SS. Paul and John] and the rest of the early Church. That link is what we would call discipleship. So when I had to find a paper topic later on, St. Ignatius just screamed at me from a previous semester. 'Come follow me! Find out why I've been misunderstood, neglected, and cast aside for other glamorous figures.'
Posts that follow will be the sections of the paper in much the same style and method as originally done. I have not changed the paper much, preferring to stick to the expectations of the course to which the paper belonged. I would not approach the topic just this way if I were to do it over. That will wait for another day.

Ad Fontes

When I started this blog I intended to write my thoughts on the blessed St. Ignatius of Antioch. You see from my title banner that he means a lot to me. While finishing my 1st master's degree I researched him and wrote a short paper describing his idea of discipleship. Soon I will publish that work here. I have been drawn to do that because we are going through Hebrews in my Sunday School class and have uncovered a lot of the same ideas.

Troll Under the Bridge

This was written in response to things-as-they-are where I work. It is a place where happy evangelicals dutifully work for the salvation of every soul, usually oblivious to any other expression of Christianity. This usually comes out vividly when students write for on-campus newspapers about their summer missionary activities. I wanted to submit this to said newspaper, but I think it's much to threatening for that audience.

Troll under the Bridge

When we are young and impressionable, the big folks like to tell us fables, myths, and legends to pique our imagination. Those tales most often have a purpose too. So it is with the proverbial troll that lives under the bridge. Perhaps there was a widespread desire to keep young children away from bridges. Bridges are not safe for young kids-that is easy to imagine. More likely it was to protect the ‘kids’ from what was beyond the bridge. So it may have been common to protect our cubs by fear. "You know," goes the tale, "there is a troll under the bridge that will scare you/eat you/kill you/molest you. So stay far away from that bridge." We don’t need to know what a troll is to be afraid of the bridge. It works…both ways. We are saved by fear and enticed to imagine.

Then we grow and learn how the world works. There are no ‘boogy men’--at least not the imaginary kind. And that troll never has been caught by our eager eyes. We grow up to feel safe about ‘our world’ and physically safe from the danger of the bridge, er uhm the troll. Maturity leads us to ditch the myth but no one really ever tells us it's a myth. No one ever sits us down and says, "we just wanted to keep you safe and close, so we made up the story of the troll." Forget the Viking stories that we crib from, we simply use tales as best suits us.

I write this because of my great angst about evangelicals’ collective, deep-rooted fantasy. It's somewhat like the troll story I describe, but much more sinister. Whether it be the ‘Church of Christ’, the ‘Methodist Church’, or the ‘Roman Catholic Church’ we prevent our kid-goats wandering too far from the reservation by fear. We protect them by branding the other guys as heretics, cults, or anti-Christs. And this works too. I am particularly beleaguered by the attitude we foster about the Roman Catholic Church. I wish I had a dime for every time I heard the ole line about the Catholics being idolaters, magic peddlers, anti-Christs, and a vast cult bent on usurping the "true" gospel. Many coins would be from my own pocket, sadly. If I banked those dimes I could do a lot of good.

Imagination is a good tool unless we forge it with prejudice or stereotyping. I’m now convinced that’s what we’ve done with the Catholics. We’ve painted them with our own imaginative ignorance. We, in fact, weaken our own view of God’s power when we portray the Catholics as so very influential that they can prohibit the ‘true’ gospel from peoples’ comprehension. In other words, the legend is too weighty to stand up under the smallest scrutiny. All those ‘things’ adorning the gospel are imagined by evangelicals to cloud the truth and veil the Lord from the people. Most prejudice is simply ignorance. What we miss is that all the ‘adornments’ point to Him.

While I had hurled insults at Catholics, I had never stepped inside a Catholic Church in my life. So it is with many of us. Oh, I know, many people embrace Christ ‘personally’ after having been Catholic much of their lives. Others have a sprinkling of Catholic experience because of mixed family ties. In this latter case I bet they still operated with fear and prejudice when they attended that wedding, or that Baptism. I remember once in my college years being afraid that something would happen to me while attending a Church outside my approved list. Good grief! (Shocking as it may be, Dallas Seminary was not on that list either!) Remember what that troll will do to you!

But the more sinister aspect of our prejudice is doctrinal. We simply do not understand their system. We fearfully and ignorantly reject their Episcopacy, Sacraments, Veneration of Mary and Saints, etc. The best we can muster is, “We don’t need to know what they believe to be sure that they are wrong.” Yet, you cannot disagree with an unknown. Students of history are urged to suspend judgment until they learn history’s content. That doesn’t mean to chuck judgment entirely, but you must have the facts first. Only then can you discern. In fact, then you must discern. Be not afraid of the truth, but neither be unmoved by it. You are at seminary to learn, to forge the habits that will fuel your future. If your time here is only spent learning how ‘wrong’ others are, are you not becoming a prejudiced servant?

Fear keeps us out of the woods like the 2^nd generation of M. Night Shyamalan’s The Village. We feel comfortable at the encampment, secure on the reservation. We don’t want to confuse our younglings with crucifixes, statues, smoke, tradition, stained glass, creeds, chants, wafers, alcohol, icons and beauty. We envision what terrible direction those things will lead their imaginations! Children are better served sitting and staring at the hymnal or the back of bro. Bob’s head. Or worse, we remove them from our company and let somebody else tell teach about the most important action in all creation, namely worshiping God. Even worse still, we remove them from worship for play and activity because they don’t understand everything that’s going on…they are stupid and unable to have, much less cultivate, faith. And they should never take communion for we are not ‘sure’ they ‘truly’ ‘believe’ in our ‘fill-in-the-blank-doctrines-necessary-for-true-spiritual-relationship-with-Jesus’. Yep, those Catholics are truly deluded and misguided.

Evangelicals champion the gospel. That name is from the Greek word for gospel, for goodness sake. Yet the gospel isn’t naked. It never has been. It has been clothed and adorned with beauty, tradition, order, dignity, and many other Catholic things. Neither are its recipients bare. We like to think that we are: that God wipes our slates clean at conversion, tabula rasa. Some folks get very near apostasy before they realize that grace’s landing strip needs maintenance. It is not tabula rasa, but tabula humanae. The human mind is vast. God created it that way. But today evangelicals usually see grace only as a heart and soul issue. I hope that you will engage your mind such that you fulfill your Lord’s summary of the Law, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.” Regarding our estranged brethren in other Churches, I hope you will struggle to honor Jesus’ words concluding the summary, “And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these to commandments hang all the Law and the prophets.” This is especially true if you have family devoted to the Catholic Church.

Those of us that consider ourselves students of The Book would do well to appreciate the entity that for centuries preserved our Book. We would do even better if we considered their preservation of Scripture at least as authentic in devotion to Christ as our modern accretions. I implore you to move beyond folklore to fact. Call a cease-fire between those that damage one another. Most of all, carefully avoid friendly-fire. We have enough to battle with Islam and secularization crowding out anyone that bears the name of Christ. Sadly, most of us would simply rather believe in the truth of our own making. We much prefer the safe fantasy world that our masters confined us within.

Anglican Way Institute Conference

July 2008
http://anglicanwayinstitute.org
Finding Grace through the Sacraments

Traditional Anglican Conference for young men and women.
Common Cause Partners, Reformed Episcopal Church, United Anglican Church, Anglican Mission in America, Anglican Province of America, Convocation of Anglicans in North America, Episcopal Missionary Church, Orthodox Anglican Church, The Anglican Church in America, The Diocese of the Holy Cross, FiFNA, ACiC, ACN, AAC, ANiC--you name the jurisdiction...this conference will appeal.

Really NEW Catechism format

Somebody had to do it. I wonder if it will catch on...