But you know, those orthodox amongst us knew over 30 years ago that the 1979 BCP was the "thin edge of the wedge". As we said then - "Remember it starts with passing the peace and ends with passing the rattlesnakes".

The Abomination of Homosexuality in the Episcopal Church

By Fr. Lawrence B. "Chip" Wheeler
January 9, 2010

We live in a time of severe crisis in the worldwide Church, especially in the Anglican sphere. This sort of crisis happens only once every 500 hundred years or so. Doctrines heretofore taken for granted have been brought into question.

The Episcopal Church recognizes a few historical documents, specific statements of faith that are aids to navigation in the troubled waters of the current age. One of these documents is the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, a product of the English Reformation first promulgated in the Church of England in 1571, modified and established by the Episcopal Church in 1801. Another document is the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral, modified in the form of Resolution 11 of the Lambeth Conference of bishops in 1888.

The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion

The sixth of the 39 Articles contains language that is sworn to by every candidate for ordination to holy orders: bishop (1979 BCP pg. 513): priest (pg. 526), and deacon (pg. 538). Here is how it reads:

"Article VI. Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation.
 (BCP pg. 868) 
Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read 
therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be 
believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation."

Conversely, we can agree that whatsoever is clearly proscribed by Holy Scripture must be eschewed. In case there were any doubt as to how much of the Old Testament applies to the lives of those who live under the New Testament, there is the seventh article:

"Article VII. Of the Old Testament (BCP pg. 869) Although the Law given from God by 
Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts 
thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are 
called Moral."

The moral laws of Moses contained in the Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament still stand, because our Lord himself said that they still stand. By saying that, Jesus passed on the moral law of Moses as part of the deposit of faith which he commanded to be continued. Witness the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount in St. Matthew's Gospel, chapter five:

Mt. 5:17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. Mat 5:18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Mat 5:19 "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others {to do} the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches {them,} he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Radical leaders of society or the Church may consider moral values to be changeable with the times. However, that notion is not true. The basic moral values that were established by God from the beginning are reflected in the unwritten natural law, and specifically promulgated in the written law of Moses. This law was not superceded by the new covenant established through Jesus Christ.

The Lambeth Quadrilateral

The first tenet of the Lambeth Quadrilateral reiterates part of Article VI, and upholds Article VII. The Church receives...

"The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, as "containing all things necessary to salvation," and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith."

The Anglican way of expressing the Faith once delivered to the saints is a Scriptural way, first and foremost. In times of crisis like our own present day, with its confusion of contrary claims to morality, the Church does well to look to the Scriptures for God's standards in these matters of grave concern.

The testimony of Holy Scripture against the abominable practice of homosexuality is confirmed in the following citations from both Testaments: Old and New. Any person who is humble enough to read the bible without prejudice will find absolutely incontrovertible evidence that homosexuality is a grave transgression of the will of God. Christians, whether clergymen or laity, who say otherwise demonstrate a blatant intellectual dishonesty.

Further, if they will not listen to the correction of faithful brothers and sisters in Christ, then they indicate a greater desire to embrace the errors of our present-day society than to defend the immutable authority of the Word of God, which has been entrusted to the Church. The following list of passages from the Scriptures is not exhaustive, but it includes most of the "whole counsel of God" from Scripture regarding homosexuality.

The Old Testament

First, we start with the story of Lot and his family in Sodom, the city that lends its name to the practice of sodomy. Two angels in the form of men have come to warn Lot that the city will be destroyed due to the sins of its citizens. This is what happened that night:

Gen 19:4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house. Gen 19:5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them." Gen 19:6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him Gen 19:7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. Gen 19:8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof." Gen 19:9 "Get out of our way," they replied. And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge. We'll treat you worse than them." They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door. Gen 19:10 But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door. Gen 19:11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door. Gen 19:12 The two men said to Lot, "Do you have anyone else here--sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, Gen 19:13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it."

This happened before the giving of the law to Moses, yet we see that the natural law that informed the conscience of man judged homosexual rape to be a "wicked

The Circumcision of Christ – Rev'd Paul Taylor, LL.M.
Not a sermon, just a thought

The Circumcision of Christ has two features which disturb modern man.
The first is the first shedding of holy blood. This generation is freaked out by the concept that the blood of Christ heals.

Many of the older hymns used to joyously sing about the blood of Christ
There were songs of blood from Emmanuel's veins making us as white as snow. This is what the Bible teaches, but modern man does not approve of the imagery.

High churchmen will recite the Agnes Dei every week but will still be repulsed when the image is brought home. If one has ever seen an auto accident, or combat, or been in an emergency room when someone is brought in, or seen animals slaughtered will know what image the Bible is talking about. Yet we are told by Holy Scripture that it is the blood of lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world.

The second disturbing problem for modern man is the concept that the holy blood is shed in strict obedience to the law.

The Old Testament is comprised of two parts: (a) The law, the first five books also called the Torah, and (b) the writings of the prophets.
The Summary of the Law can be read every Sunday, but the only thing that is picked up is love. “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” Matthew 22:40,(1928 BCP. P69).

You should note that the law and the prophets are not abolished. The message that the Old Testament is not abolished is clearly spelled out in Matthew. The Prophets are quoted all through the New Testament.

When Jesus was on earth, he taught from the Old Testament. In fact the customs of the Old Testament are used in Acts up until the time that the Holy Spirit comes to the disciples.

With respect the Law and the Prophets, St. Paul said (and St. Peter agrees) that the ceremonial and dietary laws are abolished and that one does not have to become Jewish to become a Christian. However, the Law remains. The words of the prophets remain. Both are to be heeded. One has to be more righteous than the scribes and the Pharisees in order to enter Heaven.

THE 12 DAYS OF CHRISTMAS




There is one Christmas Carol that has always baffled me. What in the world
do leaping lords, French hens, swimming swans, and especially the partridge who won't come
out of the pear tree have to do with Christmas?

From 1558 until 1829, Roman Catholics in England were not permitted to practice their faith openly. Someone during that era wrote this carol as a catechism song for young Catholics. It has two levels of meaning: the surface meaning plus a hidden meaning known only to members of their church. Each element in the carol has a code word for a religious reality which the children could remember.

The partridge in a pear tree was Jesus Christ.

Two turtle doves were the Old and New Testaments.

Three French hens stood for faith, hope and love.

The four calling birds were the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke & John.

The five golden rings recalled the Torah or Law, the first five books of the Old Testament.

The six geese a-laying stood for the six days of creation.

Seven swans a-swimming represented the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Spirit-Prophesy,
Serving, Teaching, Exhortation, Contribution, Leadership, and Mercy.

The eight maids a-milking were the eight beatitudes.

Nine ladies dancing were the nine fruits of the Holy Spirit -- Love, Joy, Peace, Patience,
Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Gentleness, and Self Control.

The ten lords a-leaping were the Ten Commandments.

The eleven pipers piping stood for the eleven faithful disciples.

The twelve drummers drumming symbolized the twelve points of belief in the Apostles' Creed.

St. Nicholas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Damascus
http://www.commonprayer.org/calend/propers/common.cfm
http://elvis.rowan.edu/~kilroy/JEK/12/04.html


St. Nicholas
(the feast of St. Nicholas is traditionally held on 6 December, a Lord's Day in 2009)

Nicholas was born in Asia Minor during the third century in the Greek colony of Patara in Lycia in the Roman province of Asia- today Antalya, Turkey — at a time when the region was Hellenistic in its culture and outlook. Nicholas became bishop of the city of Myra. He was very religious from an early age and devoted his life entirely to Christianity. According to legend, Nicholas was said to have rigorously observed the canonical fasts of Wednesdays and Fridays, even when an infant, by abstaining on those days from his mother's breasts. Nicholas is said to have been born to relatively affluent Christian parents in Patara, Lycia, where he also received his early schooling.

As the patron saint also of sailors, Nicholas is claimed to have been a sailor or fisherman himself. More likely, however, is that one of his family businesses involved managing a fishing fleet. When his parents died, Nicholas received his inheritance but is said to have given it away to the poor. So was St Nicholas a working, albeit wealthy, man who complemented his day job with caring for his congregation, or was he a full-time bishop? The impressive list of deeds of Nicholas seems to point to the latter. This does not mean, however, that his appointment to priest or bishop meant a complete rupture with his former life. More likely this was a gradual process.

Nicholas's early activities as a priest are said to have occurred during the persecution of Christians under the reign of co-ruling Roman Emperors Diocletian (reigned 284–305) and Maximian (reigned 286–305) In the Eastern Empire Galerius (reigned 305–311) continued the persecution until 311 when he issued a general edict of toleration from his deathbed. Nicholas survived this period, although his activities at the time are uncertain.

Following Galerius' death his surviving co-ruler Licinius (reigned 307–324) mostly tolerated Christians. As a result their community was allowed to further develop, and the various bishops who acted as their leaders managed to concentrate religious, social, and political influence as well as wealth in their hands. In many cases they acted as the heads of their respective cities. It is apparently in this period that Nicholas rose to become bishop of Myra. Judging from tradition, he was probably well loved and respected in his area, mostly as a result of his charitable activities. As with other bishops of the time, Nicholas's popularity would serve to ensure his position and influence during and after this period.

The destruction of several pagan temples is also attributed to him, among them the temple of Artemis. Because the celebration of Diana's birth is on December 6, some authors have speculated that this date was deliberately chosen for Nicholas's feast day to overshadow or replace the pagan celebrations.

Not only was Nicholas intolerant of pagans, he was also intolerant of Arianism. Nicholas is listed as a participant in the First Council of Nicaea. There according to legend he became so angry upon hearing the views of Arius that he rushed over to the heretic and gave him a tremendous box on his ears, sending him to the ground.

Nicholas is also known for coming to the defence of the falsely accused, often preventing them from being executed, and for his intercession on behalf of sailors and other travelers. The popular veneration of Nicholas as a saint seems to have started relatively early. Justinian I, Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire (reigned 527–565) is reported to have built a temple (i.e. a church building) in Nicholas's honor in Constantinople.



Ohio Anglican blogsopt

The Second Sunday in Advent - Rev. Dr. Louis R. Tarsitano

Hearing God's Word

'Blessed Lord, who hast caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our
learning; Grant that we may in such wise hear them, read, mark, learn,
and inwardly digest them, that by patience and comfort of thy holy Word,
we may embrace, and ever hold fast, the blessed hope of everlasting
life, which thou hast given us in our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen'
(Collect for Advent II, BCP 92).

The choice of today's Epistle and Gospel to be read on the Second Sunday
in Advent is much older than the Collect that I just quoted. It has
always been a Christian concern, from the very beginning, as St. Paul
lays it out in his Epistle to the Romans (15:4ff), that the members of
the Church, as the Body of Christ on earth, should live in obedience,
fellowship, and internal peace until the Lord's return. And the Church
has been looking forward to that return, to the fulfillment of the twin
prophecies of the end of this world and of the arrival of the kingdom of
God in all its glory, delivered by Christ in today's Gospel, since the
Lord ascended into the cloud of his Father's glory forty days after the
first Easter.

Since the Reformation, we pray the old Collect for this day on the
Sunday before Advent. We heard it just two weeks ago: 'Stir up, we
beseech thee, O Lord, the wills of thy faithful people; that they,
plenteously bringing forth the fruit of good works, may by thee be
plenteously rewarded; through Jesus Christ our Lord' (BCP 225). And it
is a good thing to be reminded that the good works that we do in this
life are entirely the fruits of God's grace at work in us, so that if we
are faithful and loyal to him by his grace, God's grace itself will
answer for us on the Last Day.

But the Reformation presented additional challenges to that state of
godliness that St. Paul advises in the Epistle. Furthermore, many who
called themselves 'Christians' were grossly unprepared to face the final
judgment, which Jesus Christ declares _will_ come, on the strength of
God's grace alone. The end of the world was for them a matter of
superstitious dread, rather than an occasion of joy at the Lord's
return. They were attracted to every crazy preacher and crack-brained
theory that offered them a supposedly fool-proof gimmick to survive the
end of the world. Rather like today's dieting crazes, in which people
will do or buy almost anything imaginable to lose a few pounds, those
poor souls would do or buy almost anything in order to purchase a place
in heaven for themselves, despite the alternative of the simple,
gracious, merciful invitation to life offered in the Holy Scriptures.

Thus, a new Collect was written for this Sunday in 1549, based on a key
passage from this morning's Epistle: 'For whatsoever things were written
aforetime were written for our learning [that is, for our
'instruction'], that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures
might have hope' (Romans 15:4). The only life that is eternal is the
life that Jesus Christ offers, according to the pattern and reality of
his own life. The only way to prepare for the Second Coming is in Jesus
Christ's way. The only way to have peace and fellowship in the Church,
as we await the Lord, is according to God's Word, who became incarnate
as the same Lord Jesus Christ. And the only way that we can know with a
certainty the will of our Father in heaven and the Gospel of his Son

A common mistake people make about Ordination. --- Artistree

Ordination is taught in the Old Testament and the New Testament.
I will give one example from the Pastoral Epistles of which St. Paul writes. This is in reference to when Timothy was ordained as Bishop of the Church of Ephesus in the year 65.
1 Timothy 4:14
14 "Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the eldership."

2 Timothy 1:6

6"For this reason I remind you to kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands. "

The laying on of hands is the Sacrament of Ordination through which Timothy receives spiritual grace to minister and the authority to govern the church in Ephesus.

1 Timothy 5:22
22Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin.

Here Paul tell Timothy not to ordain men to the ministry to quickly before a careful examination.

Jesus ordained 12 disciples (see Mark 3:14-15) and, later, appointed 70 others (see Luke 10:1).

2 Timothy 2:2
1You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.

When St. Paul speaks of "entrusting to reliable men" he is speaking of ordination of men who have the qualifications he lists for bishops, elders and deacons elsewhere in the Pastoral Epistles.

The Sacrament of Ordination, through the laying on of hands, Apostolic Succession, and the Historic Episcopate are easily proved by Scripture, both in the Old Testament and the New Testament. John Stott has a great study on the Pastoral Epistles in which he covers Timothy's Ordination in a book called "Guard the Truth" I highly recommend it to you.

Blessings,
Artistree

courtesy virtueonline

St. Andrew' Day - Fr Robert Hart

The first saint on the calendar of the Church is the one who introduced his brother to Christ. He stands at the beginning of our Church Year as if to introduce us to the Lord; or to remind us of our first introduction to Him.

If I wished to follow in the footsteps of some of today’s alleged New Testament scholars, the kind which C. S. Lewis criticized for their inability to read and understand classic literature, I would point out that this Gospel reading for the Feast of St. Andrew presents a different version of how the Galilean fishermen met Jesus than the accounts presented by St. John and St. Luke. For St. John and St. Luke both go into detailed stories of how Jesus met these four men, Peter and Andrew, James and John, unlike Matthew and Mark who begin by telling us that upon the call of Jesus to follow Him, they immediately left their nets and became His disciples. I could then conclude that the accounts contradict each other.
If, on the other hand, I want to use reason, common sense and logic, I will point out that the Church has always been aware of what is in all four Gospels, and that none of it was recently discovered by "New Testament scholars." I would also point out that the accounts of Matthew and Mark presuppose the fact that these four fishermen already knew Jesus, and had come to trust Him. Furthermore, it is obvious that they had been prepared in their minds and spirits to obey Him. This is obvious because they immediately left their nets, that is their profitable business partnership, to follow Him. So, what St. John and St. Luke provide is the details without which the calling of these four men, as presented by Matthew and Mark, is incomplete, in fact puzzling. Far from a contradiction, it is a perfect complement.
After all, it would not be in accord with Right Reason for men suddenly to commit their lives to following a stranger; the Church does not in its teaching recommend such rashness, but instead has always taught that we must test the spirits and test the prophecies. So wrote St. Paul and St. John in their epistles. In this account by St. Matthew, it is obvious from the immediacy of their obedience that these men already knew Jesus, and were waiting with some anticipation for Him to call them to be His disciples. The details are given in the complementary accounts of Luke and John. We see in Luke’s account that the toughest nut to crack, the one to come around with the most difficulty, was St. Peter. And this was due to his honest recognition of his own sinfulness, and his mistaken assumption that he must have been beyond God’s mercy.
And we learn other details from St. John’s Gospel. Andrew knew from the words of John the Baptist that Jesus was the Lamb of God. He knew somehow that this meant that He was the Messiah. This tells me that Andrew was a theologian of some skill; that he was more advanced in his understanding of scripture than were the leading Rabbis of his day. For, he figured out that the Lamb of God was a term which signified the Messiah. He correctly foresaw the meaning of the Suffering Servant prophecy in the 53rd chapter of Isaiah. I cannot see any other way for him to have connected the idea of the Messiah with the idea of the Lamb of God. The word Messiah is used in the Old Testament first of all when speaking of the priests, Aaron and his line, who offered sacrifice and made atonement for sin. Later, it is also used for the kings, the Royal line of David. Andrew seems to have grasped that the priestly ministry of the Messiah, the ministry of offering sacrifice, would be fulfilled before His reign as King could be revealed.
The life of St Andrew reminds us that the main point is what is revealed instead of the presence of mystery. Recently I read an account of contemporary liturgists (a word I loathe) who created their own version of the Mass. In it there is no Creed, and God is spoken of as the unknowable "it". Throughout their service- or perhaps dis-service- they emphasize mystery. Of course, we have mysteries because we are speaking of God. Indeed, our sacraments are mysteries, because we know not how they work. We do not fully understand the Incarnation or the Trinity because we cannot fully understand God. But, the liturgists with their own version of the

Prosperity Gospel - Michael S. Horton, Ph.D.

It's basically what the sixteenth century German monk turned church reformer Martin Luther called the "theology of glory": How can I climb the ladder and attain the glory here and now that God has actually promised for us after a life of suffering? The contrast is the "theology of the cross": the story of God's merciful descent to us, at great personal cost, a message that the Apostle Paul acknowledged was offensive and "foolish to Greeks."


Courtesy Virtueonline

Thanksgiving - Rev'd Paul Taylor, LL.M.
“O praise the Lord, for it is a good thing to sing praises unto our God; yea a joyful and pleasant thing it is to be thankful. (Psalm 147:1 bcp 522)

Thanksgiving never made it into the American book of Common Prayer until 1928. This does not mean Thanksgiving was not celebrated, because it was. A day of Thanksgiving was proclaimed in New England in the 1600's. There was gratitude for survival and gratitude for the bountiful harvests. The dates of the celebration shifted but the idea was the same.

With the Revolutionary War the day of Thanksgiving took on a different hue. Thanksgiving was thought of as a patriotic day. The leaders of our Revolution were not without the absolute conviction that God was on their side. They talked and fought with patriotic zeal that matched the prophets. They met in Philadelphia to produce a “Miracle at Philadelphia”. They wanted to renew God's covenant with his people,and they inserted moral values into a constitution that has lasted unto today.
These men built a system of government based on the state constitutions which were based on the covenants of the Old Testament.
They had the experience of the Articles of Confederation and they were convinced that, with the help of Almighty God, they would make a more perfect union for themselves and their posterity.

President Lincoln in the midst of a devastating Civil War asked for a day of Thanksgiving. Lincoln's idea of thanking God continued. Thanksgiving was a truly American idea conceived by moral men who devoutly believed in a divine creator. It was under this divine creator of the Bible that the American dream came into being and survived incredible obstacles, including a great Civil War.

We think of Thanksgiving as a day to gather with family and to overeat.
The date has been moved for commercial reasons but the idea of a National day of Thanksgiving is there. It is now celebrated in November and its timing is to give retailers enough time to sell their Christmas wares.

We as a nation have also wrapped the earlier ideas of the harvest into Thanksgiving. Yes, the idea of celebrating the bounty of the land is important, as it is the Lord God that makes bread come out of the ground. On Thanksgiving the Morning Prayer service drops the Venite and substitutes Psalm 147 to be read or sung.((bcp 264) (see also page 522)) What is stressed in there is thanks to God.

Job shook his fist but yet he stayed loyal to God. St. Paul awaiting execution told people “be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto your God”. Lincoln knew what Paul knew. In the midst of the worst that life can offer we must give thanks to God. Thanksgiving is a day to acknowledge the special blessings which belong to us as members of the family of God.

The secular humanists, like the Sadduces they so closely resemble, are nominally religious and nominally patriotic. Sadly they are neither.
Secular humanists are embarrassed that we landed in America. They are embarrassed that we planted crops after cutting down trees. They are embarrassed about being American and they simply do not want to hear anything about God. So Thanksgiving is reduced to compulsory family gatherings with too much food and drink and we gear up to spend money for another holiday that embarrasses secular humanists.

Our forefathers gave thanks in New England in the 1600's. Their descendants gave thanks at Bunker Hill and Valley Forge. Their descendants gave thanks during a great Civil War. Today things are not going well in the culture wars. The press is shooting our troops in the back just like they did in Vietnam. Governmental servants are more interested in turf than public service. Lobbyists have more to say than the ordinary citizen. Christians are not allowed to speak or pray in public and their church services are being monitored. There are curbs on religious freedom. All of these curbs are in the name of the established religion of the United States, secular humanism.

There is a lot to be angry about. There is a lot to despair about, but like St. Paul,facing death in shipwreck or in prison, told us giving thanks to God is what we are supposed to do.

We should remember the example of Jesus at the last supper. He knew that the agony of the cross awaited him. What did he do? He took bread and wine and with both the bread and wine he gave thanks and then he blessed them and gave them to his disciples.

As we observe this Thanksgiving we should give thanks to God. It is from God that all blessings flow.
AMEN

2006

Unworthily Receiving - Rev. Paul Taylor, LL.M.


St. Paul describes that there are two ways of being excommunicated. One is by action of the bishop and that practice is well known in all Christian faiths. A man can also be excommunicated by his own actions

1Cor 11:27 -34.
A man who unworthily receives the body of Christ condemns himself.

The third thing that goes with this is when a bishop or a priest asks someone not to receive, it is not out of meanness but rather out of concern for the man's soul.

PT

The Sunday next before Advent The Year in Christ - Rev'd Dr. Louis R. Tarsitano

“When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do” (John 6:5-6).
We come to the end, this morning, of one year of the church calendar, and we look forward to the beginning of another “year of the Lord” and another “year in the Lord” when we gather together next week.
The church calendar exists, after all, to place our lives perpetually into the context of the life of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, until we are called out of this world of space and time into eternity with the very same Savior. His life becomes our life, as we divide each year of worship and discipleship into two main divisions.
In the first division of the church year, then, we go chronologically through the earthly life and ministry of the Son of God made man. We prepare to celebrate his birth in on what we call “Christmas Day” by four weeks of prophecy, called Advent. These prophecies give the account of how the Father in heaven prepared the world for the first coming of his Son, and these prophecies force us to remember that the Word of God is sure—that the end of the world and the Last Judgment are just as certain as the birth in was and is a divine given.
After Christmas, beginning with the Feast of the Epiphany, the feast of Christ’s first manifestation to the Gentiles, represented by the Wise Men, we enter an entire season in which we review the events and the Scriptures in which the divine nature, the Godhead, of the Lord Jesus Christ was made manifest to the world. After this in Pre-Lent and Lent we are compelled to face the fact that the Son of God did not become Incarnate for an annual festival of “bambino worship.”
The Son of God became man to die for our sins. In the penitential seasons, then, we both admit our sinfulness and acknowledge Jesus Christ as the only cure. In fact, the Epistles and Gospels for Lent began as the final preparation of those who would be baptized on Easter Even, confessing Jesus Christ, once and for all, as their only Lord and Savior.
In Holy Week, we re-live the passion of Jesus Christ with Jesus Christ in his Church. We fast and deprive ourselves during the days when we commemorate the time that the body of our Savior lay in the tomb, and all our sorrow for sin turns to joy when Easter comes—when the Father gives victory and resurrection to the Son, promising the same to all the faithful in his Son.
In the final stage of this shared and re-lived biography of the Son of God made man, we celebrate his final earthly preaching to his disciples, his ascension into heaven to offer himself, once and for all, on our behalf, and the coming of the Holy Ghost to dwell in us, as the Lord Jesus Christ had promised. The bridge from this biographical portion of the church year to the next is Trinity Sunday.
On Trinity Sunday, no matter how improbably, we dare to celebrate God himself—the Three Eternal Persons of equal might, majesty, and dominion who are together One United God—the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This celebration is miraculous, not because of anything that we bring to it, but because of the condescension of the One True God in revealing himself to us, so that we might know him as he is, or at least as much as earthly creatures still in their travails may know the perfection of their Creator.
This worship of the Trinity, then, ushers in the second main division of the church year—namely, the teaching of the ways of God. The Sundays after Trinity, which end today, take us through the revealed will of our Father in heaven for the spiritual and moral governance of our lives. The Gospel is presented as news for us, and not just as news about God in Christ. We are called on to believe and to act, not on the basis of what the world around us tells us to do, but on the basis of what our loving and heavenly Father has told us about who and what he created us to be and about how he wishes us to live in this world and in the next.
And so we come to this morning’s Gospel, the final Gospel of the church year. It is account of the feeding of a multitude that had followed our Lord into the mountain wastes to hear him preach, near the time of the Passover. We know the story well enough. There is neither money to buy food, nor any place to buy it if the money were available. There is a boy who thought ahead, or whose mother thought ahead, who has with him what amounts to a lunchbox with five little barley loaves and two small fish (along the lines of sardines that can be smeared on the bread to give it flavor).
The boy offers what he has, and our Lord blesses it and tells the disciples to distribute the boy’s little lunch until the five thousand men that had followed Jesus to hear him preach, plus the women and children with them, had eaten as much as they liked.  And when the meal is over, there are twelve baskets of leftovers from the original lunch of five barley loaves and two fish.
So, why do we read this Gospel on this Sunday? The key is the twelve baskets of food remaining, corresponding to the twelve apostles that Christ would charge with delivering his Gospel to the world. In the desert of this world of sin, where do we go to feed the multitudes of the earth? Where do we find the bread of life? Where do we find something better than the Passover of the Old Testament.? The answer in every case is “Jesus Christ, who has known from the beginning what he was going to do.”
The twelve apostles have nothing to offer until Jesus Christ gives it to them, whether it is that one miraculous meal or the Gospel for all ages. No man, no human being of any rank or sort, possesses what the human race needs to live, in this world or the next, except for God made man, Jesus Christ. Today’s ministry, just as much as the ministry of the Apostles, is absolutely dependent on Jesus Christ in order to have anything to offer us along the way, and it is the way to life, rather than the way to death, if Jesus Christ is leading.
All of the true teaching, then, all of the Holy Scripture, and all of the miraculous meals of Christ’s own flesh and blood that we have been given in the Holy Communion in the holy year that ends today, came from Jesus Christ himself, at the will of the Father. All of the truth and of the Bread of Life that will feed the multitudes in the coming year will also be gifts from that one sacred source.
There is nothing for the Church to brag about in possessing the twelve baskets of hope and spiritual sustenance entrusted to her by Christ. There is nothing for any of us to boast about in having been invited to Jesus Christ’s table or in having been called together by him to be his people, his flock, his own Body.
And so we end and begin the church year in humility, and with a wonderful promise, represented in the faith and the generosity of that nameless boy who gave up his lunch. Once we have recognized and admitted that whatever we have is a gift from Christ, we are able to notice the fact that Jesus Christ, the Eternal Son of God, who is all-powerful, once accepted the tiny, unneeded help of that boy for the sake of grace and love. Our Savior, then, added to that small gift all of the power of God—the power to feed multitudes, the power to give remission of sins, and the power to give and sustain eternal life.
If we follow Jesus Christ in humility and gratitude into another church year, to be with him and to hear him, Jesus Christ has promised to multiply our tiniest virtues, our smallest gifts to him into blessings for our salvation and for the salvation of the whole human race. He does not need what we have to offer, but he accepts it out of love for us and makes it great.
That is, in fact, a good way of summarizing what the Church attempts for us in the keeping of the discipline of the church year—to feed us from the twelve baskets that Christ has provided and to deliver our everyday lives into the keeping of Jesus Christ, who will, in himself and in his own life, make the lives that we offer him great and everlasting.

—November 21, 2004

Oral and Holy Tradition Resources Alice C. Lindsey


Oral tradition and Holy Tradition.

Oral tradition is certainly part of Holy Tradition, but Holy Tradition also involves what has been written. Holy Tradition is about the Son of God and all that was passed orally and in writing about Him and His appearing.

These essays may be helpful:

http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2009/01/what-is-holy-tradition.html

http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2009/01/ideologies-opposed-to-holy-tradition.html

http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2009/09/recieved-tradition-vs-special.html

Types of Anglicans - Rev Paul Taylor, LL.M.

Elizabeth I by force of Arms created a unified Anglican church. (C of E)
There was a new prayerbook that looked catholic, but was not. There were the highly political 39 Articles which re invented Christianity 1500 years after the death of Christ. Lastly there were the homilies which admitted that the C of E was in fact protestant church.

The idea was to stop 200 years of religious warfare and cement Elizabeth's position of the throne of England. Henry VIII catholics could live with Geneva protestants. Neither had their way in the new church.
There was peace in our time so to speak. The reality was that there were separate groups living in one tent that were doing things differently.

To make a long story short there emerged

Anglo Catholics, Anglo Papists, High Church, Broad church,
Low church. Frankly no one really cared what you believe, if anything. This is Churchmanship at its finest. People who were actually religious were considered a bit strange. However, it its the nature of the risen Christ to reach out to his people. Horrors of horrors this even happens in well respected churches.

Anglo Catholics wanted to be catholic without submitting to catholic order and discipline. All the popes from Leo XIII were mean because they did not recognize them as Catholics.

Anglo Papists are an offshoot of the Anglo Catholics. They want to go to Rome but the overwhelming majority do not seem to be able to walk across the street to the local RCC.

High churchmen like the communion service better than the Choir offices. Fortunately no one has to explain why.

Low churchmen liked the choir offices of Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer (evensong in England). Fortunately no one has to explain why.
In the U.S Evening prayer sort of died out.

Broad Church was so frightfully thoughtful that they embraced high and low church at the same time. Civility ober allis. Enlightened tolerance is the more English term.

Recently the terminology has changed a bit. It's sort of Alice in wonderland where words mean what I say they mean.
The new word is evangelicals. In the good old days that would mean people who went out and preached the good news of the gospel. Today (and especially on the net) an evangelical is a person is is not Anglo Catholic. Now that we have simplified Anglicanism to these two groups we can get a better grip on what is and was is not and build new church.
These two groups do have things in common. (1) God is undoubtedly a gentleman and most certainly an Anglican. (2) People that go out and shout the good news of Christ crucified are religious extremists. What's worse they offend people.

So here you have it a look at the nuts inside the nutshell

Christmas shopping

The Orthodox Anglican Priest's Manual is available directly from the publisher Lulu
http://www.lulu.com/content/4872685

It it is also listed on Amazon.com using full title as there are other non orthodox versions.

It would make a perfect gift for your favorite clergyman. It's a gift of a lifetime which will give a lifetime of faithful prayerful service


Description:
The offices for the sick and dying are the forgotten child of the Book of Common Prayer. The rubric has not been updated since 1549, but much has changed since then. People go to hospitals and nursing homes instead of taking to their bed. With longer life spans and modern medicine, people are living longer and often experience more and longer hospitalizations. Visitation of the Sick has been shortened to reflect use in a hospital or nursing home instead of at home. The Reserved Sacrament is usually preferable when ministering to the sick. The Communion Service is intended for use by chaplains and parish clergy during visits to hospitals, nursing homes, and assisted living facilities. It could also be used outside of chaplaincy. Chaplains have found that many of those who are dying like to have the Psalms read to them, so the Psalter has been included from the 1928 BCP (except for Psalm 23, which is KJV).

The suggested retail price is $30.00 which is a bargain considering book prices today.

—Saint Andrew’s Church, Savannah
 
The Twenty-third Sunday after Trinity—November 3, 2002
 
Citizenship
 
“For our citizenship is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed unto the body of his glory, according to the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto himself” (Philippians 3:20-21).
 
Was St. Paul, who wrote the words that I just quoted, a loyal citizen of the Roman Empire? Certainly, we know that St. Paul was executed by that Empire for the offense of preaching the Gospel and for proclaiming a greater King than Caesar, but was St. Paul a good citizen?
 
We know from the Acts of the Apostles that St. Paul was not shy about revealing his Roman citizenship. We can read, for example, about his arrest in Jerusalem: “And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?” (Acts 22:25). Since Roman citizens had rights, this question troubled his captors: “Then the chief captain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea. And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born” (Acts 22:27-28).
 
And in the end, rather than yield himself to the Jerusalem mob or to the pliable local officials who might very well ignore the Roman law in order to placate the mob, St. Paul made a fairly ordinary Roman declaration: “For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar” (Acts 25:11). St. Paul went to Rome for his trial, and eventually he even died like a Roman, beheaded rather than crucified, as was his right as a citizen.
 
If we look at the evidence, we can see that St. Paul was a perfect Roman citizen, who placed only one limit on his earthly citizenship and on his willingness to obey the law of the Empire. He lived and died by that limit, but he did not choose it for himself, since it was nothing like a private opinion of his own. Rather, his Lord and our Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, had laid down that limit in the Gospel, as we heard reported by St. Matthew just this morning: “Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's” (Matthew 22:21).
 
The Lord God Almighty loves the nations of this world, or else he would not have sent his only-begotten Son to die for them and to redeem them. Nor would he have commanded his Son, at the moment of his Ascension, to deliver this Great Commission to the Church through the Apostles: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen” (Matthew 28:19-20).
 
God Almighty loves the nations, and that final “amen” is important. It signifies that this commission to teach, to convert, and to baptize “all nations” is the sworn Word of God and the permanent obligation of every Christian until the Second Coming, when the nations will pass away to be replaced by a new heaven and a new earth, identical in every way with the one and only Kingdom of God, and populated entirely by the adopted children of God.

The Twenty-second Sunday after TrinityL. R. Tarsitano—Saint Andrew’s Church, Savannah

The Twenty-second Sunday after Trinity—October 27, 2002

The Whammy

“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20).

Years ago, there was a character in the comic strips that had a mystical power called “the whammy.” He would screw up his face, go through various contortions, and put “the whammy” on this thing or that person to settle a score or to bring about some desired conclusion, and his will would always be done.

The teen-aged boys in my minor seminary adopted the expression as slang for any exercise of spiritual power, so that various blessings and ecclesiastical administrations were called “the whammy” for short. Of course, this was irreverent, but fifteen-year-old boys often are. And they grow up, so that my class has produced a number of faithful ministers of the Gospel.

Nevertheless, not everyone grows up spiritually, at least not easily, and it is one of the duties of the Church and of her ministers to assist in fostering a grown-up, “whammy-less” faith in Jesus Christ—a faith of the sort that gives life, cooperates with grace, and brings forth the fruits of the Holy Ghost (see Galatians 5:22-23).

Many people, however, whether they have heard of “the whammy” or not, try to use it all the time. The most common version of the spiritual “whammy” is the isolated verse of Scripture, taken out of context, that becomes the falsely simple “answer” to the complex problems of life.

One of the great “whammy verses” comes from our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount: “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1). Our Lord was speaking of self-discipline, of the evils of hypocrisy, of the wickedness of a double-standard (easy for me, but hard for you), and of the kind of mercy that imitates God the Father’s mercy, best expressed in the Lord’s Prayer a few verses earlier in the same Sermon: “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors” (Matthew 6:12).

On the other hand, when “Judge not, that ye be not judged” just floats in the air, as a seven word, all-purpose solution to the hard problems of right conduct before the Lord God, it becomes just a “whammy.” Every time someone commits a crime, there is someone else available to say “judge not, lest ye be judged.” When the officials of government do their God-given, Scriptural duty to punish evil-doers, protesters gather to cluck “judge not, lest ye be judged.”

Worst of all, a great number of people twist this verse to let themselves off the moral hook whenever they are doing, or planning to do, something which they know very well that God has forbidden. All of today’s great moral debates—the sanctity of marriage and the sacrificial self-discipline that it takes to make a home; the sanctity of life as God creates human beings in the womb and the mutual responsibilities of both parents; the created goodness of the human body and the holiness of God’s will for the body and its proper purposes—all these and so many other necessary moral discussions grind to a halt when even one person says, “I get to do whatever feels good to me. Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

These life-or-death moral discussions don’t have to end when the “judge not” whammy is invoked, but too many people don’t know the Scriptures well enough to insist with any confidence—That’s nonsense. The Scriptures don’t say anything like that. Our Lord didn’t forbid judgment between right and wrong, or else he wouldn’t have said, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). And in the very same passage of the Sermon on the Mount, five verses after our Lord warns us about hypocritical judgment, where we spare ourselves and condemn others, he commands us to be very strict, indeed, when it comes to the Law of God: “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you” (Matthew 7:6).

But if “judge not” is the great whammy verse of morality, the whammy of prayer, of proper worship, and of life in the Church as the obedient Body of Christ is the concluding verse of this morning’s New Testament lesson: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

If we look back at the whole lesson, we will see that our Lord was speaking very specifically about discipline, and not about some magic way to get whatever we want or to do whatever we please. Christians, as God’s adopted family, as brothers and sisters in Christ, are to make their best effort to settle their differences in private, among themselves. If this effort does not succeed, they are to involve “two or three more” (Matt. 18:16) of their fellow Christians, as witnesses and advisors. If their dispute is still not settled, they are to take it to the Church—to the ministers and elders (the equivalent of our rector, warden, and vestry system)—for judgment. Those who will not “hear the church” (v. 17) or abide by the Church’s judgment are to be treated as if they have left the Church, in our Lord’s words “as an heathen man and a publican” (v. 17).

Of course, there is a final appeal to God because human beings can be wrong, even in acts of good-faith discipline. But our Lord most definitely has provided his Church with this authority, sealing it with an oath: “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:18). And the limit of this authority is what our Lord was describing when he said, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

For the Church to do anything, whether it is discipline, worship, teaching, evangelism—you name it—the Church and her members must act “in my name,” in the Name of Jesus Christ. What “acting in the Name of Jesus Christ” does not mean, and we must be very clear, is some sort of whammy, so that once we have said the Name “Jesus” we may do as we please or demand whatever we want from God.

In the Bible, to do anything “in a name” is to act under the power of that name and in complete obedience to it. This Hebraic turn of phrase has survived even in the English language, so that a policeman might demand that a door be opened “in the name of the law.” The policeman, however, may not open any door that he wishes, but only such doors as the law permits. Furthermore, he will have to answer to the law for his actions, so that he will be punished if he has broken the law himself.

To gather, then, “in my name,” as our Lord commands, so that he will be personally in our midst, is to come together under the authority of Jesus Christ—not in some vague, general way, but according to the entirety of inspired Scripture, word by word, as God the Holy Ghost administers the whole Gospel of Jesus Christ, from Genesis to Revelation. To gather in Jesus Christ’s Name means “hearing the Church”—to hold to the doctrine and to live the faith and practice of the Christian Church in history, as her just judgments have been confirmed by God the Holy Ghost in Scripture and in the Church’s life.

But two or three people may not invoke the Name of Jesus Christ and go into business for themselves, worshipping, living, and teaching however they please, and then demand that Jesus Christ keep his promise to be with them. The condition of that promise is a life under the objective authority of Jesus Christ and his Father. Nor may two or three people invoke Christ’s Name and insist that God give them whatever they ask. To pray in Jesus Christ’s Name is to pray with him to the Father “Thy will be done,” and never, ever, “my will be done.”

Jesus Christ is very merciful, and he will not abandon those whom he has called to life, even if they miss the point of his teaching. He will call them back to him, but Christ’s mercy is not to be confused with indifference about the will of his Father, which is the entirety of the message of his Gospel. We must all strive to obey in order to live, work, and gather “in his name.” And we must never be satisfied with a simplistic “whammy,” when we have been offered the fullness of the Word of God.

Prayer "Lord, hold our troops in your loving hands.. Protect them as they protect us. Bless them and their families for the selfless acts they perform for us in our time of need. I ask this in the name of Jesus, our Lord and Savior. Amen."

ETHNARCH PAVES WAY FOR ROMANS TO ENTER CHURCH


This just in from Rev. Canon John Hollister

Anglican Body Invites Organic Reunion
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA, Nov. 1, 2009 (VeriZen) -- The Roman Catholic Church will now be able to reenter full communion with the Anglican Church while preserving post-Reformation elements of the Roman spiritual and liturgical tradition.

This policy has been established in amendments to the Constitution and Canons of the Holy Catholic Church of West Glastonbury adopted at its International Synod which concluded yesterday, its head announced today.

This responds to requests from Romans isolated by the schism of Pope Pius V, who have expressed wishes to return to the fullness of the Catholic Faith, particularly as the Roman Communion continues to propagate guitars, praise music, mistresses of ceremonies, and numbers of persons in street clothes milling aimlessly about its altars.

An unknown number of Roman clergy and laity have made such requests.

These new provisions were announced at a press conference in Las Vegas today, offered by His Beatitude Metropolitan Maximilian Pickelhaube, Ethnarch and Primate of All Nevada.

A statement from the Ethnarch explained that with these amendments, “the Holy Catholic Church of West Glastonbury has introduced a canonical structure that provides for such corporate reunion by permitting Roman Catholics to return to the Anglican Church from which they split 439 years ago, while preserving the organizational structures in which they have been worshipping, which will allow former Romans to reenter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of the distinctive Roman spiritual and liturgical patrimony.”

Initially, these groups of Romans will be overseen and guided through their existing dioceses and episcopate. Future leaders will be chosen according to the Apostolic model, by those dioceses’ clergy and laity. It is expected that many, if not all, of those future leaders will come from among former Roman clergy.

Unmarried priests

The statement from Ethnarch Pickelhaube explained that the Constitutional amendments “provide for the reception as Catholic priests of unmarried former Roman clergy without reordination. Although their ordinations since 1570 have been irregular, having been conferred in schism from the rest of the Western Church, once they return to communion with that Church their Roman Orders can nevertheless be recognized as valid under what is known as the Apostolic Cure.”

It clarified that “Scriptural reasons normally preclude the ordination of unmarried men as clergy in the Catholic tradition but historical and ecumenical reasons dictate a period of transition as former Romans recover the fullness of Catholic faith and practice Thus, the new provisions stipulate that the leaders of the former Roman dioceses remain in place but, upon their deaths, retirements, or resignations, that they be replaced by married clergy elected by those dioceses.

As to future clergy, the statement explained: “The seminarians and existing clergy in the former Roman dioceses will be free to remarry, thus accelerating the recovery of Apostolic practice. Seminarians may continue to be prepared in previously Roman institutions, which must immediately make provisions for married student housing. In this way, the Constitutional amendments seek to balance on the one hand the concern to preserve the worthy Roman liturgical and spiritual patrimony and, on the other hand, the concern that these groups and their clergy will be reintegrated into the Catholic Church.”

Worldwide

The Ethnarch’s statement said the Constitutional amendments provide a “reasonable and even necessary response” to what he called a “worldwide phenomenon.”

It offers a “single canonical model for the universal Church which is adaptable to various local situations and equitable to former Romans in its universal application.”

Over the past 30 years, many individual Romans have already entered into full communion with the Catholic Church.

Sometimes there have been groups of Romans who have entered while preserving some “corporate” structure, the Ethnarch’s statement noted, offering the example of a Roman parish in Tadzikistan.

“In these cases, the Catholic Church has frequently dispensed from the requirement of marriage to allow those unmarried Roman clergy who desire to continue ministerial service as Catholic priests to be received into the Catholic Church,” the statement explained.

Enriched

According to His Beatitude: “It is the hope of the Holy Catholic Church of West Glastonbury that the Roman clergy and faithful who desire union with the Catholic Church will find in this canonical structure the opportunity to preserve those Roman traditions precious to them and consistent with the Catholic faith.

“Insofar as these traditions express in a distinctive way the faith that is held in common, they are a gift to be shared in the wider Church. The unity of the Church does not require a uniformity that ignores cultural diversity, as the history of Christianity shows….

“Our communion is therefore strengthened by such legitimate diversity, and so we are happy that these men and women bring with them their particular contributions to our common life of faith.”

--oo0oo--
Posted by Fr. Robert Hart

Labour Humor

Trinitite

Recently an atheist, asked me if I was familiar with the Russians finding Sodom and Gomorrah after the war and I said no.
He said that the atheist communists refused to say anything about the bible but they had discovered Trinitite near where Sodom and Gomorrah were supposed to be
He further explained that when the Atom bomb was tested in NM that the sand underneath the bomb tower turned to radioactive glass which they called Trinitite. I had never heard of it and so with glee he Googled: Sodom Gomorrah Trinitite. And yes results came back.
I did not see any reference to Russians. I wish I had, because during the cold war and even now Russian science is discounted because they were Communists. However science is science.

I did see a reference to a current dig that was using biblical references to label the dig and the Archaeologist mentioned a pot that turned to Trinitite. His finding were immediately blasted because of his reference to the melted pot and the way it melted, but he later defended on a blog that everything fits from the biblical descriptions and that his work should not be trashed because of his description of the melted pot. In any event Trinitite was present. The age of the Trinitite, measured by radioactive decay, comes close to the time of the Biblical account.

The atheist concluded that the bible was correct and that fire came from the sky destroying the cities and created Trinitite.

Another person questioning a nuclear blast, felt that Trinitite could be created by other things than a nuclear explosion; electrical energy, etc. The fact would still remain, fire from the sky.

Fire from the sky is mentioned in other cultures too.

Many people would be horrified if these cities were actually destroyed by fire from the sky.

I have not done any serious research and am slowing down. It does make me a tad nervous about living in Washington, DC.

"The Lord will judge his people." It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” Heb 10:31




Paul+