June 27, 2004

Who controls communion? 1.5

On the two Sundays I've spent at Oxford I've worshipped at two Anglican churches--Christ Church Cathedral and St. Aldates. (Interestingly enough, the churches are physically located across the street from one another.) My experience of God in worship was very similar in each, though they could hardly be more different in style and form. God was very present in the intoned liturgies and choir voices in Latin at Christ Church and in the raised hands and guitars and drums at St. Aldates. But where my experience of the two was most similar was in the Eucharist.

Coming from a tradition in which the elements of the Eucharist are passed, I find myself particularly moved each time I have to come forward to receive them. It reminds me that, on a very fundamental level, the answer to "Who controls communion?" is me. "Take and eat," Jesus says, "this is my body." He holds out the gift of bread and cup and invites (commands?) me to take them from him into my own hands, my own mouth, my own body. Unless I reach out to him, open my mouth, swallow, I cannot partake. Unless I stand up and walk to the altar, I cannot receive. I think this is the foundational issue beneath the conversation Chris and Karl are having in the comments to my earlier "Who controls communion?" post. Communion only communicates grace to those who receive it...and "receiving" is not necessarily to be confused with "eating" or "drinking."

(The photo above is a detail from a beautiful painting I saw in the Cathedral of St. Alban in St. Albans last Friday. If I can find the time I'll post a few more photos later today or tomorrow!)

June 22, 2004

Who controls communion? 1.4

According to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, local bishops do, "in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles." (Read Christianity Today's take here at Weblog; look for the section titled "Bishops approve of bishop's actions.)

Open mouth, insert fire hose

Hello from Oxford, friends! I had a great trip here and am now soaking up the academic atmosphere, making new friends, and learning from some of the foremost names in Christian theology. I'm having a spectacular time, but after the first day I'm experiencing a bit of information overload. I'm also beginning to feel the weight of the assignments that I have to complete in the next three weeks. If I can keep my focus, I shouldn't have any problem...but there are so many things to distract a person around here!

The theology project I've been assigned for the seminar I have with Dr. Alister McGrath is on the doctrine of the Church, so I'm thinking about rehashing some of my ideas about the institutional-emergent-institutional cycle...but I have to really narrow the question down to make it do-able. Any ideas out there?

Update: I think I'm going to write on church unity, a topic near and dear to my heart. I may focus on our unity with the church of the past...

June 18, 2004

Off to Oxford


I'm packing up tonight for the trip to Oxford for this year's Oxford Summer Programme in Christianity and Culture at Wycliffe Hall. I'll be out of contact (Internet-ly speaking) until Monday when they set up our accounts and I can plug in my iBook, but I'm hoping to try out my new Wi-Fi card somewhere along the way.

I'm hoping to blog a little something each day once the program begins, assuming I have the time. In three weeks I have to review three books (and I'll be avoiding the "seminary skim" if it's at all possible, Anna Aven!), write two 3500 word "essays," prepare two presentations, and take one cumulative exam. The payoff, should I survive the fortnight, is being five credits closer to that MDiv.

Thrive, everyone! I'll see you on the other side...

June 16, 2004

Feeling mystical?

One of the seminars I'm taking next week at Oxford is called Mysticism and Spirituality in the Medieval Church and I hve to choose one of the following books to read for the seminar. I was wondering if any of you have ever read any of these, and if so if you'd recommend one over the others? Leave me a comment, if you please...

cover
The Cloud of Unknowing (author unknown)

cover
Revelations of Divine Love by Julian of Norwich

cover
The Book of Margery Kempe by Margery Kempe

So...can anyone help me out?

Is doctrine dangerous? 1.1

After reading some of the comments my faithful readers have made concerning my thoughts on the Southern Baptist Convention's decision to break fellowship with the Baptist World Alliance, I want to expand a bit on some of my thoughts:

-- I want to emphasize that, to one who lives in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and has no access to information about the schism or the events which led up to it other than the Internet, the appearance is that this decision is "intensely politicized" as I said yesterday. That may be a reflection of the media coverage the issue has received over the last couple of years. Regardless of what the actual reasons behind the move are, the appearance to most of the world is that the SBC, unhappy with the BWA's decision to include the offshoot Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, is "taking its marbles and going home." Once more, while this may not be the actual situation, it is the appearance. Many of our brothers and sisters around the world see it from that perspective. Are appearances important? Probably. If the appearance is wrong, I think the SBC needs to do a better job of correcting it by setting forth some solid evidence for their grievances that's easily accessible to that portion of of the Baptist world that doesn't attend SBC churches but is nonetheless very concerned about what's happening here.

-- I certainly don't intend to paint the SBC as the "bad guy" as Greg put it. Far from it! In fact, I stand with the SBC in my concern that the BWA has yet (that I've been able to find) to respond to the accusation that they are "soft" on the full inspiration of Scripture and the infallibility that results from it. That being said, it would seem that the other doctrinal issues involved have been resolved, at least to my satisfaction. Of the other issues usually mentioned in connection with the break of fellowship, some have to do with procedure (relating to the entrance of the CBF into the BWA) and others with practice (the fact that another member organization of the BWA has yet to act on a small number of member churches that offer church membership to unrepentant practicing homosexuals). To me the procedural issues are non-issues. We ought to be able to work through things like that. The practical issues offer real cause for concern...But how long has the situation with the American Baptists gone on? Are they going the way of much of the mainstream churches, abandoning their doctrinal foundations in practice before moving to abandon them in writing? Or are they simply working in a methodical manner to resolve an incredibly explosive issue within their fellowship? I don't know the answer here.

-- Finally, my musings on overdefining one's doctrine to the point that it separates you from other people with whom you will one day share heaven being a sin against the High Priestly prayer of Christ where just that--musings. Please remember, my friends, that my blog is "a place to document the evolution of an holistic personal Christian theology," and that means that I spend at least as much time exploring "wrong" paths as I do "right" ones. If you disagree on this point (which I think is foundational to the issue at hand) then by all means call me on the carpet about it. I need that kind of accountability.

I opened yesterday's post by saying that it was a "sad day." I think that everyone involved would agree with me. Whether it was a tragic day, however, must probably be left for future generations to decide. Only time will tell how the cause of Christ is affected by this schism.

(As promised, here's the link to Christianity Today's Weblog covering the schism: Weblog: Southern Baptists No Longer In, Nor Of, World Alliance - CT Magazine.)

June 15, 2004

Is doctrine dangerous?

What a sad day. In a move that appears to be an intensely politicized move, the Southern Baptist Convention of the U.S. voted today to withdraw from the Baptist World Alliance. Read the story here in the secular press: MSNBC - Southern Baptists quit world organization. Christianity Today has yet to report on the vote; when they do, I'll post the link.

"I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the wrold know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."
...Jesus Christ, Lord of the Church, John 17

I recognize that cooperation with ecclesiastical organizations is not the functional equivalent of the unity Christ prayed for all believers, but the dissolution of such bonds of fraternal cooperation must certainly be tested closely so that no political motives--which are obviously contrary to the prayer of Christ--can creep in. While some of the SBC's issues with the BWA have centered on doctrinal issues (though a quick reading the BWA's responses to the SBC's challenges one struggles to understand what doctrinal stances remain at issue) it's hard not to imagine other, less pious matters at the heart of this schism.

Reading Alister McGrath's excellent book Reformation Thought: An Introduction in preparation for my classes at Oxford this summer I came across a fascinating statement: "One of the purposes of doctrine is to divide" (23). The idea sparked the following thinking, which I'd love to have a few of my thoughtful readers test out for me. If it is true that we define doctrine to divide, then we must define only enough doctrine to separate ourselves from those teachings from which we must remain separate--heresies against the essential doctrines of Christianity--if we are to remain within the will of Christ as expressed in his John 17 prayer above. When we overdefine doctrine to the point that we encourage division within the Body of Christ, we violate the High Priestly Prayer.

An important question in the midst of this conversation: Is there a difference between promoting divisions and pointing out distinctions? And if there is, what does that difference look like in real-world terms?

What does it mean?

Buzzword of the day: Post-emergent

(Found in a comment made by David Trigueros on Andrew's recent post that I blogged about earlier, "When We Stop Emerging.")

What happens when "emerging" is no longer honest?

Andrew is obviously beginning to feel my age. Check out his recent post at tallskinnykiwi.com: when we stop emerging. Quote of note:
The fact is that many of us have already taken shape and we are not actually changing enough to be accurately defined as "emerging". We have done house church, celtic spirituality, moved into monastic structures, done rave worship, tapped into ancient liturgies, utilized internet technologies, and now we are settling down into a new way of being church - a new way that is not necessarily changing or emerging.

So, what happens when it is dishonest to use the word "emerging?"
Maybe, just maybe, we decide to get over what makes us different from the rest of the Church and start focusing on what makes us the same. And maybe we begin to assume responsibility for that Church that our children will one day be part of...that Church that is only now beginning to emerge just beyond our experiential horizon.

June 10, 2004

"half-assed lawn care and following Jesus"

Dave at welcometotheplanet has a great post today that was like a conviction ambush--I didn't even realize I was going to get slammed until it was too late to get away. Check it out here: half-assed lawn care and following Jesus. No quote of note for you this time around; I don't want to ruin it for you. =)

June 09, 2004

emerging sideways...

Allow me to introduce you to Bobbie and her blog emerging sideways. I've been blessed and inspired by her honesty about the journey she's been on with God, and I'm sure you will be too.

Where were the chaplains? 2.0

One of them, at least, was on patrol with the troops when a roadside bomb destroyed his Humvee. Maj. H. Timothy Vakoc, or Father Tim to those he shepherded, was seriously injured in the attack, becoming the first chaplain casualty of this war. Check out his story in this excellent opinion piece at the WSJ. Quote of note:
As for the risks involved, Father Tim took the chaplains' view: "The safest place for me to be is in the center of God's Will," he explained to his sister during a previous deployment to Bosnia, "and if that is in the line of fire, that is where I will be."
Amen, brother. And thanks.

June 08, 2004

Because bloggers express

Well, it's finally here--International Weblogger's Day! This meme didn't take off like many of us expected it would, but still, hundreds of bloggers are taking part in the observance. I think it's a worthwhile project because I think blogging is a worthwhile project. Any tool that puts the ability to publish into the hands of the masses has value.

By the way, did any of you get the presents you wanted? Believe it or not, NeoTheolog must have been a good blogger this year; my AirPort card arrived yesterday, just in time for my trip to Oxford! I suspect I'll be trying to install it sometime today or tomorrow, so if I go offline for a few days, it will be because I screwed it up. =)

June 01, 2004

Three Postmodernisms

A worthwhile (and convicting) read by Brian McLaren at forMinistry.com. Quote of note:
As a follower of Christ, I am less interested in articulating the ideal definition of this movement in words than I am in helping contribute to what the postmodern world becomes in reality.