Ascension Anglican Orthodox Mission

Sundry Kynds of Death

2010-05-25T12:37:00.000-07:00

The Holy Communion service of the Book of Common Prayer of 1662 (which is essentially Thomas Cranmer's second revision of the English prayer book, published in 1552 during the reign of Edward VI, in which we see his more mature views regarding liturgical forms) contains an exhortation which is to be read by the minister before the celebration of the Holy Communion. This exhortation is not optional but is to be read every time the Communion is celebrated, while two other exhortations are also included in the same place, to be used on certain occasions. The exhortation to which we refer is a warning to those who are preparing to come to the Table, reminding them of the need for self-examination, or self-judgement, and of the real danger of coming “unworthily”. What is notable about the exhortation is the bluntness and potency of its language. We might say that “no punches are pulled” as the minister reminds the people of the great solemnity of the Holy Mysteries. He is required to say :

For as the benefit is great, if with a true penitent heart and lively faith we receive that holy Sacrament; (for then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his blood; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us; we are one with Christ, and Christ with us;) so is the danger great, if we receive the same unworthily. For then we are guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ our Saviour; we eat and drink our own damnation, not considering the Lord’s Body; we kindle God’s wrath against us; we provoke him to plague us with divers diseases, and sundry kinds of death.

This is, of course, a clear reference to 1 Corinthians chapter 11 and specifically verses 27-30, where verse 30 reads as follows : “for this cause many are weak and sickly among you and many sleep”. Some of the people in the church in Corinth, having come unworthily to the Table, had become sick, had been plagued “with diverse diseases”, while others, coming it would seem even more unworthily, “slept”, that is, had died. This is a solemn warning indeed.

Let us note three things : the first, that the unworthiness of the Corinthians consisted largely in their treating the Lord's Supper like any other meal. They were eating and drinking to excess, getting drunk, and forgetting the unique and holy character of the Sacrament. They were coming to the Holy Table to satisfy their fleshly appetites, not to receive spiritual sustenance. They also were “shaming” the poor, those who presumably were unable to bring much of their own food to eat. We should recall that in Greek culture in the 1st century it was customary for the rich to sit down at table with the poor, the rich bringing the food and the poor joining in the bounty. This has been called a Love Feast, or Agape Meal. This custom seems to have been taken up by the early church, at least for a time, and the Lord's Supper was then celebrated in such a context, with the rich bringing bread, wine (not Welch's grape juice, please), and other victuals, and allowing the poor to join in. Again, some of the Corinthians had gotten caught up in the “pot-luck” part of the event and forgotten the sacramental part, and had clearly failed in their duty of love towards the poor. They had come unworthily, because they had come carelessly and without reverence for God's Sacrament or for God's people. The reference to this in the exhortation in 1662 is a clear reminder to us that we ought never to come in such a way to the Table. It is the LORD'S supper, not ours.

Secondly, we should note that the warning is for the careless and irreverent, the profane and impudent, not for those who are timid and doubtful and deeply conscious of their own sinfulness. Actually, in a seemingly paradoxical way, one of the requirements of coming to the Table is to BE UNWORTHY ... that is ... to come deeply aware of one's own falleness. No one is, in himself, worthy of even approaching the Table. As Archbishop Cranmer's Prayer of Humble Access says, “we are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table”, this, too, being a Biblical echo. So, there is unworthiness (carelessness, irreverence) and there is unworthiness (a deep awareness of one's own falleness). The second form of unworthiness is actually required of those who come to the Table, although clearly it the sort of unworthiness that is accompanied by repentance, a desire for amendment of life, a longing for real holiness, and a reliance on the Saviour. So, we need to see that the exhortation is not designed to drive away from the Table those who come knowing they are sinful, but rather those who have no such awareness (like the unbeliever), or the foolish believer (as in Corinth) who has forgotten what he is. The exhortation makes quite clear that it is through faith in Christ, with all that flows (however imperfectly) out of that faith (repentance, love, holiness) which allows us to come to the Sacrament as worthy partakers.

Judge therefore yourselves, brethren, that ye be not judged of the Lord; repent you truly for your sins past; have a lively and stedfast faith in Christ our Saviour; amend your lives, and be in perfect charity with all men; so shall ye be meet partakers of those holy mysteries.

Thirdly, we should note that while this exhortation remains in place in the Book of Common Prayer of 1662 (thus reflecting faithfully Cranmer's own established practice in 1552) it has become optional in most, if not all, other versions of the Book of Common Prayer in use today, including the 1928 American BCP and the 1962 Canadian BCP. In the 1928 American book it is found on page 85, an appendix to the Communion service. It no longer contains any real echo of 1 Corinthians 11, the reference to “divers diseases” and “sundry kinds of death” having been deleted. The rubric makes the use of the exhortation an option (“the Priest MAY say this Exhortation”) but does REQUIRE it to be used on the 1st Sunday of Advent, the 1st Sunday of Lent, and on Trinity Sunday. One wonders how many ministers actually follow this rubric.

In the 1962 Canadian Book the exhortation is likewise an appendix to the Communion service. Some echo of 1 Corinthians 11 does remain (“guilty of the Body and Blood”, “we eat and drink our own condemnation”) but “divers diseases” and “death” are likewise deleted. The rubric indicates that “the Priest MAY say this Exhortation” on any Sunday at Communion but requires that it be used “on a Sunday in Advent and a Sunday in Lent” (Canadian BCP p. 88), somewhat less than is required in the 1928 American book. I know from personal experience (having used the exhortation in Advent and Lent) that most Canadian Anglicans have never heard this exhortation read at all, ever, even those who have attended church for many years. Needless to say, the exhortation is not found in any form at all in the Book of Alternative Services of the Anglican Church of Canada. Some small portion of it remains in “The Book of Common Prayer”, the 1979 Episcopal book, where it is combined with diluted portions of the other 1662 exhortations, and is an option only, not being required to be used at any time, nor containing any strong echo of 1 Corinthians 11.

In other words, a disciplined preparation for coming to the Lord's Table, something that Archbishop Cranmer insisted on in his prayer book, is now no longer emphasized in many places. It seems clear that a return to the frequent use of the exhortation (I am convinced it should be used every time there is a celebration of the Communion) would be of great benefit to the faithful in our churches. Having used it regularly now in our missions here in Canada and in El Peru, we find that people appreciate it and have even commented on its power and usefulness. Once again, it seems that the “old archbishop” really knew what he was doing.

The Authority of the Holy Scriptures in the Church of England

2010-04-26T12:49:00.000-07:00

The Church of England, when it was re-born at the time
of the Reformation in the 16th century, took a very clear position
with regard to the Bible. First of all, it made expressly clear that
no Christian was required to believe anything as necessary for
his salvation that was not to be found in the Bible. In other words,
whatever was required to be believed by Christians as an article
of faith was going to be found in the Bible and in the Bible alone.
This principle appears early on in the 39 Articles of Religion of
our church. Article VI is entitled "Of the Sufficiency of the Holy
Scripture for Salvation" and says, in part, "Holy Scripture
containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that what
is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to
be required of any man, that it should be believed as an
article of the faith, or be thought requiste or necessary
to salvation". The Article goes on to state which those
books are that constitute the Holy Scriptures,
distinguishing them from the Apocryphal Books, which are
still to be read and valued, although they are not used
to establish any doctrine, not being considered canonical.

We need to note here that the Church of England did not
see this principle as simply applying to her own members. It was
not just members of the Church of England for whom the Holy
Scriptures were a sure guide in the matter of faith and salvation.
Rather, what could not be found in the Bible was not required
OF ANY MAN to be thought necessary to salvation. This means
that the reformers of the Church of England, Archbishop Cranmer
and others, saw the Bible as possessing an authority that no
other book and no human being could possibly have. This
follows simply and logically from the way in which the principle
is stated above in Article VI. In the matter of man's salvation,
the most important matter of all, only the Bible is to be our guide.
This means that, for the English reformers, the Bible spoke
with an authority that was unique. It's voice was no human
voice, but the voice of God.

This is reinforced by other statements we find made in
the Articles. For example, the three Creeds, the Apostles',
the Nicene, and the Athanasian, are to be received because
"they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture"
(Article VIII). The idea of works of supererogation, that is, works
that are above and beyond what God requires of us, is rejected
as arrogant, and Christ's words are directly quoted as proof that
they are so (Article XIV). With regard to the doctrines of election
and predestination, we are clearly told that the Holy Scriptures
are our guide. Article XVII reads, in part, "... we must receive
God's promises in such wise as they be generally set forth to
us in holy Scripture, and in our doings, that Will of God is to
be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the
Word of God."

When declaring that no man will be saved by the
particular church or sect to which he belongs, Article XVIII
states, "For holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name
of Jesus Christ, whereby man must be saved". Also, the
first of the marks, or characteristics, of a true church, is that
the "pure Word of God" is therein preached (Article XIX).
The church is not allowed to "ordain any thing that is contrary
to God's Word written", and "ought not to decree anything
against the same" but must rather be a "witness and keeper
of Holy Writ" (Article XX), testifying to what the Bible says
and thus guarding or preserving its truth.

In her Articles, the Church of England acknowledges
that not all the leaders of a church are necessarily "governed
with the Spirit and Word of God" (Article XXI) meaning that they
can therefore err, and also makes clear that should a church
council decree anything as being necessary to salvation, such
statements would have "neither strength nor authority unless
it may be declared that they be taken out of holy Scripture"
(Article XXI). The doctrine of Purgatory is rejected because it
is "grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but [is] rather
repugnant to the Word of God" (Article XXII). Conducting
worship in an language that the people do not understand
is considered to be "plainly repugnant to the Word of God
and the custom of the Primitive Church" (Article XXIV).
While the traditions of the church are deemed to be of great
importance, it is declared that "nothing may be ordained
against God's Word" (Article XXXIV). And lastly, the role of
civil magistrate and his prerogatives are understood to be
those that are described in "holy Scripture by God himself"
(Article XXXVII).

We may add to all this much more besides, such
as those things we might read in other more personal writings of
the reformers or in the Homilies of the Church of England, also
written by them. The very first of those homilies, which is an
exhortation to read and to know the holy Scriptures, begins
thus :

Unto a Christian man, there can be nothing either more
necessary or profitable than the knowledge of holy
Scripture; forasmuch as in it is contained God's true word,
setting forth his glory, and also man's duty. And there is no
truth nor doctrine necessary for our justification and ever-
lasting salvation, but that is or may be drawn out of that
fountain and well of truth. (A Fruitful Exhortation)

What must be abundantly clear to anyone who
is willing to be honest is that the Church of England,
as it was reformed, or re-born, at the time of the Reformation
in the 16th century, acknowledged the unique and supreme
authority of the Bible, receiving it as "God's true word", and
"God's Word written". And there can be no doubt but that
our church was convicted of the authority of Scripture and
determined to order her own life on its basis. For those of us
who seek to be faithful to this wonderful vision, and equally
determined to order our lives on the same basis, it is necessary
that we be not deflected in any way from this goal.

Our task is, above all else, to proclaim the true Word
of God, to proclaim the Law and the Gospel. There can be no
relativizing of the authority of that Word, no attempt to overrule
it or simply to ignore it. It must be bound as a frontlet between
our eyes (Deut. 6:8), that is, it must be in our minds and in our
hearts at all times. We have to remember that when the Bible
ceases to be authoritative, that does not mean there is no
authority in the church. Rather, when the authority of the
Bible is gone, then the authority resides precisely where
it should not, in the hands of sinful, fallen, and ignorant
men.

On the Feast of Stephen 2009

2009-12-27T16:54:00.000-08:00

The Twelve Days of Christmas

2009-12-27T16:45:00.000-08:00

Each year at Christmas I hear the same thing, usually
on what is called "Boxing Day" or very shortly thereafter:
"Well, Christmas is over for another year" ... "Well, I
guess that was Christmas for this year, time to get ready
for the New Year" ... "Happy New Year" ... etc. What this
indicates is that in the minds of most of the folks
around us, Christmas really only consists of one single
day, December 25, and nothing more. You spend several
months getting ready for that one day ... buying gifts
... making tarts, puddings, pies, etc. and then it is
all over in a quick flurry of wrapping paper, bows, toys
that needs batteries, dried pine needles, cranberry sauce,
and perhaps, painful hangovers.

Needless to say, this emphasis on a single day,
leads people to emphasize those things that culturally
have become the customary events of that day ...
the gift opening ... the turkey dinner ... the endless
dainties ... and being with the family. Of course,
none of these things are wrong in themselves,
nor the usual seasonal emphasis on being generous
and kind. All that is without any doubt good. But
such things have very clearly become the heart of
the celebration in many, many homes, even in the
homes of those who do actually make it to some
church or other on Christmas Eve or perhaps
even on Christmas Day (although church on Christmas
Day is usually pretty poorly attended in Canada,
for obvious reasons).

All this is one of the reasons why I appreciate very
much the actual season of Christmas, for it is a
season of twelve days, as we all know from the
popular traditional song, in which "my true love
gave to me" not one present but twelve. Likewise,
we know that the title of William Shakespeare's comedy
"Twelfth Night", refers to the last evening of the
last day of the Christmas season, a time when a
great deal of foolishness was traditionally permitted
in Merry Old England.

The celebration of Christmas in the early church took
some time to develop. It was not there right in the
early centuries but appeared rather later. But the
church did develop a season that is called Christmas
... not just one day ... just as we have a season
that is called Easter ... not just one single day.
This wise custom, of a season of twelve days, is
preserved in the calendar and lectionary of the English
Book of Common Prayer. It is a wise custom for us to
observe in our time because it helps us to focus on
the actual heart of the celebration, its theological
heart, the Incarnation of the Son of God.

When all the flurry of buying gifts and opening them
is over, behold, Christians are still quietly
celebrating Christmas, still singing Christmas
carols right on into the New Year, still reading
about the birth of Christ right on into early
January. Then they go on, on January 6, to
celebrate Epiphany, which is not just a single
day but also a season (of varying length depending
on the date of Easter), a kind of continuation of
the celebration of Christmas in that in Epiphany
the Incarnate Deity is manifested or shown forth
to the whole world.

What happens in Vegas may need to stay in Vegas
but what happened in Bethlehem does not
and cannot stay in Bethlehem.

Hail, thou ever bless'd morn.
Hail, Redemption's happy dawn.
Sing through all Jerusalem,
Christ is born in Bethlehem.

So, celebrating all the twelve days of Christmas
... with prayer, the reading of Scripture, and
the singing of hymns and carols (and remembering
that Boxing Day is really the feast of the first
martyr, Stephen), can help us to focus on what
God wants us to know about the birth of His Son
... the real "why" of Christmas ... and help us
to proclaim it to others. As we take the time to
reflect and wonder, we remember that this is the
One who came to "save his people from their sins"
(Matthew 1:21). He did not come just to suggest
to us that we should be nice to each other, although
He is an example of perfect charity and calls us to
the same. But rather He came primarily for the
salvation of His people, to accomplish perfectly
the salvation of His church. And He accomplished
what He came to do perfectly, so that if Christ
has died for you, you can never be lost. This is
the real message of the manger and of the twelve
days of Christmas. Thankfully, we shall have not
just twelve days but all eternity to sing of it.

The Lambeth Articles

2009-06-22T12:48:00.001-07:00

At the University of Cambridge, in the year 1595, during the
reign of Elizabeth I, a controversy developed among some of
the divines about certain points of Christian doctrine. The
matter became serious enough that it was referred to the
Archbishop of Canterbury, John Whitgift, who after
consulting with some other learned men, published the
following nine "propositions" which, in a cover letter,
he himself judged to be "true", directing that nothing
be taught at the university which would be contrary to
them. He made it clear that the nine propositions were
in complete accord with his private judgement and that
they corresponded to the "doctrine professed in this
Church of England and established by the laws of the
land". The propositions were drawn up by Dr. Whitaker
and signed by Archbishop Whitgift, by Dr. Richard
Fletcher (Bishop of London), by Dr. Richard Vaughan
(then Bishop Elect of Bangor) and others. The then
Archbishop of York, Dr. M. Hutton, affirmed that all
the propositions could be "plainly collected or
fairly deduced from the Scriptures and the writings
of St. Augustine".

The propositions have come to be called The Lambeth
Articles. They were accepted at the Dublin Convocation
of 1615 and became part of the articles of the Church
of Ireland (i.e. the Anglican Church in Ireland).
This is how they read:

1. God from eternity hath predestinated certain men
unto eternal life; certain men he hath reprobated.

2. The moving or efficient cause of predestination
to life is not the foresight of faith or of
perseverance, or of good works, or of anything
that is in the person predestinated,
but only the will and pleasure of God.

3. There is predetermined a certain number of the
predestinate which can neither be augmented
nor diminished.

4. Those not predestinated for salvation shall be
necessarily damned for their sins.

5. A true, living, and justifying faith and the
Spirit of God sanctifying, is not extinguished,
falleth not away, it vanisheth not away in the
elect either finally or totally.

6. A man truly faithful, that is, such a one
who is endued with a justifying faith,
is certain, with the assurance of faith,
of the remission of his sins,
and of his everlasting salvation by Christ.

7. Saving grace is not given, is not granted,
is not communicated to all men,
by which they may be saved if they will.

8. No man can come unto Christ unless it shall
be given unto him, and unless the Father shall
draw him and all men are not drawn by the Father
that they may come to the Son.

9. It is not in the will or power of everyone
to be saved.

What is, of course, compelling about this is
that Archbishop Whitgift and the other learned divines
of the Church of England were solidly Calvinist in
their understanding of salvation, and clearly saw
the above propositions as being in entire accord
with the 39 Articles of Religion which, of course,
they are.

After Sunday liturgy

2009-06-10T18:24:00.000-07:00

Only two religions in the whole world

2009-06-10T18:21:00.000-07:00

This is a true saying and worthy of all men to be received, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. 1 Timothy 1:15

There are only two religions in the world. One is that religion that wants to convince you that you are basically okay. The other is that religion that wants to convince you that, if left to yourself, you are entirely lost.

The first religion wants to tell you that, yes, there is God, but that all that he requires of you is that you should be a decent person. In other words, this religion says, “If you do this” or “If you do that”, or “If you are just a good person”, God will accept you. This religion takes many forms. But it is simply the religion of human nature. It comes quite naturally to us. We find it very easy to think that we are not so bad as all that, and that, yes, if we are just decent, upright, law-abiding people, God will accept us in the end.

This religion, therefore, is basically a religion of LAW. It emphasizes obedience, what we must DO on our own, and what we are CAPABLE of DOING on our own. It flatters us by making us think that we can, in fact, win heaven by our own efforts. It flatters us by making us think that we have the power to do all that is required of us. This is the religion of human works.

The other religion, which is the religion of the Bible, seems at first to be similiar. It tells us that, yes, there is God and it does not deny that His followers are to be good. But it goes on to tell us that this one, true God is a holy God, and indeed, perfectly so. That He requires not just a general obedience to His LAW, to His commandments, but absolute and perfect obedience to them, each and every one of them. And then this religion tells us, much to our irritation, that we are now incapable of that perfect obedience and will find it far beyond our reach.
This religion, the religion of the Bible, does not flatter us. Nor does it come naturally to us. In fact, in our natural state, we shall always find it most distasteful. Because, of course, it tells us that God will NOT accept us if we just try to be good, if we are just decent, law-abiding folks. Rather, it tells us that even the best things we do are tainted by something inside us that spoils all we do.
This religion is so far from flattering us with what we can do on our own, that it tells us that we entirely incapable of saving ourselves on account of the radical sinfulness, that moral infection of nature, that lies within us. It tells us that if any saving is going to get done, if any rescuing is going to get done, it is going to have to be done by God Himself. This is a terrible blow to our pride. But then, this religion is not for the proud.

Thankfully, this religion, the religion of the Bible, goes on to tell us that, even though we are incapable of making ourselves acceptable to a holy God, that same God has made a way of doing just that. Rather than leaving us in our sins, which would have been a perfectly just act on His part, He has chosen to save, out of a fallen race, a great multitude of every kindred and tongue and people and nation. And He has chosen to save them through their faith in His own Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who became a perfect sacrifice for them, fulfilling all the demands of the LAW on their behalf. By grace, through faith, all that Christ has done is reckoned over to us. Although even the faith by which we receive the gift of the righteousness of Christ, is itself a gift.

This is the religion that says not what you must DO, but rather what has been DONE for you. To the world it is foolishness. To us, it is the highest wisdom.

2009-05-25T12:48:00.000-07:00

As my father grew older, he began to suffer from significant
memory loss. One day I went to visit him in the care home
where he was living. I found him in the dining room sitting
in his wheelchair. He saw me as I walked in, recognized me,
said, ¨Can you help me? I can´t remember anything! I have
no past!¨

His distress was evident. There was a note of panic in his
voice. Things that had anchored him firmly throughout his
80-plus years were now somehow gone. He was cut adrift
on a dark, shapeless sea. And there seemed to be no
land in sight. It was a terrible moment for him.

Recalling that moment, I have often wondered what would
it be like to be able to remember ¨nothing,¨ to forget where
you were born, where you had lived, what you had done in
your life, whom you had known and loved? And there is
something truly frightening about the possibility of no longer
remembering your life, simply because remembering your
life has a lot to do with what it means to live in the present.
How we live today is very much guided by events we have
witnessed, people whom we have known, decisions that we
have made, manners and customs that we have learned,
in the past. Memory is an anchor that helps to keep us from
drifting lost and abandoned on a stormy sea of confusion.

Henry Ford once said, ¨History is bunk,¨ which I take to
mean that he considered history to be unimportant. But
really, that statement is ¨bunk.¨ History is very relevant.
It keeps us on track. This is especially so with regard to
our own personal histories. You are who you are, in large
part, because of your history. When you find yourself having
to say ¨I have no past,¨ you are really saying that you have
lost yourself in the present. How can I know who I am, if I
cannot remember who I was? When I cease to remember,
do I not, in some sense, cease to be myself? Who are you if
you cannot remember who your parents are, or where they
were born, or if you cannot remember where you yourself
were born, whether or not you are married, etc.?

I spent quite a bit of time that day with my father, trying
to help him remember his past. With a little bit of prompting,
he began to remember people and events from his life and
even from his childhood. I simply repeated back to him
many of the stories that he had told me and he began to
remember. His past was all still there, but it had become
very difficult to access. Once he realized that it had not
disappeared, he was once again ¨himself ¨ and we passed
a fine day together.

Human beings enter this world, ¨not in entire forgetfulness¨
but ¨trailing clouds of glory,¨ as the English poet William
Wordsworth has wisely said. We enter with certain things
already programmed into our minds and hearts and souls,
a certain amount of memory already on the hard-drive.
When those who have never heard of the Bible, of the Law
or the Gospel, of the Ten Commandments or the Letter to
the Galatians, or who have heard of it but do not believe it,
when those folks somehow find themselves feeling anger at
the injustices that they see in the world around them, or
hoping that there really is a world beyond this one, in that
moment they reveal that they have not come ¨in entire
forgetfulness.¨ Rather, they show ¨the work of the law
written in their hearts¨ (Romans 2:15). In that moment,
they are remembering something of who they really are.

God has this witness written in every human heart. In a
very real sense, there is no such thing as an atheist. At
some level, everyone knows that there is God, that He is
good, and that we are all going to be held accountable to
Him. When people, and whole cultures, begin to try
to cut themselves off from that deeper memory that
God has planted within them, they begin to drift lost
on an endless sea of confusion. Witness the palpable
moral drift of Canadian culture.

Of course, it is not just a matter of remembering.
Something very deeply rooted within us must change.
We must be given something that by nature we cannot
have. But beginning to remember, beginning to
understand that there are things hidden deep within us
that we need to access, that we need to remember, is
often the very first step on the road home. Memory,
the deepest kind of God-given memory, helps to
point the way.

2009-05-25T12:03:00.000-07:00