For those two or so of you who read this blog, you'll know that we've been looking for a church now for a couple of months. (And that was after the two-year search in Alabama, where we moved 6 months after we finally got settled at a church there!)
I tried hard not to be pessimistic about our first two visits, but even though we're *close* to Atlanta, it still takes an hour to get to the city, and that's where most of the churches we'd be interested in are located. So we Googled, and perused various denominational websites, and scoured the phone book (anyone else notice how dated a paper phone book seems these days??!?) and came up with a church about 30 minutes away, in Douglasville. Way closer than our last church, so we gave it a try.
It's a storefront church, tucked away in a strip mall. I had visions of folding chairs and a folding table as the altar, and no communion rail... much like our church in Anniston was. We walked in the front door and folks greeted us joyfully, introduced themselves and introduced us to others. Straight back were what looked like offices and classrooms, and to the left were the doors to the sanctuary. (Yes! A sanctuary! In a church in a strip mall!) We walked in, and - wow - they had taken great care to do everything they could to make the space *feel* like a church. Beautiful shades covered the windows and other exterior doors - it looks like they have several small storefronts that they've merged into one big space. Unless you look carefully, you don't notice that at all. They even painted stained glass motifs on the high windows above the shades! They created a raised area for the altar, and yes, there's also a communion rail. (Here's a picture from when Bishop Beach visited recently, so you can see what I mean.)
Now, I know, this is all surface stuff. What's Really Important is the mission and the message. But having a space *feel* like a sacred space does so much to ease the heart and, well, I don't know about anyone else, but I feel more at peace, more able to hear that still small voice. So I can't say it's not important at all, at least to me. And they keep the service liturgical - they use the '79 prayer book (but not the "star trek" Eucharistic Prayer D!) It's funny, I've been in a '28 church for almost 6 years now, but the '79 language comes back in a hurry. I miss the comfortable words and the prayer of humble access, but I do enjoy the '79 version of the Gloria. I think we're using a Michael Card setting for it - I'll have to remember to ask.
The good news is, they scored high on the Really Important stuff too! The rector is awesome. Great sermons, and truly a pastor's heart for his flock. He and the philosopher had coffee the week after our first visit, and by our second visit we were pretty sure we'd found our new church home. Sunday School has been awesome, and I'm hoping the philosopher can connect with a men's group too. Yes, you heard right. We actually found a church that's large enough to have two services, a Sunday School, Bible Studies, and small groups. Shocking!! 8-)
I even volunteered for the music ministry, which they're trying to grow. It's mostly praise music, with an AMAZINGLY talented worship leader, but there's also a pianist so we do get to sing some hymns too. The worship leader seems eager to start a more involved ministry, which is great. I did warn him, however, that I bring enthusiasm, not talent, to the mix. Heh. Hopefully when the Paulding campus library is ready, I will be able to participate fully, even in weeknight practices. And I haven't been able to do that since 2002. Wow. Time to pull out the guitar and see if I remember how to play, right? (Or worse, see if I actually remember how to sing!)
Anyway, thanks be to God for Trinity Anglican Church. It's always in His time that He brings us where we need to be.
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Monday, September 5, 2011
Monday, July 11, 2011
The Great Sociological Experiment, revisited
For my long-time readers, (both of you!) you will recall that when the philosopher and I endeavored to find a new church, we visited quite a number of different flavors and varieties. I blogged about them in posts labelled "The Great Sociological Experiment", or G.S.E.
So two weeks ago we began again, in a new city.
Our first venture was to a church that bills itself as "Evangelical Anglican". It's a very well known church, with over 3000 members and a very visible rector. It's about 45 minutes away from our house, and G professed to want to visit "simply out of curiosity". So off we ventured! Our first thought was that the edifice itself brought to mind cathedrals of old, very beautiful and charming. The interior, once we got out of the parking deck (yes, a church with a PARKING DECK!) was also lovely, but disjointed. There was a large desk reminiscent of a 4 star hotel lobby, where a number of folks stood by to thrust brochures into your hands. As we walked down the wide hallway (think "airport-wide") we saw on the walls a beautiful illuminated manuscript page, a sheet of ancient shaped-note music, a (erm) Thomas Kincade-like print, and then ... a large flatscreen tv scrolling announcements. (??!!??)
The sanctuary was also beautiful, with NIV Bibles in the pew backs, but no prayer books, and the bulletin was all glossy announcements with no real order of service. The band was warming up, with drums and electric guitars and some brass. ::sigh:: Ultimately, the folks were incredibly friendly but the service bore no resemblance to any kind of Anglican service. Indeed, there was no liturgy at all. No communion. Lots of extemporaneous prayer and a firey revival sermon, but no quiet reverence. Definitely not for us.
This past Sunday we visited a local congregation which met in a community center. Of the ten folks there, we were the youngest there by 20 or so years. (The community center is in a retirement community, and I suspect that everyone attending lives there - not a bad thing generally, but not necessarily what we wanted!) The rector is a full time police officer, and very pleasant, and we were delighted to hear a sermon on Romans that wasn't Calvinistic in nature. But we need a church with more to offer folks our age - a place where we can connect with a community of believers and actually be part of that community. So that definitely won't work either.
Once the philosopher gets back from a visit to his family, and I return the following week from a conference in Seattle, then we'll try again and see were God is leading. So if you're so inclined, prayers for this new venture would be deeply appreciated!
So two weeks ago we began again, in a new city.
Our first venture was to a church that bills itself as "Evangelical Anglican". It's a very well known church, with over 3000 members and a very visible rector. It's about 45 minutes away from our house, and G professed to want to visit "simply out of curiosity". So off we ventured! Our first thought was that the edifice itself brought to mind cathedrals of old, very beautiful and charming. The interior, once we got out of the parking deck (yes, a church with a PARKING DECK!) was also lovely, but disjointed. There was a large desk reminiscent of a 4 star hotel lobby, where a number of folks stood by to thrust brochures into your hands. As we walked down the wide hallway (think "airport-wide") we saw on the walls a beautiful illuminated manuscript page, a sheet of ancient shaped-note music, a (erm) Thomas Kincade-like print, and then ... a large flatscreen tv scrolling announcements. (??!!??)
The sanctuary was also beautiful, with NIV Bibles in the pew backs, but no prayer books, and the bulletin was all glossy announcements with no real order of service. The band was warming up, with drums and electric guitars and some brass. ::sigh:: Ultimately, the folks were incredibly friendly but the service bore no resemblance to any kind of Anglican service. Indeed, there was no liturgy at all. No communion. Lots of extemporaneous prayer and a firey revival sermon, but no quiet reverence. Definitely not for us.
This past Sunday we visited a local congregation which met in a community center. Of the ten folks there, we were the youngest there by 20 or so years. (The community center is in a retirement community, and I suspect that everyone attending lives there - not a bad thing generally, but not necessarily what we wanted!) The rector is a full time police officer, and very pleasant, and we were delighted to hear a sermon on Romans that wasn't Calvinistic in nature. But we need a church with more to offer folks our age - a place where we can connect with a community of believers and actually be part of that community. So that definitely won't work either.
Once the philosopher gets back from a visit to his family, and I return the following week from a conference in Seattle, then we'll try again and see were God is leading. So if you're so inclined, prayers for this new venture would be deeply appreciated!
Monday, June 14, 2010
A Good Sermon
I heard a good sermon yesterday. It was on Luke 14: 16-24, the parable of the man who has a feast, and all his friends make excuses not to come so he invites the lame, the poor, and the blind. You know, the Gospel reading for the Second Sunday after Trinity!
Fr. Ed said a couple of things that really spoke to us. The first was "what excuses do you make not to come to the feast?" In other words, what excuses do you make not to come to church so you can partake of Holy Communion? The other thought was a bit tangential from the text, but equally provoking. The statement went something like, if you attend a church, then you should be able to say "I go to this church, and I agree with my church's teachings".
I won't go in to why we left our church back in 2004. But we did, and we did it because we really do believe that second thought. So that's put us in a situation where it's difficult to *find* a church where we can say "I agree with my church's teachings". They're out there, and they're multiplying, but in this Baptist-land they are few and far between. So, as you'll know if you've been following my blog, we've been considering going to a different, nearby local church. We don't agree with everything (for example, we are not five-point Calvinists!) but the fellowship is good, it's a large stable congregation with lots of opportunity for Bible study and small groups. We've been driving over an hour every once in a while to a small Anglican church where we can have communion, because the Nearby Local Church doesn't do that very often.
So Fr Ed's sermon hit us on two fronts. Why are we attending a church where we don't agree with all the "first order" issues, and why are we making excuses to NOT regularly attend a church where we can receive communion *and* have a common theology? On our drive back yesterday from the Hour-Away-Anglican-Church (I've blogged about it before), we talked about the sermon we'd just heard. If you go back to the post I just linked to, you see the excuse - it's so far away! And really, is that any kind of excuse at all?
Now where does that leave us, you ask? We're starting to talk about transferring our membership. The philosopher still wants to visit some other little-over-hour-away churches that we hadn't considered before because they were, well, Too Far Away. But based on several things Fr. Ed said yesterday (and not just in his sermon) I think it likely that this is where we'll end up. And that, yea verily, would be a Good Thing Indeed.
Fr. Ed said a couple of things that really spoke to us. The first was "what excuses do you make not to come to the feast?" In other words, what excuses do you make not to come to church so you can partake of Holy Communion? The other thought was a bit tangential from the text, but equally provoking. The statement went something like, if you attend a church, then you should be able to say "I go to this church, and I agree with my church's teachings".
I won't go in to why we left our church back in 2004. But we did, and we did it because we really do believe that second thought. So that's put us in a situation where it's difficult to *find* a church where we can say "I agree with my church's teachings". They're out there, and they're multiplying, but in this Baptist-land they are few and far between. So, as you'll know if you've been following my blog, we've been considering going to a different, nearby local church. We don't agree with everything (for example, we are not five-point Calvinists!) but the fellowship is good, it's a large stable congregation with lots of opportunity for Bible study and small groups. We've been driving over an hour every once in a while to a small Anglican church where we can have communion, because the Nearby Local Church doesn't do that very often.
So Fr Ed's sermon hit us on two fronts. Why are we attending a church where we don't agree with all the "first order" issues, and why are we making excuses to NOT regularly attend a church where we can receive communion *and* have a common theology? On our drive back yesterday from the Hour-Away-Anglican-Church (I've blogged about it before), we talked about the sermon we'd just heard. If you go back to the post I just linked to, you see the excuse - it's so far away! And really, is that any kind of excuse at all?
Now where does that leave us, you ask? We're starting to talk about transferring our membership. The philosopher still wants to visit some other little-over-hour-away churches that we hadn't considered before because they were, well, Too Far Away. But based on several things Fr. Ed said yesterday (and not just in his sermon) I think it likely that this is where we'll end up. And that, yea verily, would be a Good Thing Indeed.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
The G.S.E. - church "F"
Heh. And you thought we were done, didn't you? You thought we'd finally settled on a non-Anglican church and decided to call it home for the duration of our stay in northeast Alabama. Fooled you!! (And if you're wondering what this is all about, which would mean I have more than two faithful readers now - woohoo!, then you can read about what I'm talking about here.)
A couple of months ago we traveled about an hour south to visit the nearest Anglican church. We were desperate for a 1928 liturgy and eucharist! It was a small congregation, meeting in an old, historic, Baptist chapel. They are a CANA church, with a 1928 prayerbook and the Alleluia III songbook (Yes, they used a guitar. Please don't fall over. Those of you who know me also know I used to play guitar in a praise team many moons ago!) We were warmly welcomed, and experienced a wonderful service. So we've been back a couple of times, most recently at Easter. And it was glorious! We sang "Alleluia, He is Coming" and I nearly wept.
And it reminded me, deeply, that I am an Anglican. We've decided to try to make it down there for church a couple of times a month, if we can. It is, alas, too far away for every Sunday, but I can put up with the TULIPs if I know there's an Anglican eucharist in the near future!
(And how's that... TWO POSTS on the same day!)
A couple of months ago we traveled about an hour south to visit the nearest Anglican church. We were desperate for a 1928 liturgy and eucharist! It was a small congregation, meeting in an old, historic, Baptist chapel. They are a CANA church, with a 1928 prayerbook and the Alleluia III songbook (Yes, they used a guitar. Please don't fall over. Those of you who know me also know I used to play guitar in a praise team many moons ago!) We were warmly welcomed, and experienced a wonderful service. So we've been back a couple of times, most recently at Easter. And it was glorious! We sang "Alleluia, He is Coming" and I nearly wept.
And it reminded me, deeply, that I am an Anglican. We've decided to try to make it down there for church a couple of times a month, if we can. It is, alas, too far away for every Sunday, but I can put up with the TULIPs if I know there's an Anglican eucharist in the near future!
(And how's that... TWO POSTS on the same day!)
Monday, January 25, 2010
The G.S.E... redux
We were sitting in church Sunday-a-week-ago, listening to the sermon. For the second week in a row, the philosopher leaned over and said, "He's talking about the "U" in TULIP." (Now, for those of you who are suddenly worried, no hard drugs or alcohol was involved!) He was talking about the "shorthand" for five-points Calvinism... T.U.L.I.P. Which, if I recall correctly, stands for:
Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints
Now I don't know if I mentioned it in one of my other Great Sociological Experiment posts, but we are not Five Point Calvinists. And up until recently, the philosopher has remained (mostly) silent during the sermons at the PCA church we've been attending. Sure, there have been the occasional wince and frown, but generally he hasn't been too cranky.
So why the change in the professorial demeanor? The church has a new pastor, and if I'm not imagining things, he's a bit... errr.... more stridently Calvinist. And the philosopher also doesn't agree with our lessons on Romans in Sunday School. Thus he's getting very little out of our Sunday visitations these days. And because I'm fretting about how uncomfortable he looks, I'm not getting much either. A friend laughed and told me we were like the couple in the O'Henry story, The Gift of the Magi. He wants us to go to a big local church so I can make friends, and I want us to go to an Anglican church, even if it's small and an hour away, to preserve his sanity! (We are, if you haven't picked up on it, Anglicans, after all!)
This past Sunday, though, we did head off to a small Anglican church about an hour south of us. (What letter am I on? Church F?) There were about 20 folks there on a stormy morning. They meet in a small historic chapel, and have a wonderful guitarist and a LEM with a fabulous voice. And we got to have communion. ::sigh:: It's been three months since we partook in an Anglican communion (longer than that if you go for a 1928 BCP communion). I so missed saying the Prayer of Humble Access!
So, to all of my far-away friends, please continue to keep us in your prayers. We're still so unsettled, and with possible out-of-state jobs in the offing it's hard to find that internal peace. For now, my Bible verse will remain Isaiah 42:16... "I will lead the blind by ways they have not known, along unfamiliar paths I will guide them; I will turn the darkness into light before them and make the rough places smooth. These are the things I will do; I will not forsake them.."
Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints
Now I don't know if I mentioned it in one of my other Great Sociological Experiment posts, but we are not Five Point Calvinists. And up until recently, the philosopher has remained (mostly) silent during the sermons at the PCA church we've been attending. Sure, there have been the occasional wince and frown, but generally he hasn't been too cranky.
So why the change in the professorial demeanor? The church has a new pastor, and if I'm not imagining things, he's a bit... errr.... more stridently Calvinist. And the philosopher also doesn't agree with our lessons on Romans in Sunday School. Thus he's getting very little out of our Sunday visitations these days. And because I'm fretting about how uncomfortable he looks, I'm not getting much either. A friend laughed and told me we were like the couple in the O'Henry story, The Gift of the Magi. He wants us to go to a big local church so I can make friends, and I want us to go to an Anglican church, even if it's small and an hour away, to preserve his sanity! (We are, if you haven't picked up on it, Anglicans, after all!)
This past Sunday, though, we did head off to a small Anglican church about an hour south of us. (What letter am I on? Church F?) There were about 20 folks there on a stormy morning. They meet in a small historic chapel, and have a wonderful guitarist and a LEM with a fabulous voice. And we got to have communion. ::sigh:: It's been three months since we partook in an Anglican communion (longer than that if you go for a 1928 BCP communion). I so missed saying the Prayer of Humble Access!
So, to all of my far-away friends, please continue to keep us in your prayers. We're still so unsettled, and with possible out-of-state jobs in the offing it's hard to find that internal peace. For now, my Bible verse will remain Isaiah 42:16... "I will lead the blind by ways they have not known, along unfamiliar paths I will guide them; I will turn the darkness into light before them and make the rough places smooth. These are the things I will do; I will not forsake them.."
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The Batman Lunchbox
We've been attending Sunday School at a local church recently. We've been studying the parables, but this past week we veered off a bit to talk about John 6 (Jesus feeding the 5000). The teacher - let's call him Bob - told the story in a very different way, with a different emphasis than I've ever heard before. I wanted to share his lesson with you (both of you!), and here's my plan - I'm going to tell it as close to the way he told it as possible, using his turns of phrase. (I'm convinced he was a teacher in another life!) So here it is....
OK, so we're going to talk about John 6. And as I always do, I ask my favorite question: "Yeah... so what?" So why this this story important? What does it teach us? Well, let's look at it. We've got Jesus, and he's testing the disciples, namely Phillip and Andrew. He goes to Phillip - who's from around here and knows the good places to get a quick bite to eat - and asks him how they can feed all these people. Phillip knows the local Kmart closed down, and he also knows it's a heck of a hike to the nearest big town where they can get some cheap Big Macs. And even if they can catch a donkey and a wagon, they don't have enough. Say a Big Mac costs a denari. Then they could buy 200, and maybe cut them in half, or even in quarters. But that's still only 800! So Phillip says, "No way, man. It can't be done!" So, does Phillip pass the test? I'd say no - he gets a big goose egg!Andrew was standing nearby, and heard Jesus' question. He's been hanging out with the crowd, chatting with people and talking about Jesus. And you gotta remember - to this crowd Jesus is a Big Deal. He's like a rock star! Everybody wants to hear what he's got to say! Anyway, Andrew has been milling around, and he saw Jakob's son. Now this kid *really* wanted to hear Jesus. So he begged, and his Dad finally gave him permission. But he also encouraged the boy to pack a lunch. "Son, it's going to be a long, hot day. Make sure you take something to eat!" So the kid grabs a few biscuits and some small bits of dried fish, puts them in his Batman lunchbox, and rushes out the door. So Andrew saw that this kid had a lunchbox. It's not much, that's for sure. But it's more than anyone else has. And maybe, somewhere in the back of his mind, he's remembering the events at Cana. So he points out the kid to Jesus, and says "that boy has some food, but it's not enough to feed everyone!" Now, does Andrew pass the test? Well, maybe not with flying colors, since he's still doubtful it will make a difference, but yeah - give him a C for effort.
Now, here's the last person Jesus tests - Jakob's son! What would you do if you were a kid in a sea of adults, and you see two of the guys that hang out with Jesus start pointing at you and walking your way? What would you do if they ask you to bring your lunchbox and come with them? I know what I would do - I'd turn and run the other way. No way you're getting MY lunch. But instead, Jakob's son gives up his lunchbox to Jesus... and look what happens! Can you imagine the amazement, the wonder, as the baskets gets passed around? Instead of being greedy with his five loaves, this boy gives them to Jesus and takes part in one of the greatest miracles of all time. Imagine the tales he had to share with his dad when he got home. Yeah, I'd say he passes Jesus's test with flying colors!
Yeah... so what?
So we've got Jesus demonstrating his power. And we've got the faith and trust of a child. And maybe what we should take away from that is don't be afraid to dream big. If Jesus calls, give what you've got, even if it's not much. And sit back and watch what Jesus can do with that gift!
OK, so we're going to talk about John 6. And as I always do, I ask my favorite question: "Yeah... so what?" So why this this story important? What does it teach us? Well, let's look at it. We've got Jesus, and he's testing the disciples, namely Phillip and Andrew. He goes to Phillip - who's from around here and knows the good places to get a quick bite to eat - and asks him how they can feed all these people. Phillip knows the local Kmart closed down, and he also knows it's a heck of a hike to the nearest big town where they can get some cheap Big Macs. And even if they can catch a donkey and a wagon, they don't have enough. Say a Big Mac costs a denari. Then they could buy 200, and maybe cut them in half, or even in quarters. But that's still only 800! So Phillip says, "No way, man. It can't be done!" So, does Phillip pass the test? I'd say no - he gets a big goose egg!Andrew was standing nearby, and heard Jesus' question. He's been hanging out with the crowd, chatting with people and talking about Jesus. And you gotta remember - to this crowd Jesus is a Big Deal. He's like a rock star! Everybody wants to hear what he's got to say! Anyway, Andrew has been milling around, and he saw Jakob's son. Now this kid *really* wanted to hear Jesus. So he begged, and his Dad finally gave him permission. But he also encouraged the boy to pack a lunch. "Son, it's going to be a long, hot day. Make sure you take something to eat!" So the kid grabs a few biscuits and some small bits of dried fish, puts them in his Batman lunchbox, and rushes out the door. So Andrew saw that this kid had a lunchbox. It's not much, that's for sure. But it's more than anyone else has. And maybe, somewhere in the back of his mind, he's remembering the events at Cana. So he points out the kid to Jesus, and says "that boy has some food, but it's not enough to feed everyone!" Now, does Andrew pass the test? Well, maybe not with flying colors, since he's still doubtful it will make a difference, but yeah - give him a C for effort.
Now, here's the last person Jesus tests - Jakob's son! What would you do if you were a kid in a sea of adults, and you see two of the guys that hang out with Jesus start pointing at you and walking your way? What would you do if they ask you to bring your lunchbox and come with them? I know what I would do - I'd turn and run the other way. No way you're getting MY lunch. But instead, Jakob's son gives up his lunchbox to Jesus... and look what happens! Can you imagine the amazement, the wonder, as the baskets gets passed around? Instead of being greedy with his five loaves, this boy gives them to Jesus and takes part in one of the greatest miracles of all time. Imagine the tales he had to share with his dad when he got home. Yeah, I'd say he passes Jesus's test with flying colors!
Yeah... so what?
So we've got Jesus demonstrating his power. And we've got the faith and trust of a child. And maybe what we should take away from that is don't be afraid to dream big. If Jesus calls, give what you've got, even if it's not much. And sit back and watch what Jesus can do with that gift!
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
A.I.N.O. ?
Anglican in Name Only?
So, Pope Benedict has offered a free trip across the Tiber to Anglicans. It's an astounding thing. But as I've said before, I'm Anglican, not Catholic. (Boy, I sound like a broken record, don't I?)
An Anglican scholar, Roberta Bayer (who serves on the Prayer Book Society) has written a very straightforward response to the proceedings. She makes several good points. The first and foremost (to me) is her statement "To move to Rome with this ordinariate may be to remain Anglican in name only." To a layperson, Anglican and Catholic worship may seem quite similar. To this Anglican, they are very, very different. And while I may not agree with much going on in the Anglican Communion these days, to move to Rome would be to abandon the spiritual practices I hold dear.
So, Pope Benedict has offered a free trip across the Tiber to Anglicans. It's an astounding thing. But as I've said before, I'm Anglican, not Catholic. (Boy, I sound like a broken record, don't I?)
An Anglican scholar, Roberta Bayer (who serves on the Prayer Book Society) has written a very straightforward response to the proceedings. She makes several good points. The first and foremost (to me) is her statement "To move to Rome with this ordinariate may be to remain Anglican in name only." To a layperson, Anglican and Catholic worship may seem quite similar. To this Anglican, they are very, very different. And while I may not agree with much going on in the Anglican Communion these days, to move to Rome would be to abandon the spiritual practices I hold dear.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
The G.S.E.: Church E
This past Sunday we visited friends in another state. One of our friends (*not* an Anglican!) suggested we go to the local Anglican church on Sunday morning before meeting up with the rest of the crowd for lunch. We hadn't been to an Anglican eucharist in quite a while, so we jumped at the chance. The congregation apparently bought an old Presbyterian church some time ago, so unlike many Anglican groups, this one had its own facilities. The priest and assistant priest greeted us at the door, as well as a couple of ushers.
We walked in and found our seats. The pianist was playing a beautiful prelude and... there were KNEELERS! The processional began and the choir came in, following the cross. The service was Rite I from the '79 prayer book. We sang the traditional Gloria, and I almost wept, because it has been years since I had the opportunity to sing that. The cantor did a glorious job with the psalm. The sermon was actually about sin and hell. (You don't get that very often from an Anglican pulpit!) And Origen was even mentioned!! After the recessional, the pianist played an amazing rendition of "A Mighty Fortress". I refused to leave until he'd finished, so we stood near the back for a bit.
That was a mistake, because apparently several folks in the congregation had spotted us as visitors, and came to say hello. What was the first thing many said? "Y'all are Anglican, aren't you?" "Well, yes, we are." "OOOhhh! Are you new to the area?" "No, we're from out of town. and just visiting our friend." ::disappointed look:: "Well, we are SO glad you came today!" If we lived in our friend's town, we would not be on this Great Sociological Experiment, because we would have found our new church this past Sunday. ::sigh::
I have to keep telling myself that God has us where we are for a reason. Otherwise I would just weep.
We walked in and found our seats. The pianist was playing a beautiful prelude and... there were KNEELERS! The processional began and the choir came in, following the cross. The service was Rite I from the '79 prayer book. We sang the traditional Gloria, and I almost wept, because it has been years since I had the opportunity to sing that. The cantor did a glorious job with the psalm. The sermon was actually about sin and hell. (You don't get that very often from an Anglican pulpit!) And Origen was even mentioned!! After the recessional, the pianist played an amazing rendition of "A Mighty Fortress". I refused to leave until he'd finished, so we stood near the back for a bit.
That was a mistake, because apparently several folks in the congregation had spotted us as visitors, and came to say hello. What was the first thing many said? "Y'all are Anglican, aren't you?" "Well, yes, we are." "OOOhhh! Are you new to the area?" "No, we're from out of town. and just visiting our friend." ::disappointed look:: "Well, we are SO glad you came today!" If we lived in our friend's town, we would not be on this Great Sociological Experiment, because we would have found our new church this past Sunday. ::sigh::
I have to keep telling myself that God has us where we are for a reason. Otherwise I would just weep.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Phone Book Church-anomics
(Or how to define criteria to help you choose a church, which is more helpful than looking at phone book ads.)
I really wish I could remember how the conversation got started. Old dead philosophers were involved, and complex philosophical and theological terms too. (Oddly enough, we were driving down to see the philosopher's sister when this came up. Most of these types of deep conversations occur when we're hiking, so that in and of itself is unusual.) I think maybe Augustine was involved (he usually is) and perhaps some Macintyre too. But don't hold me to that.
Anyway, what stuck with me after the conversation what what we were talking about towards the end - what aspects of a church are "necessary" to us, and what aspects are merely "important"? In other words, if you had to choose from among less-than-ideal churches, how do you organize the criteria?
What showed up on my lists? (I'm a librarian, of COURSE I make lists!) I'll list what I can remember. There was much more, I know. But it's nearly the weekend after a very long week, and my brain is mushy to the point of running out my ears. So I'll hit the high points and make weak promises to post more at some vague future time!
In the 'Necessary' Column
Preaching Christ Crucified
Trinitarian
Protestant
Biblically sound
In the 'Important' Column
Follows the church year
Good music (more traditional than contemporary)
Liturgically based
Vibrant small groups & Sunday school
I feel like I at least have some of my priorities in the right order; that the preaching and teaching is more important than the music, for example. But I also realized that there are some "extraneous" things that really are important to me, and fall closer to the "necessary" category than perhaps they should. So it's been a good exercise, and I'm sure it will come up again in our musings together.
The philosopher's lists were decidedly more.... philosophical. And theological. And granular. Which is why I won't try to reproduce them here. But if we end up on the Pinhoti one of these days and this topic comes up again, I plan to pull out my steno pad and take some notes!
I really wish I could remember how the conversation got started. Old dead philosophers were involved, and complex philosophical and theological terms too. (Oddly enough, we were driving down to see the philosopher's sister when this came up. Most of these types of deep conversations occur when we're hiking, so that in and of itself is unusual.) I think maybe Augustine was involved (he usually is) and perhaps some Macintyre too. But don't hold me to that.
Anyway, what stuck with me after the conversation what what we were talking about towards the end - what aspects of a church are "necessary" to us, and what aspects are merely "important"? In other words, if you had to choose from among less-than-ideal churches, how do you organize the criteria?
What showed up on my lists? (I'm a librarian, of COURSE I make lists!) I'll list what I can remember. There was much more, I know. But it's nearly the weekend after a very long week, and my brain is mushy to the point of running out my ears. So I'll hit the high points and make weak promises to post more at some vague future time!
In the 'Necessary' Column
Preaching Christ Crucified
Trinitarian
Protestant
Biblically sound
In the 'Important' Column
Follows the church year
Good music (more traditional than contemporary)
Liturgically based
Vibrant small groups & Sunday school
I feel like I at least have some of my priorities in the right order; that the preaching and teaching is more important than the music, for example. But I also realized that there are some "extraneous" things that really are important to me, and fall closer to the "necessary" category than perhaps they should. So it's been a good exercise, and I'm sure it will come up again in our musings together.
The philosopher's lists were decidedly more.... philosophical. And theological. And granular. Which is why I won't try to reproduce them here. But if we end up on the Pinhoti one of these days and this topic comes up again, I plan to pull out my steno pad and take some notes!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
The G.S.E.: Church D
The Great Sociological Experiment churns onward! The philosopher and I crossed the Tiber last Sunday and visited a local Catholic church. Now, I must preface this with a qualifier: We Are Not Catholic. We don't want to *be* Catholic. We both believe that one must agree with a church's teachngs on all the first order issues. And we have some disagreements with the Catholic Church. At our core, we are Protestant. Conservatively Protestant, even. Heck, we are ANGLICAN! But we also know that, if we can't go to an Anglican church locally, then we need to find another place to worship with a body of believers. (And you've read all this before, because I've said it more than once. Sorry for the repetition!)
Anyway, the closest thing to Anglican liturgy is Catholic liturgy. So off we went. This is the "parish church" of the county, so the sanctuary was completely full. Which was good, because there were no bulletins and no way to really follow the service. So we relied on watching the folks next to us to do the whole sit-stand-kneel thing. The music was uninspired, and we did get a couple of the bad 60s Catholic folk hymns. I don't claim they're any worse than some of the vapid modern praise choruses, but I also don't claim they're any better either. There also wasn't much in the way of Sunday school or small group offerings.
Another interesting observation: there also wasn't much in the way of welcoming visitors. We were far-to-overwhelmed with welcome at Church A, what with special visitor parking and golf cart transportation. Church C had the deacons point out the visitors to the pastor during the "passing of the peace" and the pastor came to say hello. And the other churches we visited had greeters at the door and encouraged us to fill out a visitor card (both so they could know we visited and so we could get more information if we wanted it). Here? Neither. So to me that was a bit odd too. Of course, none of this is a deal breaker. Not being able to take communion unless you're a Catholic, that's a bit more prickly. I'm not an advocate of open communion - I believe you need to profess Christ before taking of His body and blood. But I also have issue with the Catholics not accepting most other forms of Christianity.
The Anglican Catholic Church, our former church in Virginia, is in an interesting position in regard to the Catholic Church along those lines. There's a Catholic canon law that allows communion for non-Catholics of certain other churches with the permission of the Bishop. And the ACC is potentially one of them. Since we're still a member of the ACC (we never transferred our membership) we could conceivably ask for special dispensation to receive communion.
So our Experiment continues. We may go back to Church B this weekend, unless the philosopher has something else in mind. He was saying something about finding a Greek Orthodox congregation, but I'm hoping he was just kidding. ::weak grin::
As an aside, we had a nice long talk about what is "important" or "necessary" or just "nice to have" in a church home. If I can remember all the philosophical terms he used, that might just become another post.
Anyway, the closest thing to Anglican liturgy is Catholic liturgy. So off we went. This is the "parish church" of the county, so the sanctuary was completely full. Which was good, because there were no bulletins and no way to really follow the service. So we relied on watching the folks next to us to do the whole sit-stand-kneel thing. The music was uninspired, and we did get a couple of the bad 60s Catholic folk hymns. I don't claim they're any worse than some of the vapid modern praise choruses, but I also don't claim they're any better either. There also wasn't much in the way of Sunday school or small group offerings.
Another interesting observation: there also wasn't much in the way of welcoming visitors. We were far-to-overwhelmed with welcome at Church A, what with special visitor parking and golf cart transportation. Church C had the deacons point out the visitors to the pastor during the "passing of the peace" and the pastor came to say hello. And the other churches we visited had greeters at the door and encouraged us to fill out a visitor card (both so they could know we visited and so we could get more information if we wanted it). Here? Neither. So to me that was a bit odd too. Of course, none of this is a deal breaker. Not being able to take communion unless you're a Catholic, that's a bit more prickly. I'm not an advocate of open communion - I believe you need to profess Christ before taking of His body and blood. But I also have issue with the Catholics not accepting most other forms of Christianity.
The Anglican Catholic Church, our former church in Virginia, is in an interesting position in regard to the Catholic Church along those lines. There's a Catholic canon law that allows communion for non-Catholics of certain other churches with the permission of the Bishop. And the ACC is potentially one of them. Since we're still a member of the ACC (we never transferred our membership) we could conceivably ask for special dispensation to receive communion.
So our Experiment continues. We may go back to Church B this weekend, unless the philosopher has something else in mind. He was saying something about finding a Greek Orthodox congregation, but I'm hoping he was just kidding. ::weak grin::
As an aside, we had a nice long talk about what is "important" or "necessary" or just "nice to have" in a church home. If I can remember all the philosophical terms he used, that might just become another post.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
The G. S. E.: Church C
So this Sunday we ventured forth for another installment of the Great Sociological Experiment! This time we visited another Baptist church, but one *very different* from Church A. Church C was founded in 1902, and maintained that "traditional" feel in terms of the sanctuary and facilities. It also proudly proclaimed itself as Southern Baptist, both on its website and in the bulletin. Oh, and no lobster tank! Instead, the baptismal pool was discreetly tucked away - visible to the entire congregation of course - but not clear-sided like what you find in Red Lobster.
I think powerpoint has become ubiquitous. Thppt. And they also had drums. But no electric guitars... just a piano, clarinet, flutes, and some brass... non-amplified. We sang a mix of music, some from the Baptist Hymnal and others from the current praise music scene. The choir was large, but surprisingly unenthusiastic. (More on that in the next paragraph.)
Here's an interesting side note, though. We suspect this congregation is currently in a crisis about their music styles. There were many more seniors attending, and from where we were stitting not a single one sang the praise music. They stood there stonily, not even pretending to sing (as one often does when one doesn't know the music). When we sang the hymns, though, the older folks were much more participatory. (Heck, who wouldn't sing along to "Victory in Jesus"??) So we think there's a conflict with the music leaders - the seniors don't hold for that new-fangled stuff! And we both noticed it independently, so it was pretty obvious.
The preaching was definitely of the "old-style Baptist". He said some good things. Using John 15:3-5... we should be cleansed from sin, then cling to Jesus, then cultivate ourselves in that relationship in Christ. Still, it's hard getting used to a 45 minute sermon!
This service was by far more comfortable than Church A. Church A was just so... LOUD. Too much flash and not enough time for prayer, maybe. Or when there was time for prayer, the music was still overpowering. At Church C there was a much better balance of prayer, and worship, and message.
I'm still not sure about their small group/sunday school offerings. There wasn't much info in the bulletin, and their website failed on that count as well. I just don't see any indication of a broad small group program of any kind. There's a college ministry, and a seniors ministry. and a singles ministry (The singles ministry, which has an announcement for a trip to Atlanta "Singles! Join us for a Braves game, and bring your family!" A little dissonant, eh? I know what they meant, but it just sounded wierd phrased that way.) But there's nothing on any other small group options.
So the experiment continues!
I think powerpoint has become ubiquitous. Thppt. And they also had drums. But no electric guitars... just a piano, clarinet, flutes, and some brass... non-amplified. We sang a mix of music, some from the Baptist Hymnal and others from the current praise music scene. The choir was large, but surprisingly unenthusiastic. (More on that in the next paragraph.)
Here's an interesting side note, though. We suspect this congregation is currently in a crisis about their music styles. There were many more seniors attending, and from where we were stitting not a single one sang the praise music. They stood there stonily, not even pretending to sing (as one often does when one doesn't know the music). When we sang the hymns, though, the older folks were much more participatory. (Heck, who wouldn't sing along to "Victory in Jesus"??) So we think there's a conflict with the music leaders - the seniors don't hold for that new-fangled stuff! And we both noticed it independently, so it was pretty obvious.
The preaching was definitely of the "old-style Baptist". He said some good things. Using John 15:3-5... we should be cleansed from sin, then cling to Jesus, then cultivate ourselves in that relationship in Christ. Still, it's hard getting used to a 45 minute sermon!
This service was by far more comfortable than Church A. Church A was just so... LOUD. Too much flash and not enough time for prayer, maybe. Or when there was time for prayer, the music was still overpowering. At Church C there was a much better balance of prayer, and worship, and message.
I'm still not sure about their small group/sunday school offerings. There wasn't much info in the bulletin, and their website failed on that count as well. I just don't see any indication of a broad small group program of any kind. There's a college ministry, and a seniors ministry. and a singles ministry (The singles ministry, which has an announcement for a trip to Atlanta "Singles! Join us for a Braves game, and bring your family!" A little dissonant, eh? I know what they meant, but it just sounded wierd phrased that way.) But there's nothing on any other small group options.
So the experiment continues!
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Adult Sunday School
I'm on a roll this week, aren't I?
I’ve been posting on our visits to different churches, and wanted to elaborate on a comment I made earlier this week. It’s a simple question, really. Why do adult Sunday School organizers assume that ‘same-gender, same-age’ groups make the most sense for adults? I can buy that for children, maybe, but adults?
I am a married 40-ish woman, without kids. I’m nerdy and intellectual. So I don’t necessarily have the same interests as other married 40-ish women. I am not a fan of Beth Moore Bible studies. I don’t really want to talk about “bringing God to your children.” I’d rather study some of the works by Augustine, or the Church fathers, or heck, even C.S. Lewis. If it’s a Bible Study I want something that gets to the meat of the texts, not just the poofy parts. But when you can actually FIND a class that offers those, it’s usually a men’s group. So I am decidedly un-inclined to go to any Sunday school class at all.
I’ve heard of ONE church (several states away) that has a great way to do Sunday School. Teachers pick the topic, then anyone who is interested in that topic can join. That’s the only restriction… you have to actually be INTERESTED in the TOPIC. This runs for three months. Then the groups disband, a new list of classes is announced, and off you go! Amazing. And you still meet folks and make friends. If you attend the classes that are typically nerdy and intellectual, then who else do you think will attend the class? Yup – other folks who are nerdy and intellectual! If you like Beth Moore, and you go to the classes that offer Beth Moore, you meet other women who like Beth Moore.
Brilliant!
So for those of y’all out there who are Sunday school planners for your churches, think about it. Are you really helping by enforcing age and gender parameters on your adult classes?
I’ve been posting on our visits to different churches, and wanted to elaborate on a comment I made earlier this week. It’s a simple question, really. Why do adult Sunday School organizers assume that ‘same-gender, same-age’ groups make the most sense for adults? I can buy that for children, maybe, but adults?
I am a married 40-ish woman, without kids. I’m nerdy and intellectual. So I don’t necessarily have the same interests as other married 40-ish women. I am not a fan of Beth Moore Bible studies. I don’t really want to talk about “bringing God to your children.” I’d rather study some of the works by Augustine, or the Church fathers, or heck, even C.S. Lewis. If it’s a Bible Study I want something that gets to the meat of the texts, not just the poofy parts. But when you can actually FIND a class that offers those, it’s usually a men’s group. So I am decidedly un-inclined to go to any Sunday school class at all.
I’ve heard of ONE church (several states away) that has a great way to do Sunday School. Teachers pick the topic, then anyone who is interested in that topic can join. That’s the only restriction… you have to actually be INTERESTED in the TOPIC. This runs for three months. Then the groups disband, a new list of classes is announced, and off you go! Amazing. And you still meet folks and make friends. If you attend the classes that are typically nerdy and intellectual, then who else do you think will attend the class? Yup – other folks who are nerdy and intellectual! If you like Beth Moore, and you go to the classes that offer Beth Moore, you meet other women who like Beth Moore.
Brilliant!
So for those of y’all out there who are Sunday school planners for your churches, think about it. Are you really helping by enforcing age and gender parameters on your adult classes?
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
The G. S. E.: Church B
So, last week we undertook Step Two of the Great Sociological Experiment and visited Church B. It was a large PCA church, well established with a nice website. (Heck, what did churches do before they had websites??) We arrived about 15 minutes before the service, and parked. I was exceptionally happy that no one met us with a golf cart, and I was also happy that the church campus had excellent signage so we found the main building quite easily. As we walked in a greeter asked if we were visitors, and showed us into the sanctuary. Organ on one side, grand piano on the other. Choir stall against the center wall in the front. Pulpit in the center. A large screen which indicated the upcoming use of powerpoint. (sigh) The choir director looked oddly familiar... yup. He was the chorale director at my high school. Have I mentioned how WIERD it is to live in my hometown again??
Announcements, and apparently they're in the search process for a new pastor. The layman gave a very good talk about the process, so it must be a recent thing. The choir.... ahhhhhhhh. Four-part harmony. Absolutely beautiful. And we sang out of the standard hymnal. Ah, creeds. I love the Apostle's Creed. The sermon was good, but as the philosopher mentioned later, very predestination-ist. (Is that a word?) And this pastor too also mentioned God challenging you in your complacency by taking you out of your comfort zone. (Is there a message here??!?)
Afterwards several folks stopped us and welcomed us and introduced themselves. It amuses me that the philosopher is uncomfortable admitting he's, well, a philosopher. He says it makes people uncomfortable when they hear the answer, like they don't quite know how to respond. So I told him that he should tell whoever asks, proudly, "I teach philosophy at the local university!" And if they are freaked out by that then it's their own fault for asking! ::heh::
But I liked this service much better. "Of course you did", you say, "it felt more like a liturgical service!" Yes, you are correct. It was familiar, and that has a very powerful draw. So this week, the philosopher gets to pick where we go to visit. He's mentioned a Roman Catholic parish, and another Baptist church as possibilities. So we'll see what happens next!
An Aside:
I've been noticing in my research that adult sunday school classes are almost always organized by AGE. I'm a middle-aged woman, but Beth Moore Bible studies are poofy and tedious to me. Yet that is often what the Middle-Aged Women Sunday School Classes use. Pfft. Why don't they organize classes by TOPIC, that way those of us who want to do an in-depth study of, say, the early church councils can do so, and those that like Beth Moore can do that somewhere else?
Announcements, and apparently they're in the search process for a new pastor. The layman gave a very good talk about the process, so it must be a recent thing. The choir.... ahhhhhhhh. Four-part harmony. Absolutely beautiful. And we sang out of the standard hymnal. Ah, creeds. I love the Apostle's Creed. The sermon was good, but as the philosopher mentioned later, very predestination-ist. (Is that a word?) And this pastor too also mentioned God challenging you in your complacency by taking you out of your comfort zone. (Is there a message here??!?)
Afterwards several folks stopped us and welcomed us and introduced themselves. It amuses me that the philosopher is uncomfortable admitting he's, well, a philosopher. He says it makes people uncomfortable when they hear the answer, like they don't quite know how to respond. So I told him that he should tell whoever asks, proudly, "I teach philosophy at the local university!" And if they are freaked out by that then it's their own fault for asking! ::heh::
But I liked this service much better. "Of course you did", you say, "it felt more like a liturgical service!" Yes, you are correct. It was familiar, and that has a very powerful draw. So this week, the philosopher gets to pick where we go to visit. He's mentioned a Roman Catholic parish, and another Baptist church as possibilities. So we'll see what happens next!
An Aside:
I've been noticing in my research that adult sunday school classes are almost always organized by AGE. I'm a middle-aged woman, but Beth Moore Bible studies are poofy and tedious to me. Yet that is often what the Middle-Aged Women Sunday School Classes use. Pfft. Why don't they organize classes by TOPIC, that way those of us who want to do an in-depth study of, say, the early church councils can do so, and those that like Beth Moore can do that somewhere else?
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Great Sociological Experiment
As you probably know, the philosopher and I are Anglican. Unfortunately for us, we live in an area of the country where there is a paucity of Anglican churches (at least of the kind we would be interested in joining). So we've come to the point where - if we want to worship weekly with a group of Christian believers - we need to find a different denomination. One of the things we both deeply desire is the opportunity for fellowship in small groups, an opportunity to meet folks and "make friends." It sounds a bit childish, perhaps, but when you're in a place where you have few face-to-face friends, you realize how much you long for that kind of friendship.
With that in mind, we decided, rather than go for a church which is "closest to our theology", we should look for a community that has Christ-centered teaching first, and lots of opportunity for fellowship second. The philosopher immediately dubbed this our "Great Sociological Experiment." We would be venturing out of our comfort zone of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, and into the world of Southern Baptists, PCA, Bible churches, Methodists, and goodness knows what else. And who knows, maybe we'll learn a little about ourselves too.
Our first visit was to Church A, which we identified as the "stealth Southern Baptist" variety. It's one of the largest churches in the area, with "Community" situated prominently in the name. Their website was filled with information... however, it wasn't until we went to the regional Southern Baptist website that we realized they were listed as a member of the regional Southern Baptist convention. (Thus the phrase "stealth-Baptist.") We showed up about 20 minutes before the service, and were met in the Visitors Parking Area by a nice gentleman in a golf cart, who toted us to the main doors. (How embarrassing!) We walked in and stopped at the information desk, situated between the two doors leading into the sanctuary. We were given a hearty welcome and a hefty packet of materials (including a DVD). The sanctuary? At first glance it looked like a concert hall with squishy chairs and a lobster tank. (OK, I discovered a bit later that the lobster tank was a baptismal font with one side glass so everyone can see the full immersion...) Full choir! Full orchestra! Repetitive praise music all the time! Electric instruments! Booming sound system! Video equipment for the weekly tv program! Powerpoint screens in three prominent locations! Immersion Baptism! Loud and exhortionary sermon ending in an altar call! SENSORY OVERLOAD. Whew.
Reactions? (Other than the ringing of the ears and the slight dizzy feeling?) The preaching was all about getting to heaven, so that was good. And the preacher did say one thing that stuck with me. He talked about God putting us in uncomfortable situations for a reason, so we can learn how to better serve Him. Yeah. I am So There. I also like praise music, probably more than the philosopher, and I enjoy singing with a guitar. But I prefer hymnody, and I deeply appreciate a choir in four-part harmony singing beautiful choral anthems. So I don't know that I could worship that was every week. There's just too much going on and not enough "down" time. They do have about 50 Sunday school and small groups, tho. That's a plus!
I plan to continue posting about each church we visit. So look soon for the next one!
With that in mind, we decided, rather than go for a church which is "closest to our theology", we should look for a community that has Christ-centered teaching first, and lots of opportunity for fellowship second. The philosopher immediately dubbed this our "Great Sociological Experiment." We would be venturing out of our comfort zone of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, and into the world of Southern Baptists, PCA, Bible churches, Methodists, and goodness knows what else. And who knows, maybe we'll learn a little about ourselves too.
Our first visit was to Church A, which we identified as the "stealth Southern Baptist" variety. It's one of the largest churches in the area, with "Community" situated prominently in the name. Their website was filled with information... however, it wasn't until we went to the regional Southern Baptist website that we realized they were listed as a member of the regional Southern Baptist convention. (Thus the phrase "stealth-Baptist.") We showed up about 20 minutes before the service, and were met in the Visitors Parking Area by a nice gentleman in a golf cart, who toted us to the main doors. (How embarrassing!) We walked in and stopped at the information desk, situated between the two doors leading into the sanctuary. We were given a hearty welcome and a hefty packet of materials (including a DVD). The sanctuary? At first glance it looked like a concert hall with squishy chairs and a lobster tank. (OK, I discovered a bit later that the lobster tank was a baptismal font with one side glass so everyone can see the full immersion...) Full choir! Full orchestra! Repetitive praise music all the time! Electric instruments! Booming sound system! Video equipment for the weekly tv program! Powerpoint screens in three prominent locations! Immersion Baptism! Loud and exhortionary sermon ending in an altar call! SENSORY OVERLOAD. Whew.
Reactions? (Other than the ringing of the ears and the slight dizzy feeling?) The preaching was all about getting to heaven, so that was good. And the preacher did say one thing that stuck with me. He talked about God putting us in uncomfortable situations for a reason, so we can learn how to better serve Him. Yeah. I am So There. I also like praise music, probably more than the philosopher, and I enjoy singing with a guitar. But I prefer hymnody, and I deeply appreciate a choir in four-part harmony singing beautiful choral anthems. So I don't know that I could worship that was every week. There's just too much going on and not enough "down" time. They do have about 50 Sunday school and small groups, tho. That's a plus!
I plan to continue posting about each church we visit. So look soon for the next one!
Thursday, July 16, 2009
::Sigh:: What's wrong with the RSV?
I was in the Christian bookstore biz for quite a number of years. I saw all manner of kookiness cross the pages of some publishers' catalogs. I saw the advent of the "Bible Magazine" from Thomas Nelson (now in its 5th edition... ::shudder:: )
But now... there's a whole new generation of bizarro-Bibles meant to reach a particular audience. Are you a hip urban teen? Try THIS.
Most recently? Are you an environmentalist and keep careful track of your carbon footprint? Now there's a Bible just for YOU! The Green Bible (H/T Justin)
How far should publishers go to promote the Word of God (leaving aside for the moment the question of whether or not their goal is to spread the Gospel or make some profit) before they turn the Word of God into a laughingstock or a sad, sick joke? If I were an urban hipster, I would get a laugh out of that Bible, and not much more. Hmm - like the laugh folks gave Episcopal church when it published its hip-hop prayer book, with it's catchy 23rd Psalm "The Lord is all that, I need for nothing." (Oh, my eyes! My eyes!)
I admit the Bible can be difficult to read. And any translation suffers from the fact that it's... well... a TRANSLATION. But rather than trying to be hip and relevant to whatever audience you're trying to reach, doesn't it make more sense simply to preach the gospel? If you do that, honestly and earnestly, there shouldn't be any need for tricks or gimmicks.
But now... there's a whole new generation of bizarro-Bibles meant to reach a particular audience. Are you a hip urban teen? Try THIS.
Most recently? Are you an environmentalist and keep careful track of your carbon footprint? Now there's a Bible just for YOU! The Green Bible (H/T Justin)
How far should publishers go to promote the Word of God (leaving aside for the moment the question of whether or not their goal is to spread the Gospel or make some profit) before they turn the Word of God into a laughingstock or a sad, sick joke? If I were an urban hipster, I would get a laugh out of that Bible, and not much more. Hmm - like the laugh folks gave Episcopal church when it published its hip-hop prayer book, with it's catchy 23rd Psalm "The Lord is all that, I need for nothing." (Oh, my eyes! My eyes!)
I admit the Bible can be difficult to read. And any translation suffers from the fact that it's... well... a TRANSLATION. But rather than trying to be hip and relevant to whatever audience you're trying to reach, doesn't it make more sense simply to preach the gospel? If you do that, honestly and earnestly, there shouldn't be any need for tricks or gimmicks.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Church: Theology or Community?
Our little Anglican church plant is suspending services until September. We've lost several core families over the past few months, and have been unable to replace them. The congregation (what's left of us) is torn in regard to the direction we should go, and our priest (a full time high school teacher) is burned out trying to herd us cats. So, with the permission of our Bishop, we are suspending services until a congregational meeting in September, at which time we will decide the parish's future. In the meantime, our priest is urging us to attend some other, larger, healthier church so we can worship corporately and be spiritually fed.
So that is where we find ourselves, the philosopher and I. Here in the heart of Baptist country, it's tough to find liturgical churches, and even tougher to find orthodox liturgical churches. I was reading a post by Rod Dreher over at Crunchy Con, and near the end he makes some thought-provoking statements about the nature and relationship of a church body to its community life and its theology. He writes:
We're not called to be church planters. That has become clear to us - it's like trying to pound square pegs into round holes. And I'm OK with that. God calls us each to different things, and we each have different gifts. More frustrating is the fact that we are isolated. Most of my friends are in far off places, and we keep in touch via email and such. And these friends are dear to me - it's a blessing to have the technology where we can chat about day-to-day things. But locally I've yet to meet any folks we can invite over to share a pizza and watch a movie, or go hiking together, or whatever. So we'd really like a church community where we can meet people, and connect, and get more involved, and share our gifts and talents. But does that mean we're like the folks Rod calls out: "Church people who bang on the loudest about the need for "community" tend to be those who want to worship the community"? I don't think we "worship community", but a healthy church community is certainly important to us. So it's a quandary!
There's no easy answer here, and I'm not really looking for answers in a blog post anyway. ::grin:: There will be lots of prayer on our part, and church visits, and hopefully our path will become clear.
So that is where we find ourselves, the philosopher and I. Here in the heart of Baptist country, it's tough to find liturgical churches, and even tougher to find orthodox liturgical churches. I was reading a post by Rod Dreher over at Crunchy Con, and near the end he makes some thought-provoking statements about the nature and relationship of a church body to its community life and its theology. He writes:
Anyway, the trick is that you cannot organize a meaningful church community around the idea that the community matters more than the theology, or that the theology is unimportant. If members of the community share significantly different beliefs about who Christ is, what the authoritative teachings of the church are, and so forth, they can only be a community if they agree that theology doesn't matter. Who wants to be part of that church community? A religious community must exist for a clear reason beyond itself, or it won't long exist at all. Right? Church people who bang on the loudest about the need for "community" tend to be those who want to worship the community, at least that's what I've observed.
Still, holding the correct theology is in vain if one's church has little or no active love or community -- unless you think the Christian life is all about learning correct doctrine, as in a classroom.
So that's what I'm pondering. There is not another Anglican church closer than 1.5 hours away. And anyway what's the point of being part of a church where you can barely participate in its life because it's a three hour round trip to get there? So we need to look for other options. Do we ignore the theology and go for a church with a vibrant community life where we can find a niche? Do we go for something that's close to us theologically, regardless of how healthy the community is?
We're not called to be church planters. That has become clear to us - it's like trying to pound square pegs into round holes. And I'm OK with that. God calls us each to different things, and we each have different gifts. More frustrating is the fact that we are isolated. Most of my friends are in far off places, and we keep in touch via email and such. And these friends are dear to me - it's a blessing to have the technology where we can chat about day-to-day things. But locally I've yet to meet any folks we can invite over to share a pizza and watch a movie, or go hiking together, or whatever. So we'd really like a church community where we can meet people, and connect, and get more involved, and share our gifts and talents. But does that mean we're like the folks Rod calls out: "Church people who bang on the loudest about the need for "community" tend to be those who want to worship the community"? I don't think we "worship community", but a healthy church community is certainly important to us. So it's a quandary!
There's no easy answer here, and I'm not really looking for answers in a blog post anyway. ::grin:: There will be lots of prayer on our part, and church visits, and hopefully our path will become clear.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Prayers for Holy Week
Since I'll be offline until the weekend, I wanted to offer up these prayers for Holy Week...
ALMIGHTY God, we beseech thee graciously to behold this thy family, for which our Lord Jesus Christ was contented to be betrayed and given up into the hands of wicked men, and to suffer death upon the cross; who now liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost ever, one God, world without end. Amen.
O MERCIFUL God, who hast made all men, and hatest nothing that thou hast made, nor desirest the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live; Have mercy upon all who know thee not as thou art revealed in the Gospel of thy Son; Take from them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy Word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that they may be saved among the remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.
May God be with you this holy season, and may we rejoice together at His glorious resurrection!
ALMIGHTY God, we beseech thee graciously to behold this thy family, for which our Lord Jesus Christ was contented to be betrayed and given up into the hands of wicked men, and to suffer death upon the cross; who now liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost ever, one God, world without end. Amen.
O MERCIFUL God, who hast made all men, and hatest nothing that thou hast made, nor desirest the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live; Have mercy upon all who know thee not as thou art revealed in the Gospel of thy Son; Take from them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy Word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that they may be saved among the remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.
May God be with you this holy season, and may we rejoice together at His glorious resurrection!
Thursday, October 30, 2008
The Heart of Anglican Bible Study
Tom Wright, Bishop of Durham, gave a talk at the Lambeth Conference that went relatively uncommented-on over the last few months. Fulcrum has finally put the text up here. I want to highlight a tiny portion - though certainly his talk was much farther ranging and insightful than this small bit - that really struck me.
I've always read the Bible to "learn that bit"... It didn't really occur to me to take it in a broader context of the whole Story (and, yes, I will capitalize Story here!) I've been disappointed with our Sunday School classes at church recently because we've been reading books about the Bible, or about Christianity. And I think this is why I've been disappointed, but I didn't really know or understand why until I finished reading this article. I want to go to Sunday School (and every night in between) and READ the Bible - not to memorize specific vignettes, but to read and worship God in awe of his might and power. I want to talk about the Scriptures with other Christians, and see what they think, and see how they may fit the passages we read into the larger fabric of the Story. As we see the Story come to life, and as we see how we fit into the story, we also revel in the Glory of God.
Of course, I'm reminded of Tolkien here (I should've used an obscure Tolkien reference in my blog name, shouldn't I?) where Sam and Frodo are talking about the story, and how they are taking their place in it. Sam says, "Why, to think of it, we're in the same tale still! It's going on. Don't the great tales never end?" (From Two Towers, "The Stairs of Cirith Ungol") But I think Bishop Wright is making the same case - we ARE part of that great Biblical Story, and it's still going on. And it's up to us to see our part through as best we can, with God's help.
(Tip o' the Tinfoil Hat to Stand Firm)
All this is of course nurtured by the straightforward but deeply powerful tradition of the daily offices, with the great narratives of scripture read through day by day, preferably on a lectio continua basis, so that ‘living prayerfully within the story’ is the most formative thing, next to the Eucharist itself, which Anglicans do. Classic mattins and evensong, in fact, are basically showcases for scripture, and the point of reading Old and New Testaments like that is not so much to ‘remind ourselves of that bit of the Bible’, as to use that small selection as a window through which we can see, with the eyes of mind and heart, the entire sweep of the whole Bible, so that our ‘telling of the story’ is not actually aimed primarily at informing or reminding one another but rather at praising God for his mighty acts, and acquiring the habit of living within the story of them as we do so. That, I suggest, is the heart of Anglican Bible study.
I've always read the Bible to "learn that bit"... It didn't really occur to me to take it in a broader context of the whole Story (and, yes, I will capitalize Story here!) I've been disappointed with our Sunday School classes at church recently because we've been reading books about the Bible, or about Christianity. And I think this is why I've been disappointed, but I didn't really know or understand why until I finished reading this article. I want to go to Sunday School (and every night in between) and READ the Bible - not to memorize specific vignettes, but to read and worship God in awe of his might and power. I want to talk about the Scriptures with other Christians, and see what they think, and see how they may fit the passages we read into the larger fabric of the Story. As we see the Story come to life, and as we see how we fit into the story, we also revel in the Glory of God.
Of course, I'm reminded of Tolkien here (I should've used an obscure Tolkien reference in my blog name, shouldn't I?) where Sam and Frodo are talking about the story, and how they are taking their place in it. Sam says, "Why, to think of it, we're in the same tale still! It's going on. Don't the great tales never end?" (From Two Towers, "The Stairs of Cirith Ungol") But I think Bishop Wright is making the same case - we ARE part of that great Biblical Story, and it's still going on. And it's up to us to see our part through as best we can, with God's help.
(Tip o' the Tinfoil Hat to Stand Firm)
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Was Frodo a Calvinist?
Have I admitted recently that I am a Tolkien nerd? If not, I humbly admit it now. {{grin}}
I recently re-watched The Lord of the Rings (LotR), and was having a conversation with someone that made me stop and think. First of all, I don't despise the movies as some die-hard fans do. I think Peter Jackson did all right most of the time. The Faramir thing, tho, and the Sam/Gollum/Frodo thing on the stairs in Mordor, are almost unforgivable. I do confess to fast forwarding through the latter during my last viewing. (And I probably will again, next time I watch!)
But here's my biggest beef, I think. I'm just not crazy about the way Elijah Wood plays Frodo. Or at the very least, how he was directed to play Frodo (not sure if that was an actor or a director failing). In the books you get the sense that, yes, Frodo was "pulled" into this adventure through no design of his own. But once he gets on the Road, he is determined to see it through to whatever bitter end may come. You read about his fighting against the power of the ring, resisting it at every moment. For me, that internal struggle is very important. He knows what he has to do. He's fighting every step to do it, despite incredible pressure to surrender the ring to Sauron.
In the movies, Frodo seems much weaker. Sam saves him from surrendering the ring to the Nazgul in Osgiliath. Aragorn saves him on Weathertop. The few times you see him "fight" with the ring's power, he simply looks like he's about to barf (You know that look on his face - it's more reminiscent of indigestion than determination!). You just don't get that same sense of deep and abiding struggle that you read page after page in the books. Now, I do know that there are some scenes where you do see him fight... at least twice (off the top of my head) I can thing of Frodo and Gollum locked in battle. But in these cases, Frodo isn't fighting against the ring, Frodo is fighting to KEEP the ring. But I'm digressing....
Anyway, as we were talking about this after the movie ended, my conversation buddie said... "In the movies, Frodo is a Calvinist. In the books, he's a Thomist." First I must say that I am neither a theologian nor a philosopher, so what follows here can probably be picked apart by just about anyone. But I thought I'd throw it out for further consideration anyway! Why is he a Calvinist in the movie? Because everything that happens is external to him. Sam saves him from the Nazgul. He's mainly just going with the flow - you don't see him initiating or changing events, but reacting. Yes, I do know he's changing events by destroying the ring in the end, and changing events by saying he'll take the ring in the first place!) But on the whole, you don't see any internal motivation. In the books, he has an inner grace (I'm thinking here of the Anglican phrase: "The sacraments are an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace") that gives him strength and courage to keep up the struggle. That's more of a Thomistic (or Augustinian) attribute. You are given grace to draw upon in daily (or dire) struggles. The grace comes from God, but it is held within yourself. Calvinism would have that grace being from "without."
Tolkien even speaks of it outright in many cases. After Boromir tries to take the ring and Frodo has put it on to escape, he is seen/felt by the Eye on Amon Hen, which calls him to Sauron. We find later that Gandalf fights on his behalf, and the ensuing (internal) battle reads like this:
So there's my foray into theology for the night. A pitiful attempt, I am sure, but that's all you get from a Zana of very little brain! 8-)
I recently re-watched The Lord of the Rings (LotR), and was having a conversation with someone that made me stop and think. First of all, I don't despise the movies as some die-hard fans do. I think Peter Jackson did all right most of the time. The Faramir thing, tho, and the Sam/Gollum/Frodo thing on the stairs in Mordor, are almost unforgivable. I do confess to fast forwarding through the latter during my last viewing. (And I probably will again, next time I watch!)
But here's my biggest beef, I think. I'm just not crazy about the way Elijah Wood plays Frodo. Or at the very least, how he was directed to play Frodo (not sure if that was an actor or a director failing). In the books you get the sense that, yes, Frodo was "pulled" into this adventure through no design of his own. But once he gets on the Road, he is determined to see it through to whatever bitter end may come. You read about his fighting against the power of the ring, resisting it at every moment. For me, that internal struggle is very important. He knows what he has to do. He's fighting every step to do it, despite incredible pressure to surrender the ring to Sauron.
In the movies, Frodo seems much weaker. Sam saves him from surrendering the ring to the Nazgul in Osgiliath. Aragorn saves him on Weathertop. The few times you see him "fight" with the ring's power, he simply looks like he's about to barf (You know that look on his face - it's more reminiscent of indigestion than determination!). You just don't get that same sense of deep and abiding struggle that you read page after page in the books. Now, I do know that there are some scenes where you do see him fight... at least twice (off the top of my head) I can thing of Frodo and Gollum locked in battle. But in these cases, Frodo isn't fighting against the ring, Frodo is fighting to KEEP the ring. But I'm digressing....
Anyway, as we were talking about this after the movie ended, my conversation buddie said... "In the movies, Frodo is a Calvinist. In the books, he's a Thomist." First I must say that I am neither a theologian nor a philosopher, so what follows here can probably be picked apart by just about anyone. But I thought I'd throw it out for further consideration anyway! Why is he a Calvinist in the movie? Because everything that happens is external to him. Sam saves him from the Nazgul. He's mainly just going with the flow - you don't see him initiating or changing events, but reacting. Yes, I do know he's changing events by destroying the ring in the end, and changing events by saying he'll take the ring in the first place!) But on the whole, you don't see any internal motivation. In the books, he has an inner grace (I'm thinking here of the Anglican phrase: "The sacraments are an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace") that gives him strength and courage to keep up the struggle. That's more of a Thomistic (or Augustinian) attribute. You are given grace to draw upon in daily (or dire) struggles. The grace comes from God, but it is held within yourself. Calvinism would have that grace being from "without."
Tolkien even speaks of it outright in many cases. After Boromir tries to take the ring and Frodo has put it on to escape, he is seen/felt by the Eye on Amon Hen, which calls him to Sauron. We find later that Gandalf fights on his behalf, and the ensuing (internal) battle reads like this:
This deep internal struggle doesn't come across very well on screen. The force of will (the grace) he summons to defy Sauron is seen in the movies as events imposed upon him as opposed to through him. At the most, when we see Frodo make decisions, we get no sense of struggle when the decision is made.He heard himself crying out: Never, never! Or was it: Verily I come, I come to you? He could not tell. Then as a flash from some other point of power there came to his mind another thought: Take it off! Take it off! Fool, take it off! Take off the ring!
The two powers strove in him. For a moment, perfectly balanced between their piercing points he writhed, tormented. Suddenly he was aware of himself again. Frodo, neither the Voice nor the Eye: free to choose... (Fellowship, p. 404)
So there's my foray into theology for the night. A pitiful attempt, I am sure, but that's all you get from a Zana of very little brain! 8-)
Monday, December 3, 2007
idols of the heart
My pastor made a passing reference to John Calvin yesterday, and I've been thinking about what he said. His comment was something like "The human heart is a factory of idols," we were designed to worship, only our hearts tend to set whatever is in front of us up as an idol to worship, like money or a new car or a Harvard education, rather than what we should worship - God. Of course, being the librarian that I am, I went searching for the actual quote. I ended up on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library site, and found Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. The nearest thing I could find was the following:
Anyway, that concept really struck me. And then I say to myself, "I don't idolize my new job", or "I don't idolize my renovated house," no, I say, "I am just proud to have these accomplishments." But does that sense of pride - if taken too far - become an idol in and of itself?
And then there's the other big "set" of idols - those things we so desperately desire. A new car, a bigger house, a spouse, a dog, a trip to Africa. Just FYI: I'm generalizing here - I am blessed every day by my most wonderful husband, and I don't like dogs and definitely don't need a new car! {{grin}} But here's my question. When do these things become idols? Is it wrong for a single person to say wistfully "someday I'll be married" or to save your pennies and dimes for that dream trip across the world? Or do our hopes and dreams become idols only when we give them power over our lives? And if that's the case, how do we know when that moment arrives? And can you use that same rationale for accomplishments - can you be proud of something you did without that something overtaking God's rightful place in your heart?
So it's become a new challenge to keep a better idea in the forefront of my mind, whenever I'm proud or desirous of something, to thank God for giving me the skills and talents and abilities to make these things possible. I don't know if this is really a "solution" to what Calvin calls "crowds of gods issuing from the human mind," and it's probably too deep for this "bear of very little brain" to tackle anyway. But anyway, I'd be interested to hear what you think. 8-)
I never did find the actual quote "factory of idols" (I found it referenced quite a bit on other searches, but no one attributed it to a specific bit of Calvin's writings) so if there is a better citation, please let me know!Every individual mind being a kind of labyrinth, it is not wonderful, not only that each nation has adopted a variety of fictions, but that almost every man has had his own god. To the darkness of ignorance have been added presumption and wantonness, and hence there is scarcely an individual to be found without some idol or phantom as a substitute for Deity. Like water gushing forth from a large and copious spring, immense crowds of gods have issued from the human mind, every man giving himself full license, and devising some peculiar form of divinity, to meet his own views. (Book 1, Chapter 5, Section 12)
Anyway, that concept really struck me. And then I say to myself, "I don't idolize my new job", or "I don't idolize my renovated house," no, I say, "I am just proud to have these accomplishments." But does that sense of pride - if taken too far - become an idol in and of itself?
And then there's the other big "set" of idols - those things we so desperately desire. A new car, a bigger house, a spouse, a dog, a trip to Africa. Just FYI: I'm generalizing here - I am blessed every day by my most wonderful husband, and I don't like dogs and definitely don't need a new car! {{grin}} But here's my question. When do these things become idols? Is it wrong for a single person to say wistfully "someday I'll be married" or to save your pennies and dimes for that dream trip across the world? Or do our hopes and dreams become idols only when we give them power over our lives? And if that's the case, how do we know when that moment arrives? And can you use that same rationale for accomplishments - can you be proud of something you did without that something overtaking God's rightful place in your heart?
So it's become a new challenge to keep a better idea in the forefront of my mind, whenever I'm proud or desirous of something, to thank God for giving me the skills and talents and abilities to make these things possible. I don't know if this is really a "solution" to what Calvin calls "crowds of gods issuing from the human mind," and it's probably too deep for this "bear of very little brain" to tackle anyway. But anyway, I'd be interested to hear what you think. 8-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)