There have been a lot of thoughts rambling about in my head now for a while, and the truth is that I'm not sure where to begin. Every time I come to my computer and try to type them out, my mind goes blank, and I can't bring them back.
While I'm thinking about it, they go something like this:
First: I find it sad that to say you have a degree in theology these days is all too often taken as declaring that your college major was underwater basket weaving, especially by those in the fields of psychology and counseling. It isn't necessarily their fault, as much as it is ours and the theological, biblical, or religious communities in general. In some real sense, our field was the original study of the “psyche” (the word for soul in Greek) and its treatment, and thus ours was the original psychology. But because we have drifted away from the treatment and deliverance of the psyche from our fundamental disorder and all too often concern ourselves with arguments over semantics, and irrelevant and inconsequential teachings, and shied away the practical applications of the Gospel because we have ourselves misunderstood or been ignorant of them; because of all of these things and more we have practically no credibility in that field within which we should know better than anyone.
Second: I recently watched “The Last Airbender” for the third time in the theater today. The acting and dialogue aren't great, but there's just something about it which speaks to me, to the point where I get choked up and nearly cry in a couple of scenes. Judging by the crowd in the theater this late after the movie opened this summer, I'm not the only one to whom it speaks. And I have to ask myself “why?”
“Avatar: The Last Airbender”, as a movie and as the original TV series takes much of it's spirituality from the eastern religions and beliefs, and over the last twenty or thirty years, many western people have turned to these beliefs to fill a spiritual need which they have been unable to meet in the churches. I have written and ranted in my rambles a lot about the catalysts involved in this exodus so I won't go through a full rant here about them. But it is sad.
I myself found a great deal of peace in Buddhist and Taoist writings, and a great deal of agreement and complementary teachings. I was disturbed about my reaction until I began to read such writings as “The Imitation of Christ,” “The Cloud of Unknowing,” and those by St. Peter of Damascus, and others from the Spiritual and Mystical traditions of the Church; and in these writings I found our brothers from the centuries before us saying much the same thing about practice, focus, detachment, and self-abandonment as the Buddhist and Taoist writings do while adamantly focused on Jesus Christ.
I have to wonder if, in some way, the world of “The Last Airbender” doesn't reflect the state of spirituality today, if not the Church directly. We, like the four nations, are fighting amongst ourselves. I can't even speak to old friends at times without them looking for an opportunity to try and “convert” me, or feel like I have to defend my Christianity as though it were somehow inferior to theirs. And in the end, I think most of us are trying desperately to practice our faith in Jesus Christ, knowing the Father through Him, but often don't really know where to turn. In some sense, like those in the movie, I think many of us are hoping that there is an “Avatar” out there who can teach us and lead us back to the way we somehow just know things are supposed to be.
I think this is why so many people leave the churches for something else, or else just think the Church is fraudulent at best.
Third: I have to be careful with this. I think, in some small way, I'm getting the hang of this. I'm not saying I've arrived, or that I'm perfect, or anything like that. If I were to feel or think that way, it would be a sure sign that I hadn't got a clue and was plunging headlong down a really, really dark path. But I think I'm finally at the point where it no longer feels like I'm spinning my wheels spiritually.
I'm finding that, at least for me, withdrawing from myself, and denying myself has less to do with isolation and more to do with being with people. I tried for months, as I wrote about before, to spend time in meditation, sometimes hours at a time. Meditation, prayer, private Eucharist. Sometimes it was well, sometimes it produced little it seemed. And then, a couple of months ago I was convicted about it. I had gone to do my prayers and Communion on my own again, and then realized that it had been a few weeks since my wife, not to mention my kids, had taken Holy Communion. I then included my wife. The truth is that it was a bit uncomfortable for me at first. In some ways it still is, because I have always been uncomfortable with other people being involved with my prayer life.
But that's just the point. I was trying to stay in a place where I was comfortable. I wasn't denying or abandoning self when I retreated to do my prayers, I was running headlong to it. And in so doing, I was preventing my family from receiving the Eucharist, and denying them Jesus rather than providing Him to them. I wasn't fulfilling my calling as a priest, I was abandoning it without truly understanding what I was doing, and so instead of drawing closer to Christ through self-abandonment, I was pushing Him away and keeping those dearest to me from receiving Him.
We began doing morning and evening prayers as a family using the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, and doing Mass at home with both my wife and kids; and I have struggled with it. But, that's the point. I do struggle with it because it's not comfortable to have anyone else be a part of my prayer life. Just like it's not comfortable to do the dishes, or feed the animals, or water the garden when my wife is unable to do so. It's not comfortable to sit and listen to someone rant about their problems when all you want to do is get away and watch a movie, or read, or play a game.
I think I'm finally beginning to get the hang of this because I am now recognizing that it isn't me who is doing any of these things when they happen, but the Grace of God within me. I recognized it before, but now I think I've got a grasp on it, if that makes any sense. It's penetrating through my thick skull that I can't just plow through a day and assume that I'm going to be kind, or gentle, or gracious. I can't assume that I'm going to keep my temper if things don't go my way. I'm accepting now that whatever temptations I encounter are because I want to do those things and therefore I am the one who is dysfunctional, not the circumstances surrounding me, and because I am the one who is dysfunctional I must, I repeat must, confess this dysfunction daily, hourly, minutely, and ask for His grace to flow through me, for Him to overflow within me with His presence, and power, a love, and compassion, and wisdom, and humility because I am poor, blind, weak, naked, and ignorant. I have a serious disorder, and ignoring that fact isn't going to make it go away. It's only when you admit that you have one, and apply yourself to the treatment plan that you are able to learn to function in spite of it. If you at any point deny that it exists, you are only lying to yourself and will make it worse, not better.
At any rate, I think I've finally said my peace, so I'll quit rambling for now.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
A Ramble About Temptation
The Scriptures say that:
Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. (James 1:13-15, WEB)
Temptations occur because inwardly we want something (or don't want something, as the case may be), and are then told “no, you can't have it your way”. For example, someone who absolutely cannot stand chocolate will not be tempted to eat one even if a hundred bars of chocolate are placed in front of them. This must be understood and accepted, if you are tempted to do something, it is because somewhere within you is the desire to do it.
We don't like to admit that fact. The married man who believes himself to be godly may refuse to admit to himself that he struggles with adulterous thoughts because he is somehow sexually attracted to women other than his wife. In other words, he doesn't want to admit that he is capable of such a thing, when in fact deep down he is not only perfectly capable of it, but a part of him wants to do so. The fact that the temptation occurs is a glaring reminder of our deep spiritual disorder; a disorder we may pay lip service to, but is painful to be reminded of in reality. It is so disturbing, and even traumatic, to the human psyche to be faced with this disorder that a person's mind can throw everything possible at him in order to avoid dealing with the reality of it.
This is why God permits temptations. We have a deep need to be constantly reminded of our problem, because we, by nature, constantly seek to ignore it and remain in self-denial about it. We have to be shown it on a regular basis. If we aren't, we will fall into the delusion that there's nothing wrong with us. Our salvation depends on us drawing nearer to God through Jesus Christ. Without the constant reminder of the problem, most of us (myself included), would drift farther and farther away as we delude ourselves into thinking that we don't have a problem and so don't need to approach Him in prayer and confession.
And, as 1 Corinthians 10:13 says, God allows the temptation to go so far, but no farther. The purpose behind permitting them is therapeutic, not to make us slide farther into the abyss. Just enough to remind us of our spiritual disorder and our need for Him, but not enough to where we can't say “no” and send us spiraling downward beyond our control.
If we are tempted to eat doughnuts when on a diet, it is because we want to eat the doughnuts and have been told “no”. If we are tempted to steal, it is because we want the item in question, and feel that we have every right to violate the person from whom we are taking it. If we are tempted to “sexual misconduct”, it is because we are sexually aroused by the thought of it and want to do it.
It is not the fault of the bikini clad girl that the self-professed Christian man struggles with his thoughts about her. The man desires her, refuses to admit it to himself or God, and continues to struggle in a losing battle until he does admit it and seeks help. Making her put on a tee shirt and blaming her for her indiscretion doesn't remove the primary problem within the man. It might be kind of her to do so in recognition of the man's weakness, but it is the man's weakness which is the issue, not her choice of swimwear.
The ironic thing about the above example, is that we, as Christian men, have a tendency to become angry with the woman and blame her rather than facing the problem within ourselves. There are some men who will blame the woman for being raped if the clothing she wore was too provocative. There are many thieves who will blame the person they stole from for their thievery. There are many people who eat doughnuts who blame the baker for making them.
The first step in the treatment of any disorder or addiction is admitting that you have one. Once this is done, in order to continue making progress you must continuously be aware that you still have that problem and come to terms with it on a regular basis. It isn't the liquor store's fault if a recovering alcoholic walks in and buys the alcohol believing that he no longer has that problem. For all intents and purposes, it isn't the drug dealer's fault if the recovering addict pops by on the street corner for a quick fix because he thinks he can handle it. If I myself were to pop by and speak to the same dealer, there would be no issue because I myself have no such addiction and would not be tempted to buy and use it.
Removing the temptation only serves to delay the inevitable if the root problem is not faced and admitted. I love watching Stargate. It is also a distraction from spiritual pursuits. Putting away the DVDs for a while doesn't solve the problem, it only delays it. Removing the DVDs altogether doesn't solve the problem, because I will be tempted to go out and replace them. The root problem is the desire to escape by watching Stargate and to see “what happens next”.
In some respects, that God permits temptation can be one of His greatest gifts in our spiritual growth because it encourages us to keep our eyes focused on Him, where they need to be, and to face the reality of our spiritual disorder.
Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. (James 1:13-15, WEB)
Temptations occur because inwardly we want something (or don't want something, as the case may be), and are then told “no, you can't have it your way”. For example, someone who absolutely cannot stand chocolate will not be tempted to eat one even if a hundred bars of chocolate are placed in front of them. This must be understood and accepted, if you are tempted to do something, it is because somewhere within you is the desire to do it.
We don't like to admit that fact. The married man who believes himself to be godly may refuse to admit to himself that he struggles with adulterous thoughts because he is somehow sexually attracted to women other than his wife. In other words, he doesn't want to admit that he is capable of such a thing, when in fact deep down he is not only perfectly capable of it, but a part of him wants to do so. The fact that the temptation occurs is a glaring reminder of our deep spiritual disorder; a disorder we may pay lip service to, but is painful to be reminded of in reality. It is so disturbing, and even traumatic, to the human psyche to be faced with this disorder that a person's mind can throw everything possible at him in order to avoid dealing with the reality of it.
This is why God permits temptations. We have a deep need to be constantly reminded of our problem, because we, by nature, constantly seek to ignore it and remain in self-denial about it. We have to be shown it on a regular basis. If we aren't, we will fall into the delusion that there's nothing wrong with us. Our salvation depends on us drawing nearer to God through Jesus Christ. Without the constant reminder of the problem, most of us (myself included), would drift farther and farther away as we delude ourselves into thinking that we don't have a problem and so don't need to approach Him in prayer and confession.
And, as 1 Corinthians 10:13 says, God allows the temptation to go so far, but no farther. The purpose behind permitting them is therapeutic, not to make us slide farther into the abyss. Just enough to remind us of our spiritual disorder and our need for Him, but not enough to where we can't say “no” and send us spiraling downward beyond our control.
If we are tempted to eat doughnuts when on a diet, it is because we want to eat the doughnuts and have been told “no”. If we are tempted to steal, it is because we want the item in question, and feel that we have every right to violate the person from whom we are taking it. If we are tempted to “sexual misconduct”, it is because we are sexually aroused by the thought of it and want to do it.
It is not the fault of the bikini clad girl that the self-professed Christian man struggles with his thoughts about her. The man desires her, refuses to admit it to himself or God, and continues to struggle in a losing battle until he does admit it and seeks help. Making her put on a tee shirt and blaming her for her indiscretion doesn't remove the primary problem within the man. It might be kind of her to do so in recognition of the man's weakness, but it is the man's weakness which is the issue, not her choice of swimwear.
The ironic thing about the above example, is that we, as Christian men, have a tendency to become angry with the woman and blame her rather than facing the problem within ourselves. There are some men who will blame the woman for being raped if the clothing she wore was too provocative. There are many thieves who will blame the person they stole from for their thievery. There are many people who eat doughnuts who blame the baker for making them.
The first step in the treatment of any disorder or addiction is admitting that you have one. Once this is done, in order to continue making progress you must continuously be aware that you still have that problem and come to terms with it on a regular basis. It isn't the liquor store's fault if a recovering alcoholic walks in and buys the alcohol believing that he no longer has that problem. For all intents and purposes, it isn't the drug dealer's fault if the recovering addict pops by on the street corner for a quick fix because he thinks he can handle it. If I myself were to pop by and speak to the same dealer, there would be no issue because I myself have no such addiction and would not be tempted to buy and use it.
Removing the temptation only serves to delay the inevitable if the root problem is not faced and admitted. I love watching Stargate. It is also a distraction from spiritual pursuits. Putting away the DVDs for a while doesn't solve the problem, it only delays it. Removing the DVDs altogether doesn't solve the problem, because I will be tempted to go out and replace them. The root problem is the desire to escape by watching Stargate and to see “what happens next”.
In some respects, that God permits temptation can be one of His greatest gifts in our spiritual growth because it encourages us to keep our eyes focused on Him, where they need to be, and to face the reality of our spiritual disorder.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
A Ramble about Creation
I don't think I've ever written a ramble directly about this subject. I know I've alluded to it, but I don't think I've directly talked about it. If I have, please forgive the redundancy. I just started mulling it over again in my mind after reading an article in Scientific American online, and then reading some of the responses in the article from other well meaning Christians.
The book of Genesis says that God created the world in six days. Modern science says that the universe, the planet, and all life on it took billions of years to form. This is “the” classic argument between those of us who believe the Holy Scriptures, and those of us who read and keep up with modern scientific study, theories, and advances in understanding. There's a lot of good research and evidence that indicates that modern science has a more correct view of the time-line involved, and yet the Bible is the inspired word of God, and whether or not we accept the doctrine of “sola scriptura” (the doctrine which teaches that Sacred Scripture alone is sufficient for doctrine and teaching [to which I do not ascribe]) there are few professing Christians who will declare the Bible to be somehow wrong (myself included).
Thus began the great war of words between Bible believing Christians and sincere scientists (“the Bible says this!” and “but the data says this!”). The great conflict between general and special revelation. The question then becomes, if both means of revelation are given by God, how can they contradict each other?
I remember reading in one book by a Dr. Hugh Ross (it was either “The Fingerprint of God” or “The Creator and the Cosmos”), an astrophysicist who is also a professing Christian, that the order of the six days of creation reads like watching the formation of the earth and evolutionary history from the viewpoint of someone standing on the earth. There are many who have taken a similar standpoint putting forth ideas such as each “day” of creation as actually being an “evolutionary age” of time.
I would like to go back and expand on Dr. Ross' observation and suggest that what Genesis is describing is not six literal 24 hour days of “creation”, but it is describing six literal 12 hour periods of revelation about creation. Genesis itself gives us the clue to this as it describes, literally, “there is evening and there is morning, day one, … day two, … day three, etc.” Moses is describing being shown something for twelve hours at a time, and then given twelve hours to process what he has seen and sleep before the next round.
Here is my opinion. Moses was on the mountain for forty days according to Exodus. During those forty days, God took six days to reveal millions of years of His creative acts. Being God, He showed it to Moses, from Moses' viewpoint on the ground, in a kind of “fast forward”, as much as his human mind could assimilate and process at a time, and then it all amalgamated in his mind as it attempted to absorb and retain all of it, and he then wrote down the gist of what he could remember. The point of the book of the first chapter of Genesis then becomes not how God created the world, but that He created the world.
How is it that we have gotten to the point that a Christian's personal faith and relationship with God is so fragile that it depends on a specific, yet scientifically problematic, interpretation of Holy Scripture? How is it that we have gotten to the point that entire theologies of salvation are dependent on a specific translation or understanding of a particular word in Hebrew or Greek?
How would some Christians react to the information that, most likely, the Old Testament was not originally written in the oldest language we have copies in, namely a 6th century Babylonian dialect of Hebrew? The Torah, the first five books, were written in approximately the fifteenth century before Christ, concurrent with the lifetime of Moses. Hebrew did not exist as a language prior to the time of King David, approximately 1000 B.C.
Hebrew as we know it is a descendant of a dialect of Canaanite, much like Spanish is a descendant of Latin, and was likely adopted after the conquest of Canaan and the subsequent (forbidden) intermingling between the Israeli and Canaanite peoples described in the book of Judges. The descendants of Jacob and his twelve sons were in Egypt for four hundred years, and there is no record of the Egyptian Pharoahs seeking to suppress their language or culture, even while they were ordering the death of the firstborn. Furthermore there is a consistent pattern of the Israeli, and later Jewish people, of adopting the language of the people of the land in which they are living. So that we have a dialect of German such as Yiddish, a dialect of Spanish such as Ladino, prior to this in the time of Christ, the Jewish people predominantly spoke either Greek, or Aramaic. Hebrew itself was such a dead language among most of the people by the time of Ezra, at the end of the Babylonian captivity, that Ezra had to translate the Scriptures for the masses. Hebrew only really existed among the Rabbis much as Latin only really continued and still continues among the Roman Catholic clergy and religious. This was the reason for the translation of the Scriptures into the Aramaic targums, and then later the translation from the Hebrew into the Greek Septuagint, which was the Bible most familiar to the Jewish people of the first centuries both B.C. and A.D.
This in mind, there is good circumstantial evidence that the original words of Moses were likely written in Egyptian, or some Israeli variant of it which was later translated into Hebrew, probably during or after the time of King David, and there is good internal evidence within the Scriptures that they were later appended and added to in both Hebrew and Aramaic (and then later in Greek, although most Protestants will likely argue this point).
I believe that God inspired the original words. I also believe that God was perfectly capable of inspiring each well meaning editor, redactor, and translator until we have the Scriptures we have today. I believe that the important message that God intended to be passed down from generation to generation continues to be passed down. That He created the heavens and the earth. That He did it all by Himself with no one to assist Him. That He did it in the way he wanted, and in the time (which means nothing to Him) He chose to do it.
I find it fascinating that there is good archaeological evidence that the beginnings of civilization arose between six and seven thousand years ago near Tabriz, Iran and southern Georgia, the best location I have ever heard for the geographical site of the Biblical garden of Eden (believe it or not, it matches perfectly with the Biblical description of where Eden was located). I find it just as fascinating that human beings most likely started wearing clothes about 150,000 years ago (roughly when the body louse evolved). I also find it fascinating that Neanderthals actually died out between thirty and fifty thousand years ago and were not genetically related or descended from modern Homo Sapiens.
I think God told us what he considered important in the Holy Scriptures. I also think there's a lot He didn't say; whole Chapters of Human history which He refused to elaborate on because He didn't think it necessary for His purposes to tell us. Chapters, some of them quite dark, which we get small glimmers of through archaeological and paleontological research. Some of which chapters are likely better left buried in the past from what I have read. This doesn't make Him a liar under any circumstances, but it does make Him far more prudent than ourselves in what he chooses to reveal directly.
The important realization of our human history which Genesis tells us, is that somewhere in our distant past, our ancestors screwed up royally and passed down a disorder which keeps us from knowing God without His direct intervention. The next important realization is the constant direct intervention by God in our history so that we would come to know Him in spite of our disorder.
If we are continuously fighting about how much time (a concept which is meaningful only to human beings) God took to create the world, were are limiting God and missing the real message of Holy Scripture, that God wants to help us and has been working without a break to do so, through this meaningless distraction. This divisiveness can only be described as the very definition of heresy.
The book of Genesis says that God created the world in six days. Modern science says that the universe, the planet, and all life on it took billions of years to form. This is “the” classic argument between those of us who believe the Holy Scriptures, and those of us who read and keep up with modern scientific study, theories, and advances in understanding. There's a lot of good research and evidence that indicates that modern science has a more correct view of the time-line involved, and yet the Bible is the inspired word of God, and whether or not we accept the doctrine of “sola scriptura” (the doctrine which teaches that Sacred Scripture alone is sufficient for doctrine and teaching [to which I do not ascribe]) there are few professing Christians who will declare the Bible to be somehow wrong (myself included).
Thus began the great war of words between Bible believing Christians and sincere scientists (“the Bible says this!” and “but the data says this!”). The great conflict between general and special revelation. The question then becomes, if both means of revelation are given by God, how can they contradict each other?
I remember reading in one book by a Dr. Hugh Ross (it was either “The Fingerprint of God” or “The Creator and the Cosmos”), an astrophysicist who is also a professing Christian, that the order of the six days of creation reads like watching the formation of the earth and evolutionary history from the viewpoint of someone standing on the earth. There are many who have taken a similar standpoint putting forth ideas such as each “day” of creation as actually being an “evolutionary age” of time.
I would like to go back and expand on Dr. Ross' observation and suggest that what Genesis is describing is not six literal 24 hour days of “creation”, but it is describing six literal 12 hour periods of revelation about creation. Genesis itself gives us the clue to this as it describes, literally, “there is evening and there is morning, day one, … day two, … day three, etc.” Moses is describing being shown something for twelve hours at a time, and then given twelve hours to process what he has seen and sleep before the next round.
Here is my opinion. Moses was on the mountain for forty days according to Exodus. During those forty days, God took six days to reveal millions of years of His creative acts. Being God, He showed it to Moses, from Moses' viewpoint on the ground, in a kind of “fast forward”, as much as his human mind could assimilate and process at a time, and then it all amalgamated in his mind as it attempted to absorb and retain all of it, and he then wrote down the gist of what he could remember. The point of the book of the first chapter of Genesis then becomes not how God created the world, but that He created the world.
How is it that we have gotten to the point that a Christian's personal faith and relationship with God is so fragile that it depends on a specific, yet scientifically problematic, interpretation of Holy Scripture? How is it that we have gotten to the point that entire theologies of salvation are dependent on a specific translation or understanding of a particular word in Hebrew or Greek?
How would some Christians react to the information that, most likely, the Old Testament was not originally written in the oldest language we have copies in, namely a 6th century Babylonian dialect of Hebrew? The Torah, the first five books, were written in approximately the fifteenth century before Christ, concurrent with the lifetime of Moses. Hebrew did not exist as a language prior to the time of King David, approximately 1000 B.C.
Hebrew as we know it is a descendant of a dialect of Canaanite, much like Spanish is a descendant of Latin, and was likely adopted after the conquest of Canaan and the subsequent (forbidden) intermingling between the Israeli and Canaanite peoples described in the book of Judges. The descendants of Jacob and his twelve sons were in Egypt for four hundred years, and there is no record of the Egyptian Pharoahs seeking to suppress their language or culture, even while they were ordering the death of the firstborn. Furthermore there is a consistent pattern of the Israeli, and later Jewish people, of adopting the language of the people of the land in which they are living. So that we have a dialect of German such as Yiddish, a dialect of Spanish such as Ladino, prior to this in the time of Christ, the Jewish people predominantly spoke either Greek, or Aramaic. Hebrew itself was such a dead language among most of the people by the time of Ezra, at the end of the Babylonian captivity, that Ezra had to translate the Scriptures for the masses. Hebrew only really existed among the Rabbis much as Latin only really continued and still continues among the Roman Catholic clergy and religious. This was the reason for the translation of the Scriptures into the Aramaic targums, and then later the translation from the Hebrew into the Greek Septuagint, which was the Bible most familiar to the Jewish people of the first centuries both B.C. and A.D.
This in mind, there is good circumstantial evidence that the original words of Moses were likely written in Egyptian, or some Israeli variant of it which was later translated into Hebrew, probably during or after the time of King David, and there is good internal evidence within the Scriptures that they were later appended and added to in both Hebrew and Aramaic (and then later in Greek, although most Protestants will likely argue this point).
I believe that God inspired the original words. I also believe that God was perfectly capable of inspiring each well meaning editor, redactor, and translator until we have the Scriptures we have today. I believe that the important message that God intended to be passed down from generation to generation continues to be passed down. That He created the heavens and the earth. That He did it all by Himself with no one to assist Him. That He did it in the way he wanted, and in the time (which means nothing to Him) He chose to do it.
I find it fascinating that there is good archaeological evidence that the beginnings of civilization arose between six and seven thousand years ago near Tabriz, Iran and southern Georgia, the best location I have ever heard for the geographical site of the Biblical garden of Eden (believe it or not, it matches perfectly with the Biblical description of where Eden was located). I find it just as fascinating that human beings most likely started wearing clothes about 150,000 years ago (roughly when the body louse evolved). I also find it fascinating that Neanderthals actually died out between thirty and fifty thousand years ago and were not genetically related or descended from modern Homo Sapiens.
I think God told us what he considered important in the Holy Scriptures. I also think there's a lot He didn't say; whole Chapters of Human history which He refused to elaborate on because He didn't think it necessary for His purposes to tell us. Chapters, some of them quite dark, which we get small glimmers of through archaeological and paleontological research. Some of which chapters are likely better left buried in the past from what I have read. This doesn't make Him a liar under any circumstances, but it does make Him far more prudent than ourselves in what he chooses to reveal directly.
The important realization of our human history which Genesis tells us, is that somewhere in our distant past, our ancestors screwed up royally and passed down a disorder which keeps us from knowing God without His direct intervention. The next important realization is the constant direct intervention by God in our history so that we would come to know Him in spite of our disorder.
If we are continuously fighting about how much time (a concept which is meaningful only to human beings) God took to create the world, were are limiting God and missing the real message of Holy Scripture, that God wants to help us and has been working without a break to do so, through this meaningless distraction. This divisiveness can only be described as the very definition of heresy.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
A Ramble about What We Ingest
My family and I are on a fairly strict diet. It's Gluten Free, lactose free, and more or less vegetarian. It pretty much consists of rice, beans, fruit, vegetables, and any combination of the first four. It's not as bad as it sounds. We're able to make rice-flour pastas, cakes, and muffins, and it's easier to find gluten free and lactose free foods in a grocery store these days than you might think.
The thing about this kind of a diet is that it supplies what the body needs, and also tends to purge all the other junk from the body. This means that you will probably feel sick for the first month or two (or more) as your system begins to clean itself out of various toxins, and bad things which, if you're like me, you've probably put in your system for the larger portion of your life eating fast food, t.v. dinners, and delivery pizzas. Part of this is also going through withdrawals from these kinds of foods and toxins.
But when you've survived and somehow made it out the other side, you tend to actually feel better, you heal faster, and you can have more energy. We went on it out of necessity because my wife is gluten intolerant, and my kids (and admittedly I myself) are lactose intolerant (my wife doesn't do well with milk either). The downside, in some ways, though about going through it is that you lose most or all of your tolerances for the foods that you have given up. Even though I could drink milk or eat cheese before, I can't now because of the effects it has on my stomach and digestive system. And if I break the diet, I tend to feel a little spacey, ill, and like something's just not quite right.
In the writings of the ancient Church, and the Christian mystics, one of the things which they instruct in terms of prayer is to remove all distractions and attachments. The instructions they give at times seem absolutely draconian such as fasting by eating only once a day, and sleeping only half the night. Withdrawing yourself from most conversation, giving away most or all (preferably all) your possessions, and drawing all of your attention on your unworthiness, and the love of God and for God (there's a great deal more which they go into, which for sake of space I can't otherwise you'ld be reading for hours).
In the course of my reading and meditating I have attempted at least some of what they have prescribed, and during those times of renunciation, and removal of myself from distractions such as movies, games, books, etc. Things have seemed more "right" spiritually. I was able to let go of self more, and spiritual things flowed far more easily. Tears of repentance came far more easily, and His presence was easier to be aware of.
But after some time, I allowed myself to watch a movie, or read a book, or play a video game. Nothing truly bad, a little Sci-Fi, some SimCity. I've been reading through the Percy Jackson series. All fairly benign.
I didn't notice it at first, but the more I did those things, the harder it became to spend time in prayer and meditation. The more scattered I felt, and the more scattered thoughts intruded into my mind when they weren't wanted. It began with the thought "This couldn't hurt, I did this all the time." But the results were consistent. The more time I spent in prayer, saying Mass, and confining my reading to Scripture and spiritual writings of the Church Fathers and mystics, things began to clear up and flow easier again. The more I watched a movie, read some other book, played a video game, the harder it was and the more I tended to forget as to how to meditate and pray at times.
Having a candy bar or some yogurt every once in a while probably won't kill me, but it will throw me off. And if I continue to eat things outside of my diet, it will make me sick and will eventually lead to health problems which may kill me. In the same way, reading a book every once in a while, or watching a movie won't completely destroy my relationship with the Lord, niether will He condemn me for it. But the more I ingest that kind of "junk food" the more spiritual health problems I will encounter.
The diet is a pain at times, and it is a bit draconian, but it's there to keep us from getting sick and to heal us from all the other stuff we put into our systems. It's our choice whether or not to follow it or how strictly, but there will always be consequences for the choice we make.
The thing about this kind of a diet is that it supplies what the body needs, and also tends to purge all the other junk from the body. This means that you will probably feel sick for the first month or two (or more) as your system begins to clean itself out of various toxins, and bad things which, if you're like me, you've probably put in your system for the larger portion of your life eating fast food, t.v. dinners, and delivery pizzas. Part of this is also going through withdrawals from these kinds of foods and toxins.
But when you've survived and somehow made it out the other side, you tend to actually feel better, you heal faster, and you can have more energy. We went on it out of necessity because my wife is gluten intolerant, and my kids (and admittedly I myself) are lactose intolerant (my wife doesn't do well with milk either). The downside, in some ways, though about going through it is that you lose most or all of your tolerances for the foods that you have given up. Even though I could drink milk or eat cheese before, I can't now because of the effects it has on my stomach and digestive system. And if I break the diet, I tend to feel a little spacey, ill, and like something's just not quite right.
In the writings of the ancient Church, and the Christian mystics, one of the things which they instruct in terms of prayer is to remove all distractions and attachments. The instructions they give at times seem absolutely draconian such as fasting by eating only once a day, and sleeping only half the night. Withdrawing yourself from most conversation, giving away most or all (preferably all) your possessions, and drawing all of your attention on your unworthiness, and the love of God and for God (there's a great deal more which they go into, which for sake of space I can't otherwise you'ld be reading for hours).
In the course of my reading and meditating I have attempted at least some of what they have prescribed, and during those times of renunciation, and removal of myself from distractions such as movies, games, books, etc. Things have seemed more "right" spiritually. I was able to let go of self more, and spiritual things flowed far more easily. Tears of repentance came far more easily, and His presence was easier to be aware of.
But after some time, I allowed myself to watch a movie, or read a book, or play a video game. Nothing truly bad, a little Sci-Fi, some SimCity. I've been reading through the Percy Jackson series. All fairly benign.
I didn't notice it at first, but the more I did those things, the harder it became to spend time in prayer and meditation. The more scattered I felt, and the more scattered thoughts intruded into my mind when they weren't wanted. It began with the thought "This couldn't hurt, I did this all the time." But the results were consistent. The more time I spent in prayer, saying Mass, and confining my reading to Scripture and spiritual writings of the Church Fathers and mystics, things began to clear up and flow easier again. The more I watched a movie, read some other book, played a video game, the harder it was and the more I tended to forget as to how to meditate and pray at times.
Having a candy bar or some yogurt every once in a while probably won't kill me, but it will throw me off. And if I continue to eat things outside of my diet, it will make me sick and will eventually lead to health problems which may kill me. In the same way, reading a book every once in a while, or watching a movie won't completely destroy my relationship with the Lord, niether will He condemn me for it. But the more I ingest that kind of "junk food" the more spiritual health problems I will encounter.
The diet is a pain at times, and it is a bit draconian, but it's there to keep us from getting sick and to heal us from all the other stuff we put into our systems. It's our choice whether or not to follow it or how strictly, but there will always be consequences for the choice we make.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Just Another Ramble
Twenty years ago, I called on God to be my Father and made the decision to take my Christianity seriously. I had little or no understanding of Christian doctrine then (I was fourteen). I just felt this irresistible pull towards God, and the Scriptures and whatever books and materials I could get a hold of. At the time, these were “The Book”, an edition of the Living Bible, and various books by Hal Lindsey.
I was a social outcast at the time. With an undiagnosed case of Asperger's Syndrome, of which no one at the time knew anything about, I barely understood my own feelings about anything, and really couldn't comprehend – and was unaware I couldn't comprehend – the experience of a basic relationship between two people. I was wrapped in my own world and withdrawn from the painful reality of the world of people around me, a world I didn't understand and had stopped trying to comprehend. Those decisions and choices weren't necessarily deliberate or conscious, but they were ones in which I was trapped nevertheless. This was the mental and emotional state I was in when I began to feel this pull.
One thing is for certain, I took it seriously. I always have. I took it seriously enough to read everything I could about it, and began to go to church voluntarily; embroiling myself in yet more relationships which I couldn't truly form with people I had known for several years by then, but hadn't seen for at least one or two; and embroiling myself in relationships with people that didn't like me, and with whom I knew didn't like me (and not without cause).
So I continued learning everything which I could from sermons, the youth group, other people at the church, and trying to become more involved, although still being deficient in knowing and understanding people. I thought I knew what Christianity was all about from the sermons, and the books, and the people, and the Bible itself.
I then had the privilege of going on a missions trip overseas to Papua New Guinea. This trip taught me lessons which I continue to look back on to this day. But it was the first time, as I returned from New Guinea, that my eyes were really opened to the fact that something wasn't quite right with the church. That learning all the “right” doctrines, and going to church on Sundays, and doing all the things with the church youth group, while good, was still missing something. At the time I just thought it wasa lack of devotion or willingness to put everything on the line like the missionaries with whom I had just spent two months did; an illusion which didn't really get dispelled later on when I went to a Bible School run by the same missions organization and spent two more years there. If nothing else they only tried to reinforce it, consciously or not.
It was during these earliest times in my own journey of faith when I was struck with the simple, inexplicable fact that the Christians, the churches, the books, and I myself were all missing something, something important in our faith and the way we lived our lives. I had no idea what when I started, and little idea when I made the first realization of this, but I spent the next fifteen years after that first Bible School trying to find it, believing that I had, then realizing that I hadn't found anything, then seeing glimmers of it every now and then, like pieces of a puzzle that someone has scattered around a house and then left for someone else to pick up.
I read book after book. Some were profoundly worthwhile, others were little more than fluff, while yet others had no right to call themselves Christian. For a time I even read works outside of the Christian tradition and gained some insights which drove me straight back to the Scriptures and Christ Himself. By the grace of God I was driven towards the ancient roots of the faith, and the rich body of writings and Tradition left by those who lived within a few generations of the Apostles, and knew their Teaching far better than we do today. I continued to be pulled irresistibly towards God and to find what was missing.
I searched ancient fathers and masters of the faith of Jesus Christ, and these led me to delve even further into place in prayer that not long before I had no idea even existed. I have attempted to seek the holy darkness and been frustrated and confused when I couldn't, when the day before even I had experienced a wonder in prayer to where I had no desire to leave. I fought, and continue to struggle within myself over the most benign of actions or ways to spend my time.
And twenty years later, humbly, I have come to a conclusion that what is called Christian today is often not, nor has any understanding of what the word means. I have come to the conclusion that I am often not Christian in my thoughts, my words, or my actions. I look back on those who came before us, many hundreds of years ago, I read their words, and what they knew and experienced, and I know that I am nothing in comparison, and what is far, far worse than this, is that we have carelessly twisted and abused the faith which they gave their lives, and their deaths, to pass down to us so that it is little more than a mockery and a caricature.
Christianity isn't a set of doctrines. It's a practice and a discipline and an agreement with God that you will cooperate with Him through renouncing yourself, your possessions, your wants, even your bodily appetites and the pursuit of experiencing the one relationship which truly matters more than anything else. It's regarding your favorite T.V. show, the things you're proud of accomplishing, and your prized book collection as little more than trash in the active pursuit of knowing and drawing close to Him. It's taking a hard, honest look at yourself and admitting to yourself that death is only a breath away, and that if you were to stand in judgment, it would be absolutely damning, and that it is only because God loves you, and in His mercy, that you have not been destroyed already and that He is capable and willing to deliver even you for the sake of Jesus Christ. Christianity is letting go of everything which we have done or been before, and reaching ahead towards Him and not looking back.
Christianity is a constant fight with your innermost desires and thoughts, and the constant whispers of unclean spirits in your ears seeking to either puff you up with pride, or drag you down in despair, and to do anything other than to walk the fine razor in between the two which is humility and an honest appraisal of yourself, and acceptance of the love of God. It's the fight to leave off eating until you spend time in prayer in the morning, or to spend time in contemplation of God instead of watching Sci-Fi reruns. It's the hard work of emptying yourself, emptying your mind in the hopes of brushing up against the holy darkness of His presence, and having to walk away without it because He doesn't want you to harm yourself spiritually by giving you more than you're capable of yet and being destroyed through pride. It's the never ending battle against yourself, your own laziness, your own lack of empathy, your own ignorance, weakness, blindness, and your own refusal to admit these things.
Christianity is the embrace of suffering, any and all suffering which destroys and breaks down the ego, for the sake of Jesus Christ. It's the deliberate choice to tell yourself “no” to even the most benign of distractions which come between you and your Lord. It is the Cross of Jesus Christ and the embrace of it into our lives until it burns its way down deep into us and we ourselves are destroyed and out of the way. It is destroying our own soul in order to deliver it. It is dying that He might live within and out through us. It is the hard work of building that relationship through Jesus Christ between you and God, and defending that relationship at all costs as more important than your possessions, your comforts, all other relationships, and especially your very life.
What's most often missing in the churches today is not some doctrine or study or “new” idea. What's missing most often in the churches today which the ancient fathers of the Church understood only too well, is Christianity itself.
I was a social outcast at the time. With an undiagnosed case of Asperger's Syndrome, of which no one at the time knew anything about, I barely understood my own feelings about anything, and really couldn't comprehend – and was unaware I couldn't comprehend – the experience of a basic relationship between two people. I was wrapped in my own world and withdrawn from the painful reality of the world of people around me, a world I didn't understand and had stopped trying to comprehend. Those decisions and choices weren't necessarily deliberate or conscious, but they were ones in which I was trapped nevertheless. This was the mental and emotional state I was in when I began to feel this pull.
One thing is for certain, I took it seriously. I always have. I took it seriously enough to read everything I could about it, and began to go to church voluntarily; embroiling myself in yet more relationships which I couldn't truly form with people I had known for several years by then, but hadn't seen for at least one or two; and embroiling myself in relationships with people that didn't like me, and with whom I knew didn't like me (and not without cause).
So I continued learning everything which I could from sermons, the youth group, other people at the church, and trying to become more involved, although still being deficient in knowing and understanding people. I thought I knew what Christianity was all about from the sermons, and the books, and the people, and the Bible itself.
I then had the privilege of going on a missions trip overseas to Papua New Guinea. This trip taught me lessons which I continue to look back on to this day. But it was the first time, as I returned from New Guinea, that my eyes were really opened to the fact that something wasn't quite right with the church. That learning all the “right” doctrines, and going to church on Sundays, and doing all the things with the church youth group, while good, was still missing something. At the time I just thought it wasa lack of devotion or willingness to put everything on the line like the missionaries with whom I had just spent two months did; an illusion which didn't really get dispelled later on when I went to a Bible School run by the same missions organization and spent two more years there. If nothing else they only tried to reinforce it, consciously or not.
It was during these earliest times in my own journey of faith when I was struck with the simple, inexplicable fact that the Christians, the churches, the books, and I myself were all missing something, something important in our faith and the way we lived our lives. I had no idea what when I started, and little idea when I made the first realization of this, but I spent the next fifteen years after that first Bible School trying to find it, believing that I had, then realizing that I hadn't found anything, then seeing glimmers of it every now and then, like pieces of a puzzle that someone has scattered around a house and then left for someone else to pick up.
I read book after book. Some were profoundly worthwhile, others were little more than fluff, while yet others had no right to call themselves Christian. For a time I even read works outside of the Christian tradition and gained some insights which drove me straight back to the Scriptures and Christ Himself. By the grace of God I was driven towards the ancient roots of the faith, and the rich body of writings and Tradition left by those who lived within a few generations of the Apostles, and knew their Teaching far better than we do today. I continued to be pulled irresistibly towards God and to find what was missing.
I searched ancient fathers and masters of the faith of Jesus Christ, and these led me to delve even further into place in prayer that not long before I had no idea even existed. I have attempted to seek the holy darkness and been frustrated and confused when I couldn't, when the day before even I had experienced a wonder in prayer to where I had no desire to leave. I fought, and continue to struggle within myself over the most benign of actions or ways to spend my time.
And twenty years later, humbly, I have come to a conclusion that what is called Christian today is often not, nor has any understanding of what the word means. I have come to the conclusion that I am often not Christian in my thoughts, my words, or my actions. I look back on those who came before us, many hundreds of years ago, I read their words, and what they knew and experienced, and I know that I am nothing in comparison, and what is far, far worse than this, is that we have carelessly twisted and abused the faith which they gave their lives, and their deaths, to pass down to us so that it is little more than a mockery and a caricature.
Christianity isn't a set of doctrines. It's a practice and a discipline and an agreement with God that you will cooperate with Him through renouncing yourself, your possessions, your wants, even your bodily appetites and the pursuit of experiencing the one relationship which truly matters more than anything else. It's regarding your favorite T.V. show, the things you're proud of accomplishing, and your prized book collection as little more than trash in the active pursuit of knowing and drawing close to Him. It's taking a hard, honest look at yourself and admitting to yourself that death is only a breath away, and that if you were to stand in judgment, it would be absolutely damning, and that it is only because God loves you, and in His mercy, that you have not been destroyed already and that He is capable and willing to deliver even you for the sake of Jesus Christ. Christianity is letting go of everything which we have done or been before, and reaching ahead towards Him and not looking back.
Christianity is a constant fight with your innermost desires and thoughts, and the constant whispers of unclean spirits in your ears seeking to either puff you up with pride, or drag you down in despair, and to do anything other than to walk the fine razor in between the two which is humility and an honest appraisal of yourself, and acceptance of the love of God. It's the fight to leave off eating until you spend time in prayer in the morning, or to spend time in contemplation of God instead of watching Sci-Fi reruns. It's the hard work of emptying yourself, emptying your mind in the hopes of brushing up against the holy darkness of His presence, and having to walk away without it because He doesn't want you to harm yourself spiritually by giving you more than you're capable of yet and being destroyed through pride. It's the never ending battle against yourself, your own laziness, your own lack of empathy, your own ignorance, weakness, blindness, and your own refusal to admit these things.
Christianity is the embrace of suffering, any and all suffering which destroys and breaks down the ego, for the sake of Jesus Christ. It's the deliberate choice to tell yourself “no” to even the most benign of distractions which come between you and your Lord. It is the Cross of Jesus Christ and the embrace of it into our lives until it burns its way down deep into us and we ourselves are destroyed and out of the way. It is destroying our own soul in order to deliver it. It is dying that He might live within and out through us. It is the hard work of building that relationship through Jesus Christ between you and God, and defending that relationship at all costs as more important than your possessions, your comforts, all other relationships, and especially your very life.
What's most often missing in the churches today is not some doctrine or study or “new” idea. What's missing most often in the churches today which the ancient fathers of the Church understood only too well, is Christianity itself.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
A Letter About The Body and Blood
Sunday School 4th Sunday of Lent 03/14/2010
Hey All,
I'm sorry I've been out of the loop for so long. It's going to be a little while before I can find the right balance again. I hope you have all been continuing the gospel assignment, and have been maintaining a personal daily devotion as I wrote about at the beginning of these emails.
Because we are fast approaching Holy Week, I wanted to take the time and look at the doctrine of the real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist just a little bit more. Specifically, I wanted to provide a good foundation for an understanding, not only of the Church's teaching on the subject, but also why Christ must be truly present in the Eucharist, and why, from the standpoint of the Bible and the writings of the Early Church it can't be merely a symbol as many of our Evangelical Protestant cousins insist on.
First, let's go back to the sacrifices in the Old Testament under the Mosaic Law and try to understand what was required for a valid sacrifice.
Concerning the Passover Sacrifice:
Exodus 12:8-11
“They shall eat the flesh in that night, roasted with fire, and unleavened bread. They shall eat it with bitter herbs. Don’t eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted with fire; with its head, its legs and its inner parts. You shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; but that which remains of it until the morning you shall burn with fire. This is how you shall eat it: with your belt on your waist, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste: it is Yahweh’s Passover.”
One of the principle requirements of a valid Passover sacrifice, was that it be eaten, and whatever was not eaten had to be burned to ashes. We see the same requirements later on in the book of Leviticus regarding other sacrifices:
Leviticus 6: 24-26
“Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to Aaron and to his sons, saying, ‘This is the law of the sin offering: in the place where the burnt offering is killed, the sin offering shall be killed before Yahweh. It is most holy. The priest who offers it for sin shall eat it. It shall be eaten in a holy place, in the court of the Tent of Meeting.”
Leviticus 7:7-17
“‘As is the sin offering, so is the trespass offering; there is one law for them. The priest who makes atonement with them shall have it. The priest who offers any man’s burnt offering, even the priest shall have for himself the skin of the burnt offering which he has offered. Every meal offering that is baked in the oven, and all that is dressed in the pan, and on the griddle, shall be the priest’s who offers it. Every meal offering, mixed with oil or dry, belongs to all the sons of Aaron, one as well as another. ‘This is the law of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which one shall offer to Yahweh. If he offers it for a thanksgiving, then he shall offer with the sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes mixed with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil, and cakes mixed with oil. With cakes of leavened bread he shall offer his offering with the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving. Of it he shall offer one out of each offering for a heave offering to Yahweh. It shall be the priest’s who sprinkles the blood of the peace offerings. The flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten on the day of his offering. He shall not leave any of it until the morning. ‘But if the sacrifice of his offering is a vow, or a freewill offering, it shall be eaten on the day that he offers his sacrifice; and on the next day what remains of it shall be eaten: but what remains of the flesh of the sacrifice on the third day shall be burned with fire.”
The seriousness of completing the sacrifice by eating it can be seen in another passage in Leviticus 10:1-2, 12-19:
“Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer, and put fire in it, and laid incense on it, and offered strange fire before Yahweh, which he had not commanded them. And fire came forth from before Yahweh, and devoured them, and they died before Yahweh.”
“Moses spoke to Aaron, and to Eleazar and to Ithamar, his sons who were left, “Take the meal offering that remains of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire, and eat it without yeast beside the altar; for it is most holy; and you shall eat it in a holy place, because it is your portion, and your sons’ portion, of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire: for so I am commanded. The waved breast and the heaved thigh you shall eat in a clean place, you, and your sons, and your daughters with you: for they are given as your portion, and your sons’ portion, out of the sacrifices of the peace offerings of the children of Israel. The heaved thigh and the waved breast they shall bring with the offerings made by fire of the fat, to wave it for a wave offering before Yahweh: and it shall be yours, and your sons’ with you, as a portion forever; as Yahweh has commanded.” Moses diligently inquired about the goat of the sin offering, and, behold, it was burned: and he was angry with Eleazar and with Ithamar, the sons of Aaron who were left, saying, “Why haven’t you eaten the sin offering in the place of the sanctuary, since it is most holy, and he has given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before Yahweh? Behold, its blood was not brought into the inner part of the sanctuary: you certainly should have eaten it in the sanctuary, as I commanded. Aaron spoke to Moses, “Behold, this day they have offered their sin offering and their burnt offering before Yahweh; and such things as these have happened to me: and if I had eaten the sin offering today, would it have been pleasing in the sight of Yahweh?”
This was the understanding of the laws regarding the sacrifices is that they were to be eaten, and then whatever was left was to be burned to ashes. Now this understanding of sacrifice wasn't particular to just Israel. The Greeks also understood sacrifices in the same way. A sacrifice made to one of the Greek gods, especially the twelve Olympians, wasn't considered valid or effective unless it was eaten.
It is the express teaching of Holy Scripture and sacred tradition that Jesus Christ died as a sacrifice under the law for our sins. In the Gospels one of the first ways He is addressed is as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). A lamb which takes away sin in this cultural understanding is and can only be a sacrifice.
The letter to the Hebrews is far more explicit:
Hebrews 9:11-15
“But Christ having come as a high priest of the coming good things, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the Holy Place, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify to the cleanness of the flesh: how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, since a death has occurred for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, that those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.”
Hebrews 10:8-12
“Previously saying, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you didn’t desire, neither had pleasure in them” (those which are offered according to the law), then he has said, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He takes away the first, that he may establish the second, by which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest indeed stands day by day serving and often offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins, but he, when he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God;”
In order for the body of Jesus Christ to be considered a valid sacrifice under the law, two requirements must be met: it has to be eaten, and whatever is left over must be incinerated. In John 6:51-58, Jesus states very clearly that his body and blood must be consumed:
“I am the living bread which came down out of heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. Yes, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The Jews therefore contended with one another, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Jesus therefore said to them, "“Most certainly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don’t have life in yourselves. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he who feeds on me, he will also live because of me. This is the bread which came down out of heaven—not as our fathers ate the manna, and died. He who eats this bread will live forever.”
It can be argued that His dead body satisfied the second requirement of being fully consumed or incinerated in the resurrection (see 1 Corinthians 15:40-49). The question then arises, how do you make a sacrifice, especially a human sacrifice, available to be eaten repeatedly for an extended indefinite period of time?
In all three Synoptic Gospels is recorded the same words at the last supper:
Matthew 26:26-29
“As they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks for it, and broke it. He gave to the disciples, and said, "“Take, eat; this is my body.” He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, "“All of you drink it, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the remission of sins. But I tell you that I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on, until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s Kingdom.”
Mark 14:22-25
“As they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had blessed, he broke it, and gave to them, and said, "“Take, eat. This is my body.” He took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them. They all drank of it. He said to them, "“This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many. Most certainly I tell you, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it anew in the Kingdom of God.”
Luke 22:17-20
“He received a cup, and when he had given thanks, he said, "“Take this, and share it among yourselves,
for I tell you, I will not drink at all again from the fruit of the vine, until the Kingdom of God comes.” He took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave to them, saying, "“This is my body which is given for you. Do this in memory of me.” Likewise, he took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.”
In order to make His sacrifice available for everyone to partake of He took regular, unleavened bread and regular wine and declared them to be His body and His blood. In some, unknown and unknowable way He linked the bread and wine with His own sacrificial death so that they became inseparable. That this was never understood to be merely in a symbolic way is revealed by St. Paul's understanding in 1 Corinthians 10:14-22 where he very clearly equates the Holy Eucharist with a sacrifice in contrast to the sacrifices made to idols, and that you cannot validate both by partaking of both:
“Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men. Judge what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, isn’t it a sharing of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, isn’t it a sharing of the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf of bread, we, who are many, are one body; for we all partake of the one loaf of bread. Consider Israel according to the flesh. Don’t those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? What am I saying then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? But I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God, and I don’t desire that you would have fellowship with demons. You can’t both drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You can’t both partake of the table of the Lord, and of the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?”
He says also later in the same letter that those who eat and drink in an unworthy manner are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord:
“For I received from the Lord that which also I delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed took bread. When he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "“Take, eat. This is my body, which is broken for you. Do this in memory of me.” In the same way he also took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink, in memory of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks the Lord’s cup in a way unworthy of the Lord will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy way eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he doesn’t discern the Lord’s body.”
The early leaders of the Church always, and without question considered the Eucharist to be the real presence of Jesus Christ:
Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, c. 105
“Take heed then, to have only one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to the unity of His blood.”
“They [the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not believe the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ. … Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death.”
Justin Martyr, Christian evangelist and apologist, c. 160
“We do not receive these as common bread and common drink. Rather, Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation. So, likewise, we have been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”
Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, c. 180
“Our opinion is in accordance with the Eucharist, and in turn, the Eucharist establishes our opinion. For we offer to Him His own, announcing consistently the fellowship and union of the flesh and spirit. For the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist—consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly. So also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection of eternity.”
Tertullian, Presbyter, c. 207
“He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed in His blood, affirmed the reality of His body.”
When the Eucharist is celebrated, it is not a separate sacrifice, or a re-sacrificing of Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is linked in some way which is never explained, nor should it be, to His one sacrifice so that His sacrifice could be partaken throughout the centuries until all was fulfilled and brought to completion. It has always been the teaching of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church that Jesus Christ is really and truly present in when the bread and wine. The teaching that it is merely symbolic floated around the heretical sects, such as the Gnostics, but was not widespread until the Reformation when the backlash against the Roman Church was so great that the reformers threw out almost all teaching which they even associated with the Roman Church not understanding that the Roman Church itself had broken from the Apostolic Faith.
Let us never be afraid to proclaim our faith in the Holy Eucharist as nothing less than the body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Fr. Allen+
Hey All,
I'm sorry I've been out of the loop for so long. It's going to be a little while before I can find the right balance again. I hope you have all been continuing the gospel assignment, and have been maintaining a personal daily devotion as I wrote about at the beginning of these emails.
Because we are fast approaching Holy Week, I wanted to take the time and look at the doctrine of the real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist just a little bit more. Specifically, I wanted to provide a good foundation for an understanding, not only of the Church's teaching on the subject, but also why Christ must be truly present in the Eucharist, and why, from the standpoint of the Bible and the writings of the Early Church it can't be merely a symbol as many of our Evangelical Protestant cousins insist on.
First, let's go back to the sacrifices in the Old Testament under the Mosaic Law and try to understand what was required for a valid sacrifice.
Concerning the Passover Sacrifice:
Exodus 12:8-11
“They shall eat the flesh in that night, roasted with fire, and unleavened bread. They shall eat it with bitter herbs. Don’t eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted with fire; with its head, its legs and its inner parts. You shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; but that which remains of it until the morning you shall burn with fire. This is how you shall eat it: with your belt on your waist, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste: it is Yahweh’s Passover.”
One of the principle requirements of a valid Passover sacrifice, was that it be eaten, and whatever was not eaten had to be burned to ashes. We see the same requirements later on in the book of Leviticus regarding other sacrifices:
Leviticus 6: 24-26
“Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to Aaron and to his sons, saying, ‘This is the law of the sin offering: in the place where the burnt offering is killed, the sin offering shall be killed before Yahweh. It is most holy. The priest who offers it for sin shall eat it. It shall be eaten in a holy place, in the court of the Tent of Meeting.”
Leviticus 7:7-17
“‘As is the sin offering, so is the trespass offering; there is one law for them. The priest who makes atonement with them shall have it. The priest who offers any man’s burnt offering, even the priest shall have for himself the skin of the burnt offering which he has offered. Every meal offering that is baked in the oven, and all that is dressed in the pan, and on the griddle, shall be the priest’s who offers it. Every meal offering, mixed with oil or dry, belongs to all the sons of Aaron, one as well as another. ‘This is the law of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which one shall offer to Yahweh. If he offers it for a thanksgiving, then he shall offer with the sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes mixed with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil, and cakes mixed with oil. With cakes of leavened bread he shall offer his offering with the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving. Of it he shall offer one out of each offering for a heave offering to Yahweh. It shall be the priest’s who sprinkles the blood of the peace offerings. The flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten on the day of his offering. He shall not leave any of it until the morning. ‘But if the sacrifice of his offering is a vow, or a freewill offering, it shall be eaten on the day that he offers his sacrifice; and on the next day what remains of it shall be eaten: but what remains of the flesh of the sacrifice on the third day shall be burned with fire.”
The seriousness of completing the sacrifice by eating it can be seen in another passage in Leviticus 10:1-2, 12-19:
“Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer, and put fire in it, and laid incense on it, and offered strange fire before Yahweh, which he had not commanded them. And fire came forth from before Yahweh, and devoured them, and they died before Yahweh.”
“Moses spoke to Aaron, and to Eleazar and to Ithamar, his sons who were left, “Take the meal offering that remains of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire, and eat it without yeast beside the altar; for it is most holy; and you shall eat it in a holy place, because it is your portion, and your sons’ portion, of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire: for so I am commanded. The waved breast and the heaved thigh you shall eat in a clean place, you, and your sons, and your daughters with you: for they are given as your portion, and your sons’ portion, out of the sacrifices of the peace offerings of the children of Israel. The heaved thigh and the waved breast they shall bring with the offerings made by fire of the fat, to wave it for a wave offering before Yahweh: and it shall be yours, and your sons’ with you, as a portion forever; as Yahweh has commanded.” Moses diligently inquired about the goat of the sin offering, and, behold, it was burned: and he was angry with Eleazar and with Ithamar, the sons of Aaron who were left, saying, “Why haven’t you eaten the sin offering in the place of the sanctuary, since it is most holy, and he has given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before Yahweh? Behold, its blood was not brought into the inner part of the sanctuary: you certainly should have eaten it in the sanctuary, as I commanded. Aaron spoke to Moses, “Behold, this day they have offered their sin offering and their burnt offering before Yahweh; and such things as these have happened to me: and if I had eaten the sin offering today, would it have been pleasing in the sight of Yahweh?”
This was the understanding of the laws regarding the sacrifices is that they were to be eaten, and then whatever was left was to be burned to ashes. Now this understanding of sacrifice wasn't particular to just Israel. The Greeks also understood sacrifices in the same way. A sacrifice made to one of the Greek gods, especially the twelve Olympians, wasn't considered valid or effective unless it was eaten.
It is the express teaching of Holy Scripture and sacred tradition that Jesus Christ died as a sacrifice under the law for our sins. In the Gospels one of the first ways He is addressed is as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). A lamb which takes away sin in this cultural understanding is and can only be a sacrifice.
The letter to the Hebrews is far more explicit:
Hebrews 9:11-15
“But Christ having come as a high priest of the coming good things, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the Holy Place, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify to the cleanness of the flesh: how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, since a death has occurred for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, that those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.”
Hebrews 10:8-12
“Previously saying, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you didn’t desire, neither had pleasure in them” (those which are offered according to the law), then he has said, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He takes away the first, that he may establish the second, by which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest indeed stands day by day serving and often offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins, but he, when he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God;”
In order for the body of Jesus Christ to be considered a valid sacrifice under the law, two requirements must be met: it has to be eaten, and whatever is left over must be incinerated. In John 6:51-58, Jesus states very clearly that his body and blood must be consumed:
“I am the living bread which came down out of heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. Yes, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The Jews therefore contended with one another, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Jesus therefore said to them, "“Most certainly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don’t have life in yourselves. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he who feeds on me, he will also live because of me. This is the bread which came down out of heaven—not as our fathers ate the manna, and died. He who eats this bread will live forever.”
It can be argued that His dead body satisfied the second requirement of being fully consumed or incinerated in the resurrection (see 1 Corinthians 15:40-49). The question then arises, how do you make a sacrifice, especially a human sacrifice, available to be eaten repeatedly for an extended indefinite period of time?
In all three Synoptic Gospels is recorded the same words at the last supper:
Matthew 26:26-29
“As they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks for it, and broke it. He gave to the disciples, and said, "“Take, eat; this is my body.” He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, "“All of you drink it, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the remission of sins. But I tell you that I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on, until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s Kingdom.”
Mark 14:22-25
“As they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had blessed, he broke it, and gave to them, and said, "“Take, eat. This is my body.” He took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them. They all drank of it. He said to them, "“This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many. Most certainly I tell you, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it anew in the Kingdom of God.”
Luke 22:17-20
“He received a cup, and when he had given thanks, he said, "“Take this, and share it among yourselves,
for I tell you, I will not drink at all again from the fruit of the vine, until the Kingdom of God comes.” He took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave to them, saying, "“This is my body which is given for you. Do this in memory of me.” Likewise, he took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.”
In order to make His sacrifice available for everyone to partake of He took regular, unleavened bread and regular wine and declared them to be His body and His blood. In some, unknown and unknowable way He linked the bread and wine with His own sacrificial death so that they became inseparable. That this was never understood to be merely in a symbolic way is revealed by St. Paul's understanding in 1 Corinthians 10:14-22 where he very clearly equates the Holy Eucharist with a sacrifice in contrast to the sacrifices made to idols, and that you cannot validate both by partaking of both:
“Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men. Judge what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, isn’t it a sharing of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, isn’t it a sharing of the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf of bread, we, who are many, are one body; for we all partake of the one loaf of bread. Consider Israel according to the flesh. Don’t those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? What am I saying then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? But I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God, and I don’t desire that you would have fellowship with demons. You can’t both drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You can’t both partake of the table of the Lord, and of the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?”
He says also later in the same letter that those who eat and drink in an unworthy manner are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord:
“For I received from the Lord that which also I delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed took bread. When he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "“Take, eat. This is my body, which is broken for you. Do this in memory of me.” In the same way he also took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink, in memory of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks the Lord’s cup in a way unworthy of the Lord will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy way eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he doesn’t discern the Lord’s body.”
The early leaders of the Church always, and without question considered the Eucharist to be the real presence of Jesus Christ:
Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, c. 105
“Take heed then, to have only one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to the unity of His blood.”
“They [the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not believe the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ. … Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death.”
Justin Martyr, Christian evangelist and apologist, c. 160
“We do not receive these as common bread and common drink. Rather, Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation. So, likewise, we have been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”
Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, c. 180
“Our opinion is in accordance with the Eucharist, and in turn, the Eucharist establishes our opinion. For we offer to Him His own, announcing consistently the fellowship and union of the flesh and spirit. For the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist—consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly. So also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection of eternity.”
Tertullian, Presbyter, c. 207
“He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed in His blood, affirmed the reality of His body.”
When the Eucharist is celebrated, it is not a separate sacrifice, or a re-sacrificing of Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is linked in some way which is never explained, nor should it be, to His one sacrifice so that His sacrifice could be partaken throughout the centuries until all was fulfilled and brought to completion. It has always been the teaching of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church that Jesus Christ is really and truly present in when the bread and wine. The teaching that it is merely symbolic floated around the heretical sects, such as the Gnostics, but was not widespread until the Reformation when the backlash against the Roman Church was so great that the reformers threw out almost all teaching which they even associated with the Roman Church not understanding that the Roman Church itself had broken from the Apostolic Faith.
Let us never be afraid to proclaim our faith in the Holy Eucharist as nothing less than the body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Fr. Allen+
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
A Ramble About Broken Things
I had just turned out the light the other night and was getting ready for bed. I then happened to look out my bedroom window onto the parking lot below. There, a few feet from our van there was what looked like an orange light, maybe some kind of a small fire. It was the oddest thing to see. I didn't have my glasses on, so I couldn't see it very well. I turned this way in the window and that because I thought it might a reflection on the window from somewhere else in the room, but it stayed where it was. I couldn't figure out what it was, but there it stayed in the parking lot, blazing an orange light with everything that it had.
It bugged me so much that I got out of bed, went down stairs in my bare feet and went out into the cold, dark, and wet parking lot to find out what it was. I went to the spot where I had seen it from the window and checked it out. Do you know what it was?
It was an old, bent, and broken screw. I looked at it for a while. The head of the screw was still pretty polished and it had been reflecting the light of the streetlamp nearby. It had reflected it so well that it looked like someone had left a small fire going in the dark. Now that I think about it, the fact that it was bent at the angle it was probably what made it reflect light in my direction so well. If it had been perfectly straight and "useful", not only would it have shone the light in the wrong direction, but it might have been more of a danger to the cars that came and went through the parking lot.
There is a prevailing thought, I have heard, that is beginning to wind its way around a church whose people are near and dear to my heart, and who have shown me and my family a great deal of kindness in the past and even now continue to do so.
This thought is that somehow people can be too broken for the Lord to use, or put in leadership. Somehow, if you have issues or problems in your life, then you need to get these in order before you can be of any value to the Church or Christ.
This is utter nonsense. What's worse is that it is totally in contradiction to the clear teachings of Holy Scripture and all precedents therein. The names of broken screws and nuts within the Scriptures are nearly endless: Moses, David, Paul, even Daniel had certain issues (he was probably a eunuch, remember? Just try and tell me that doesn't give someone issues).
First, God uses those people who are weak, who are foolish, who are seen as nothing to completely befuddle and put to shame the things of this world. 1 Corinthians 1:26-31 is quite clear about this.
Second, to believe that you are perfectly healthy or ok spiritually, to believe that you have it all together is an extremely dangerous place to be, and is a hairsbreadth from darkness if you haven't already plunged yourself into it. "Let he who thinks he stand take heed lest he falls."
The path of the cross is one of constant admittance that there is something wrong with you. You are malfunctioning. There will be something wrong with you until you die. This is the reality of what St. Paul teaches. You cannot live in the reality of the resurrection until you submit to the reality of the cross. You cannot live until you submit to death.
It does no good for a recovering alcoholic to suddenly say to himself, "oh, I'm fine, I don't have a problem with this any more." If he does this, and then tells himself one sip won't hurt him, then it will be another sip, and then the rest of the bottle. Self is the same way except far more insidious in that often you don't realize it's happening until it's too late.
God doesn't just use broken things; they're often the only things God uses. Furthermore, admission of being broken isn't just the beginning of the Path of Jesus Christ, it's the constant guide along it. When you stop following that guide is when you plunge off the Path and then it can be really hard to find your way back.
1 John 1:8 says "if we say we are without sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:10 says "If we say we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us. 1 John 1:9 is a great verse, and comforting when we admit our sin, but we cannot just ignore 8 and 10 because we don't want to see it.
It bugged me so much that I got out of bed, went down stairs in my bare feet and went out into the cold, dark, and wet parking lot to find out what it was. I went to the spot where I had seen it from the window and checked it out. Do you know what it was?
It was an old, bent, and broken screw. I looked at it for a while. The head of the screw was still pretty polished and it had been reflecting the light of the streetlamp nearby. It had reflected it so well that it looked like someone had left a small fire going in the dark. Now that I think about it, the fact that it was bent at the angle it was probably what made it reflect light in my direction so well. If it had been perfectly straight and "useful", not only would it have shone the light in the wrong direction, but it might have been more of a danger to the cars that came and went through the parking lot.
There is a prevailing thought, I have heard, that is beginning to wind its way around a church whose people are near and dear to my heart, and who have shown me and my family a great deal of kindness in the past and even now continue to do so.
This thought is that somehow people can be too broken for the Lord to use, or put in leadership. Somehow, if you have issues or problems in your life, then you need to get these in order before you can be of any value to the Church or Christ.
This is utter nonsense. What's worse is that it is totally in contradiction to the clear teachings of Holy Scripture and all precedents therein. The names of broken screws and nuts within the Scriptures are nearly endless: Moses, David, Paul, even Daniel had certain issues (he was probably a eunuch, remember? Just try and tell me that doesn't give someone issues).
First, God uses those people who are weak, who are foolish, who are seen as nothing to completely befuddle and put to shame the things of this world. 1 Corinthians 1:26-31 is quite clear about this.
Second, to believe that you are perfectly healthy or ok spiritually, to believe that you have it all together is an extremely dangerous place to be, and is a hairsbreadth from darkness if you haven't already plunged yourself into it. "Let he who thinks he stand take heed lest he falls."
The path of the cross is one of constant admittance that there is something wrong with you. You are malfunctioning. There will be something wrong with you until you die. This is the reality of what St. Paul teaches. You cannot live in the reality of the resurrection until you submit to the reality of the cross. You cannot live until you submit to death.
It does no good for a recovering alcoholic to suddenly say to himself, "oh, I'm fine, I don't have a problem with this any more." If he does this, and then tells himself one sip won't hurt him, then it will be another sip, and then the rest of the bottle. Self is the same way except far more insidious in that often you don't realize it's happening until it's too late.
God doesn't just use broken things; they're often the only things God uses. Furthermore, admission of being broken isn't just the beginning of the Path of Jesus Christ, it's the constant guide along it. When you stop following that guide is when you plunge off the Path and then it can be really hard to find your way back.
1 John 1:8 says "if we say we are without sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:10 says "If we say we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us. 1 John 1:9 is a great verse, and comforting when we admit our sin, but we cannot just ignore 8 and 10 because we don't want to see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)