Occasional thoughts of an Anglican Episcopal priest

Category: Scripture (Page 39 of 43)

Alms? – From the Daily Office – October 22, 2014

From Ecclesiasticus:

Do not grow weary when you pray; do not neglect to give alms.

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Sirach 7:10 (NRSV) – October 22, 2014)

“Do not neglect to give alms.” Alms: “charitable donations of money or goods to the poor or needy” says the dictionary with an etymological note saying it comes from an old Greek word, eleemosyne, meaning “pity, mercy.”

The fancy plates of wood or brass or silver passed down the rows of pews on Sunday morning are called “alms basins” by some. (Others call them “offering plates” or, worse, “collection plates.”) But they really aren’t for alms, are they? I know people want to believe that what they turn loose of in church is used for the benefit of the poor, but look at any church budget and ask “How much of this is used for relief of the poor?” The answer will surprise you.

Most of what is given to the church is used for upkeep of the institution. The two largest expenses for most congregations are (1) upkeep of aging, often-remodeled, energy-inefficient, and frequently under-utilized buildings and (2) paying for professional staff, clergy and lay. Is that the way it should be? As one dependent on the church for my paycheck, I benefit from the current arrangement, but I’m not at all sure that the church is managing the alms given by church members properly.

I offer no answer today; I simply raise the question.

Alms Basin

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

Clear Instructions – From the Daily Office – October 17, 2014

From the Gospel of Luke:

Then from the cloud came a voice that said, “This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!”

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Luke 9:35 (NRSV) – October 17, 2014)

You couldn’t get clearer instructions, could you? “Listen to him!” So why don’t people?

I don’t mean people in general, I mean people who call themselves Christian. They pay attention to Leviticus and Deuteronomy. They pay attention to Paul. Why don’t they pay attention to Jesus?

Get their knickers all in a twist, for example, about gay and lesbian people and their relationships when Jesus had nothing at all to say about that — they pay attention to a couple of verses in Leviticus, a couple of verses in the letters of Paul, but do they listen when Jesus says to the woman guilty of adultery, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.” (Jn 8:11) That’s just about the only thing he had to say about anyone’s sexual relationships, “I don’t condemn you.” Why don’t they listen to him and do likewise?

Seems to me that Jesus boiled everything down to something just about as simple as the Father’s admonition. When asked which of the commandments was the greatest, he said: “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mk 12:29-31) My diocese has summarized this on a bumper sticker:

Love God Bumper Sticker

You can’t get clearer instructions, can you? Listen to him!

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

Leftist? Rightist? – From the Daily Office – October 16, 2014

From the Gospel of Luke:

If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will save it. What does it profit them if they gain the whole world, but lose or forfeit themselves? Those who are ashamed of me and of my words, of them the Son of Man will be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Luke 9:23-26 (NRSV) – October 16, 2014)

So ….

I left off writing these things publicly, but found that not writing them put a crimp in my spiritual life. I write them for my own spiritual well-being and if they are of assistance to anyone else that’s all well and good, too. I thought I was stressing out under the self-imposed pressure of writing one everyday, but I think now the stress was from trying to be “gentle” with my words so as not to offend anyone. However, since I now realize that I am writing them for myself, I don’t need to worry about that. If someone reads what I have to say and is offended by it, they can choose not to read another thing I write. That’s their responsibility, not mine. (Frankly, I think that’s part and parcel of the attitude demonstrated by Jesus in the last sentence of this selection. “I say what I say. If it resonates, follow me. If not, we part company.”)

OK . . . introductory remarks done with . . . this morning someone in an internet discussion group did the drama-queen leaving act. “TEC [the stupid current trendy abbreviation for the Episcopal Church] and this group have veered too far left, so I’m leaving.” You could hear the door slam as they left (and picture them standing outside with their ear pressed to it listening for the reaction).

What do people mean when they apply the terms “Left” or “Right” to the church? Do people even know what those terms mean, period?

These terms are political terms translated into British and American politics from the French Revolution of 1789 during which members of the National Assembly divided themselves by where they sat in the chamber, supporters of the king to the president’s right, supporters of the revolution to his left. They were first introduced into British politics in the 1930s to label politicians according to their position on the Spanish Civil War — those who supported Franco’s Nationalists were “the Right,” those who supported the Republicans were “the Left.” From Britain, these terms made their way into American political discourse, but what they actually mean in the political arena today is pretty muddled.

Which means, of course, that when they are applied to the church they basically mean nothing! Or, rather, they mean “the church is doing that with which I disagree.” For example, when someone opens the distribution of Holy Communion to the non-baptized (something I disagree with, by the way), is that a “Leftist” or a “Rightist” thing to do? I don’t really know; I suspect that, depending on what one thinks those terms mean, one can construct an argument for the application of either one.

What a ridiculous waste of time!

When judging a church denomination, parish, diocese, organization, ministry, whatever . . . isn’t the question not whether it is “Leftist” or “Rightist” but whether it embodies and follows the gospel? Whether it and those people who claim membership or activity within it have denied themselves and taken up their cross and followed Jesus? And when we make that discernment, exercise that judgment, aren’t we called to do so with the greatest possible amount of charity, allowing the possibility that others may perceive the gospel mandate differently from ourselves? “Faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.” (1 Cor. 13;13) That’s neither “Leftist” nor “Rightist” in my thinking.

Here’s my final thought on this subject . . . OK, it’s not my final thought; I’ll probably have more to say or write at some other time . . . but for now, it’s the concluding bit of what I’m writing today.

Any time I am tempted to label someone else in the church or some church group or some theological or ministerial activity, to say “That’s Leftist” or “That’s Rightist,” I remind myself of the question asked by one of America’s best popular theologians, the late cartoonist Charles Schultz speaking through the character of Snoopy:

You Might Be Wrong

Keeping that in mind, my hope is that Christ will not be ashamed of me.

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

We Should Think . . . – From the Daily Office – August 21, 2014

From the Acts of the Apostles:

An angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go towards the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a wilderness road.) So he got up and went.

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Acts 8:26-27a (NRSV) – August 21, 2014)

Telephone Call to MinistryI suppose that if “an angel of the Lord” told me to “get up and go” that I’d do as Philip did, even in these times when a trip to Gaza would not be the most pleasant journey one could make. I have often remarked at the willingness of the early disciples to drop everything and respond to these calls to ministry. The response of the first of the apostles, of Simon Peter and his brother Andrew, of James and John (the sons of Zebedee), to leave their fishing businesses and take off with Jesus is the same. (Mt 4:18-22) The response of Matthew (or was he called Levi) to leave his tax booth is the same. (Mt 9:9) “Come” and they come; “get up and go” and they go. Modern folk are seldom so swift to respond.

Of course, we live in a world (at least in the United States . . . at least in the Episcopal Church in the United States) that discourages swift responses to God’s call.

We should really think about that!

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

Anglo? Israel? What Is Truth? – From the Daily Office – August 20, 2014

From the Psalter:

“Greatly have they oppressed me since my youth,”
let Israel now say;
“Greatly have they oppressed me since my youth,
but they have not prevailed against me.”
The plowmen plowed upon my back
and made their furrows long.

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Psalm 129:1-3 (BCP Version) – August 20, 2014)

Multivocality Depicted as Speech BubblesTruth, United States Senator Hiram Johnson observed in 1917, is the first casualty of war. When war becomes nearly universal is truth in danger of being fully obliterated? I don’t think so; I think truth will ultimately survive and prevail. My faith is that the Truth will no doubt prevail, but for the moment, I am speaking neither of grand philosophical concepts nor of the One who made the audacious claim, “I am the Truth.” (Jn 14:6) Rather, I speak simply of factual accuracy and of the intellectual integrity of those who communicate; that truth is suffering some mighty hurtful body blows at present.

Following up on Senator Johnson’s observation several decades later, linguist William Lutz (best known as the editor of the Quarterly Review of Doublespeak) suggested language as an alternative “first casualty of war” because, he said, “with language goes the truth.” In a 1992 essay in English Today, Lutz argued that in times of war and conflict language becomes corrupted and turned into “an instrument for concealing and preventing thought, not for expressing or extending thought.” (The First Casualty)

I was reminded of Johnson and Lutz this week when Missouri’s Republican lieutenant governor, in response to the civil unrest in Ferguson following the killing of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old black man, by a white police officer, suggested that those with grievances (and they and their complaints are many and legitimate) should turn not to the streets but to the “Anglo-American jurisprudence tradition.” Almost immediately a fire-storm erupted on social media and in the left-leaning press accusing the man of being a “white supremacist” because of his use of the term “Anglo-American.”

I was particularly astounded to see religious journalists, pastors, preachers, and essayists, friends and colleagues whom I respect, jumping on this bandwagon. I suggested in a couple of Facebook discussions that “Anglo-American” is not a white racist buzzword, that it is a term of art to those who study or have studied (as the Missouri politician and I both have) the law and the history of the American judicial system. It refers to the historical reality that our system and our preconceptions of fairness, equity, and justice stem from origins in the laws and processes of England and English jurisprudence (the “Anglo” part) imported to and further developed in this country (the “American” part). I have no doubt that our judicial system (and our entire society) embody a systemic racism that must be addressed, but vehement criticism of the Missouri lieutenant governor for use of a longstanding and venerable term of art is not the way to do it. As I pointed out, I have used the term “Anglo-American” myself on many occasions in briefs, oral arguments, and lectures, and I have never used it to mean “white supremacy,” so I give the Missouri politician the benefit of the doubt.

As I thought more about it, it took me back to my college days in the late 1960s and early 1970s in Southern California. Those were the heydays of La Raza Unida, LULAC, the United Farm Workers, and other Chicano labor and political organizations. (Does anyone even use the terms “Chicano” or “Chicana” any longer?) In the rhetoric of the day, any non-hispanic caucasian was an “Anglo.” It didn’t matter where in northern Europe one’s ancestors may actually have come from — Ireland, France, and Germany (my own heritage), Poland and Ukraine (my then-girlfriend’s background), or Scandinavia (my roommate’s family), we were all “Anglos.” What had previously been a prefix referring specifically to the English became an all-inclusive term for white people in general. The racial and ethnic conflict of the day corrupted the language; truth suffered. Apparently, the corruption still taints almost a half-century later.

Then this evening’s psalm — “let Israel now say” — and I am confronted with my own failure to embrace multiple word meanings, my own tendency to corrupt language and to distort truth! I hear the words of the psalm, “Greatly have they oppressed me since my youth,” and I hear them as untrue in today’s world. Israel (the modern nation state) is not oppressed; it is the oppressor! I hear Israel’s metaphoric claim that “plowmen [have] plowed upon my back,” and it rankles me! It is Israel with her air force and her bombs who is “plowing upon the backs” of others! I must divorce myself from my modern irritation for it is not the psalm but my reaction to it which is untrue. The word Israel is a word of many meanings, for some of which the psalm is true; for others, not.

Who is this “Israel”? What does the name mean?

Israel could mean

  • Jacob, son of Isaac, who spent a night wrestling with God and was given this new name
  • His genetic descendants
  • Those who adhere to the religion of Judaism as it has evolved from its earliest beginnings
  • Those like myself who adhere to the Christian faith, the “New Israel” grafted to the old (Romans 11)
  • The ancient ethnic “nation” of diverse tribes (twelve?) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean, through its various permutations of governance
  • The original singular kingdom which was one of the iterations of that “nation”
  • The subsequent northern kingdom which rebelled against the central imperial government and established itself as a separate entity
  • The modern nation state established by United Nations Resolution 181 in 1947
  • The land on which that nation state sits
  • The additional land of “Greater Israel” claimed by ultra-Orthodox Zionists
  • And a host of additional meanings others may list

How I hear, interpret, pray, accept, reject, or otherwise respond to this evening’s (and any other) psalm naming “Israel” depends on which of these meanings I choose to accept at the moment, and in that choice lies either truth or falsehood. If I choose to accept only one of those meanings to the exclusion of all others, I corrupt language, I betray truth.

The internet discussion of “Anglo” focused (I think) on a single, limited understanding of the term and, in doing so, distorted it and betrayed the truth. There may have been truth — the truth of white privilege, the truth of non-uniform application of laws, the truth of a sometimes failing judicial system — but there was also falsehood and distortion — the condemnation of the Missouri lieutenant govern as a racist (he may be, I don’t know, but the use of the word is hardly sufficient evidence by itself), the dismissal of the historical term is nothing more than a “white supremacist buzzword,” the rejection of the notion of “Anglo-American civilization” as an oxymoron.

Back in college, I often protested, “I am not an Anglo!” My Irish and French ethnic heritage bristles at the very suggestion. And, yet, as an Anglican Episcopalian, as an American lawyer, as a speaker of the English language (corrupted though my American version may be), and in may other ways, I am very much an Anglo. As a student and practitioner of Anglo-American jurisprudence (I am still licensed and admitted to practice in two states and before the Federal judiciary), I am an Anglo. As a user of the term “Anglo-American,” however, I am not a white supremacist but, as a white person in the “Anglo-American civilization” which the Missouri politician lauded, I am a person who possesses (and must be conscious of) white privilege. Youthful protest notwithstanding, I must accept and admit that I am an Anglo.

My negative reaction to the psalm is the same. To be certain, in one sense, the modern state of Israel is not oppressed, nor is its back being plowed, but perhaps in another sense there is truth about the modern nation in the ancient psalm. If I am to hear that truth, I must not distort the language by closing off alternative understandings.

Who are these “Anglos”? Who is this “Israel”? There is more than a single answer to each question and the answers are many and varied, and in all of the several answers there is truth.

“What is truth?” Pilate famously asked. (Jn 18:38) Jesus did not answer him, but had elsewhere asserted, “You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” (Jn 8:32) It will only do so if we open ourselves to it. Truth is multi-vocal, and even though we may not want wish to hear all of the voices of truth, but we need to do so. To the extent that we limit, distort, or corrupt the language of our conversations, religious or political, we will be unable to hear its many voices. We must be open to truth’s multi-vocality; only then will the truth set us free.

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

An Aquifer – From the Daily Office – August 19, 2014

From the Psalter:

I lift up my eyes to the hills; from where is my help to come?

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Psalm 121:1 (BCP Version) – August 19, 2014)

AquiferI love Psalm 121 for a variety of reasons. It is the psalm which the sanctoral lectionary provides for the feast of St. Francis of Assisi (October 4), always a favorite saint. It is the psalm my late mother chose to be read at her funeral. It is one of the psalms of ascent which pilgrims to the Temple are believed to have sung as they made their way to Jerusalem for the major festivals of ancient Judaism; on pilgrimage in Israel and Palestine, my wife and I recalled it as we rode in a travel coach from Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv to ancient city. There many good memories, some joyful, some sad, all meaningful, associated with it.

Its first verse seems particularly appropriate this week as the world has come through and continues to experience the tragedy of conflict in Gaza, the carnage that is the on-going fighting in Iraq, and the violence that has erupted in Ferguson, Missouri. I can imagine people on every side of every one of those situations lifting their eyes and wondering where help is going to come from.

Help, the psalm assures us, comes from the Lord, “the maker of heaven and earth.” But I sometimes think that many (if not most) find that about as helpful as Job did: “Oh, that I knew where I might find him . . . If I go forward, he is not there; or backward, I cannot perceive him; on the left he hides, and I cannot behold him; I turn to the right, but I cannot see him.” (Job 23:3a,8-9) We live in a world where people do not know where to find God, do not know where to look for strength.

I would suspect that most who acknowledge the objective reality of God when asking the question posed in this psalm look for help “out there somewhere” hoping to find God swooping in like Superman bounding tall buildings, or more disturbingly like American bombers defending an Iraqi dam. On the other hand, those who deny the reality of God either don’t bother to look at all or (more commonly) also look “out there somewhere” expecting never to see anything.

A few, however, will know that (as St. Bernard de Clairvaux observed) our spiritual nourishment comes from the place where we think, pray and work, that we begin our spiritual journey where we are and not somewhere else. Moses promised his people that God was bringing them “into a good land, a land with flowing streams, with springs and underground waters welling up in valleys and hills,” (Dt 8:7) and while that may have been the promise of real and tangible place it is also a metaphor for the spiritual reality of God’s help and strength. Jesus told the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s Well that he would give those who asked the water of life which would become in them “a spring of water gushing up to eternal life.” (Jn 4:14)

God’s help, God’s strength, God’s spirit is like an aquifer underlying the soil of our lives. We tap that help and strength by going within, by searching the core of our being, not by looking “out there somewhere.” Yes, like the psalmist, we lift up our eyes to hills as we wonder where to find help, but we must turn our gaze around to actually discover it.

Certainly the people of Gaza, Iraq, and Missouri are right to look for help from outside, but such help is contingent and temporary; it cannot produce any real, lasting, long-term solution. Real change will only come when all people look deep within and tap that spiritual aquifer to which we all have access, that underground stream of living water, that spring of eternal life which has been promised all along.

From where is my help to come? From the Lord, deep within not “out there somewhere.”

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

Russian Steam Locomotive? – From the Daily Office – August 18, 2014

From the Gospel according John:

[Jesus said:] “Very truly, I tell you, anyone who hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life, and does not come under judgment, but has passed from death to life. Very truly, I tell you, the hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.”

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – John 5:24-25 (NRSV) – August 18, 2014)

Russian Steam LocomotiveDid Jesus actually say these things? Most contemporary bible scholars would probably answer “No.” The author of John’s Gospel has made Jesus say the things a largely Jewish community of the church in the late 1st Century, a church struggling to cope with its separation from traditional Judaism, believed about Jesus; Jesus is thus both the subject and the interpreter of the message of John’s Gospel. In the 21st Century, we might have preferred the author to have included the interpretation of Jesus in the narrative, not in the words spoken by the character of Jesus portrayed here, but that’s not what we’ve got. What we’ve got is the Jesus remembered by a community with a highly developed Christology telling that community, and us, who Jesus was then and now.

Realizing that helps one realize that this is not Jesus’ predicting the end of the world as we know it. The tenses of verbs in this passage are important. The passing of believers “from death to life” is something that has already happened; it is not something in the future. The coming hour “is now here;” it is a present reality not something for which we are still waiting. This is a spiritual reality, not a prediction about physical reality. Death and life, eternity and judgment, coming hour and voice of the Son of God are all metaphoric terms describing a believer’s present spiritual reality, whether that believer is a 1st Century Jew or a 21st Century Gentile.

Metaphoric language is often difficult to understand, especially when the metaphor is an unfamiliar one. It can be confusingly dreamlike and stubbornly unenlightening. The past few days, recovering from minor surgery on my knee (a partial meniscectomy), I have also been “detoxing” from the general anesthesia used during surgery and the pain management medication prescribed afterward (which I only took for 36 hours). Apparently, vivid dreams are a part of that detoxification process.

One of the recurring images of these dreams is travel on a Russian cross-country train pulled by an antique steam engine! I have never been to Russia, rarely traveled anywhere by train, and never in steam-engine driven conveyance; as metaphors for something, these are highly unfamiliar images. To say the least, this imagery is disconcerting, disorienting, and (as I said) stubbornly unenlightening. I do believe that dreams, especially those we remember, are ways in which our minds work out issues in non-rational ways; I believe they are ways our psyches provide us insights not accessible by the conscious mind. But what are my dreams trying to tell me?

When I read today’s Gospel with Jesus’ interpretive discourse today, I have a similar experience of disorientation; I have almost as little experience with John’s images as I do with Russian steam locomotives. I have no direct experience of death though I have witnessed it; I have no direct experience of divine judgment though I have courtroom experience with its earthly analog; I have no direct experience of the voice of the Son of God though I have heard the voices of parents and children. What is scripture trying to tell me when John’s Jesus uses these metaphoric images?

Fortunately, as Walter Brueggemann has often reminded his readers, metaphors are not univocal, nor do they claim a one-to-one correlation with reality. They speak differently each time we encounter them. Today scripture’s voice maybe as confusing as the dream of a Russian train; tomorrow it may be as clear as a bell; the next day . . . who knows?

What I do know is this, that everyday I am called to listen to the voice of scripture and, in it, hope to hear the voice of the Son of God which promises life. Everyday, I must climb aboard the Russian steam-driven train that is Holy Write and ride where it takes me. Everyday, I must wrestle with scripture as Jacob wrestled with the angel at Peniel and hope that, as he saw God face to face and lived, so may I.

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

I Believe – From the Daily Office – August 15, 2014

From the Gospel according John:

There was a royal official whose son lay ill in Capernaum. When he heard that Jesus had come from Judea to Galilee, he went and begged him to come down and heal his son, for he was at the point of death. Then Jesus said to him, “Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe.” The official said to him, “Sir, come down before my little boy dies.” Jesus said to him, “Go; your son will live.” The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him and started on his way. As he was going down, his slaves met him and told him that his child was alive. So he asked them the hour when he began to recover, and they said to him, “Yesterday at one in the afternoon the fever left him.” The father realized that this was the hour when Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live.” So he himself believed, along with his whole household.

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – John 4:46b-53 (NRSV) – August 15, 2014)

Apostle's Creed in Prayer BookJohn uses the word “believe” three times in this short passage: once quoting Jesus about witnesses to his acts of power and twice regarding the royal official’s state of mind. What, precisely, does John mean by doing so? That is one of the ponderable but unanswerable questions about scripture, the precise meaning of a biblical author.

John wrote in Greek and in each of the three cases here the Greek word used is some form of the verb pisteuo, which is also occasionally translated as “faith” and as “trust.” It does not usually carry a strong sense of intellectual assent to a doctrine or concept, although our English “believe” certainly does. Jesus, most likely, did not actually use a Greek word in his statement; more likely he spoke Aramaic in which (as in Hebrew) the word for “believe” is ‘aman and, like the Greek, it does not carry a strong association with intellectual concurrence to a proposition.

When we read or hear John’s testimony in English, therefore, we have to appreciate both the ambiguity of the original and the rather different thrust of our modern understanding of the word “believe”. What we especially must not do is hear John’s “believe” in the same way that we use the word in the creeds.

Of course, when I make such a statement I am immediately confronted by the realization that I have not the slightest idea what you mean by the word “believe” when you recite the Nicene Creed! Even more so, I am confronted by my own lack of clarity when I recite the creed.

Recently, my friend and colleague in ordained ministry, Presbyterian elder Mark Sandlin, published an essay on his blog The God Article entitled “Jesus Is Not My God” in which he confessed to being a heretic by beginning with the declaration, “I am a believer. Mostly. I believe that there is probably a god . . . .” Mark then followed up with, “I also believe there might not be a god. . . .” So how is Mark using “believe”? I think (notice I avoided using the word “believe”) that he is saying that he can intellectually assent to those propositions.

That’s not, however, how I understand the word when it pops up in the Nicene Creed which, as a liturgical Episcopalian, I recite publicly at least once each week, or the Apostle’s Creed which, as a practitioner of the Daily Office, I recite twice each day. I regularly say that I believe that there is a God, that that God created everything, that God had a Son and that Jesus the Anointed One is that Son, that Jesus was born of a virgin, that Jesus was killed on a cross, that he rose from the dead, that he went to heaven and that I expect him to return.

When I do so, however, I am not limiting myself to merely assent to the factual accuracy of those statements. In fact, I’m not even concerned with facticity when I make these statements of belief. In the discussion in the comments about Mark’s “heretical” essay, I said this:

I have no problem whatsoever saying the traditional creeds (Nicene, Apostle’s), every single word of them – virgin birth, death on cross, resurrection, expected return, the whole kit-and-kaboodle. (Did I spell “kaboodle” correctly?) That’s because I understand that “believe” doesn’t mean “assent to the scientific [or historical, I will now add] factual accuracy” of the statements set forth. “Believe” means I trust that these things mean something — usually something more than I currently understand and certainly something a lot more important than mere scientific [or historical] factual accuracy.

I don’t (I hasten to add) disbelieve the factuality of the statements in the creeds, don’t get me wrong, but if it turned out that Mary wasn’t, for example, a virgin, I would still recite the creedal words without a qualm. They are metaphoric; they are symbolic; it’s what they say about Jesus, not what they say about Mary, that is important. Or suppose someone actually were to find and verify a bunch of bones as being the remains of Yeshua of Nazareth; I would still assert my belief in his resurrection. Why? Because his truth, his gospel, the good news that God loves the human race was resurrected in, made alive by, and continues to sustain us in his church.

Whatever Jesus and John may have meant by the word “believe” in this story of the healing of the royal official’s son, that’s what I understand it to be in the creeds. I trust in the importance of what the creedal assertions point us toward. Far from being answers, the creedal statements are starting points for further spiritual exploration; they raise more questions than they answer. And I believe (I am using the word intentionally) that exploring those questions is a healthy and health-giving spiritual activity.

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

Of Tombs and Siblings – From the Daily Office – August 14, 2014

From the Book of Acts:

[Stephen the Deacon answered the High Priest in the council and said:] “Joseph sent and invited his father Jacob and all his relatives to come to him, seventy-five in all; so Jacob went down to Egypt. He himself died there as well as our ancestors, and their bodies were brought back to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought for a sum of silver from the sons of Hamor in Shechem.”

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Acts 7:14-16 (NRSV) – August 14, 2014)

Icon of the Martyrdom of St PhiloumenosShechem was known as Sychar in Jesus’ time. Near that land that Abraham had bought for use as a tomb, just a short walk south from the traditional location of Joseph’s tomb, is a well that belonged to Jacob. At that well, Jesus stopped to ask a Samaritan woman for a drink; part of the story of that meeting and Jesus’ conversation with the woman (the longest of all the conversations recorded in the Gospels) is today’s Gospel text (John 4:27-42).

Near Sychar the Romans built the Greek-named city of Flavia Neapolis which grew large and encompassed the ancient Jewish and Samaritan city. As the predominant local language changed to Arabic, the Greek name was retained but shortened and Arabicized, and now the modern city of Nablus is among the largest Arab cities in the Holy Land.

Over the site of Jacob’s Well stands the Greek Orthodox Church of St. Photini. The name Photini is given by Orthodox tradition to the Samaritan woman; it means “light bringer” in recognition of her bringing the light of Christ to the people of the city. The first church dedicated to her at the site was built in 311 AD.

There are two tombs at St. Photini Church. One inside houses the remains of Archimandrite Philoumenos, a priest who almost single-handedly restored the ancient church to its present modern condition. In 1979 a group of radical Zionists from a nearby Israeli settlement claimed Jacob’s Well, which is in a chapel inside the crypt of the church, as a Jewish holy place and demanded that crosses and icons be removed. A week later, on November 29, Fr. Philoumenos was hacked to death with an ax in the crypt and the church was desecrated. Although it is widely believed that the settlers were responsible, no one was ever convicted of the priest’s murder. Fr. Philoumenos was ranked among the Saints of the Church of Jerusalem on August 30, 2008, and his feast day set on November 29, the anniversary of his martyrdom.

Fr Justinus's TombThe second tomb is that of Fr. Justinus, the priest who took over the church from St. Philoumenos and continued his work of restoration. An accomplished artist, Fr. Justinus wrote all of the icons which now decorate the nave, sanctuary, and crypt, including an icon of the martyrdom of St. Philoumenos. Fr. Justinus’s tomb is empty because he is still alive. He built his tomb himself and it is placed just outside the front door of the church; he walks past it everyday coming from his residence in the neighboring monastery to the church. It is a daily reminder of his (and our) mortality and of the dangers he (and many) face in the on-going violence or threat of violence that characterizes the Holy Land today.

If we were to read further in Acts (and we will tomorrow and the day after) we would read of the martyrdom of Stephen. His address to the Sanhedrin (perhaps one would best characterize it as a polemical sermon) so enraged his hearers that “they dragged him out of the city and began to stone him” (Acts 7:58) which resulted in his death. We are told that “devout men buried Stephen and made loud lamentation over him” (8:2) but we are not told where his burial place may have been, though surely it is in or near Jerusalem.

Nonetheless, his sermon about Jesus at Jacob’s Well in Shechem-Sychar-Nablus, the well’s location near Joseph’s Tomb and its intimate connection to the martyrdom of St. Philoumenos, and the eventual outcome of Stephen’s address are stark reminders that the Good News of God (whether that be the Covenant of the Old Testament or the Gospel of the New) is not the promise of an easy life. One would not be surprised to hear the Almighty singing the lyrics of that old country song:

I beg your pardon; I never promised you a rose garden.
Along with the sunshine, there’s gotta be a little rain sometime.
When you take you gotta give so live and let live and let go.
I beg your pardon, I never promised you a rose garden.

In fact, Jesus did pretty much that when he disabused his disciples, “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Mat. 10:34)

The People of God are called to be risk-takers and, sometimes, to risk even death. Christians most surely must know that; we have only the example of our Lord to prove it. But it is also true of all the children of Abraham, not only Christians but also Jews and Muslims. What is sad is that Abraham’s descendants cannot live peaceably among themselves, that it is often our Abrahamic “siblings” from whom we face the greatest danger (sometimes even more so from our brothers and sisters within the same faith group). I believe that this breaks God’s heart!

As he died, Stephen the Deacon “knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them.’” (Acts 7:60) So should we all pray for those who persecute us, and let us pray especially for all who are the spiritual descendants of Abraham, that there may be peace among Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

(Note: The icon of the martyrdom of St. Philoumenos may be photographed by pilgrims and tourists, and those photographs are to be found widely posted on the internet, the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority will not permit the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem nor the parish church or monastery to reproduce the icon. It is considered politically inflammatory and is therefore censored.)

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

Most Definitely – From the Daily Office – August 13, 2014

From the Book of Acts:

Now during those days, when the disciples were increasing in number, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. And the twelve called together the whole community of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should neglect the word of God in order to wait at tables. Therefore, friends, select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this task, while we, for our part, will devote ourselves to prayer and to serving the word.” What they said pleased the whole community, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, together with Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. They had these men stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.

(From the Daily Office Lectionary – Acts 6:1-6 (NRSV) – August 13, 2014)

Coptic Pope Selected by a ChildMy wife refuses to use the word “coincidence.” She claims there are no such things. The concurrence in time of apparently unrelated but complementary and mutually reinforcing events, she asserts, is the intentional activity of the Holy Spirit. Nothing, “coincidental” (in the popular understanding of the word) about it.

Well, today one of these God-incidents, as she calls them, has occurred. When we are given this passage of scripture to read, we are also treated to the announcement of the Joint Nominating Committee for the Election of the Presiding Bishop (JNCPB) that it has issued a Call for Discernment and Profile for the election of the 27th Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church. (Notice all the “this is terribly important” capital letters in that announcement!) The “Call and Profile” can be found here: it is TWENTY pages long! The coincidence (Sorry, dear!) of this reading and this announcement seems instructive.

Luke (the author of Acts) doesn’t tell us how the apostles and the early Christian community actually called, profiled, [s]elected, and chose the first seven deacons, but I somehow doubt that they spent several months producing a twenty page document detailing the perceived needs, duties, qualifications, objectives, potential ministries, goals, and whatever-else-corporate-America-is-currently-buzzwording-for-CEOs of the job. Granted deacons are not presiding bishops. (Truth be told, I think deacons are more important than presiding bishops.) But diakonia is diakonia at whatever hierarchical level it may be performed.

I think the church has gotten lost. I hate to say that, but I think the church has truly gotten lost in the dark woods of corporate leadership process. We have followed the guidebook of the Harvard MBA and seem no longer to hear (or heed) the promptings of the Holy Spirit. As much as I value the democratic processes that make the Episcopal Church unique among Anglicans and the other branches of the Christian faith which preserve the Catholic Tradition, those processes do not and should not be permitted to make us a religious reflection of a for-profit corporation. What works (assuming it does work) for shareholders, directors, and managers of Wall-Street-traded business entities may not (probably does not) work for the church, but we seem to have adopted those processes and methods lock, stock, and barrel.

We use these methods now to select rectors of parishes, bishops of dioceses, and (now) the Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopal Church. I ask, in all sincerity, have they worked? And my answer would be, “Sometimes.” Sometimes I believe the Holy Spirit uses our business methods and processes to do her work and help us select the best person. And sometimes I think our business processes and methods get in the way, and that the Holy Spirit just shrugs her shoulders, sits back, and waits for next time . . . .

When the Episcopal Cafe made note of the “Call and Profile” and posted that article on Facebook, I made this comment:

Put the names of all canonically eligible bishops in a large chalice then have my yet-to-be-born grandchild (who will be 9 months old and in attendance with his/her deputy parents) – or some other available innocent child – draw one name slip from the chalice. Make that person PB. Trust the Holy Spirit and stop all this corporate-America profiling-and-politicking nonsense.

This is a riff on the method the Coptic Orthodox Church uses to select its popes (as reported by NBC News). I believe it would work for us as well as, if not better than, all the profiling, job describing, nominating, and electing we go through; it is just as likely to be used and guided by the Holy Spirit, and maybe even more so. It was, basically, the method the apostles used to select a successor for Judas (Acts 1:15-26) and, in all honesty, I don’t think we’ve improved on it in nearly 2,000 years of adopting, changing, and monkeying with other methods.

My son is a clergy deputy to the upcoming General Convention (and his wife is a lay deputy). I asked if he thought Jr. Funston would be up to the task of selecting a name from a chalice. He replied, “Most definitely.”

====================

A request to my readers: I’m trying to build the readership of this blog and I’d very much appreciate your help in doing so. If you find something here that is of value, please share it with others. If you are on Facebook, “like” the posts on your page so others can see them. If you are following me on Twitter, please “retweet” the notices of these meditations. If you have a blog of your own, please include mine in your links (a favor I will gladly reciprocate). Many thanks!

====================

Father Funston is the rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Medina, Ohio.

« Older posts Newer posts »