GAFCON Is the accent on the Gaffe or on the Con? - by Fr. John Hollister


The “Jerusalem Declaration” issued as part of the “Final Statement” from last week’s GAFCON conference sounds just wonderful. Warm, fuzzy words abound and the whole thing sounds just like what real Anglicans might have said back in the 1950s, had there been any need to say them.
The problem is just that: Words. A word means something only if both the writer and the reader understand it the same way; otherwise, it is not a means of communication but an obstruction to communication. That is why elementary Philosophy classes used to be taught: “First define your terms”.
“Doonsbury”, the newspaper cartoon, currently has a theme about Berzerkistan, a “former Soviet republic” where the psychopathic dictator renames everything in sight with the most beautiful word he knows – his own name. In such a fantasy realm, no one can ever be sure what someone else refers to because the key word has so many potential meanings. For other examples, just read the “news” releases from the current government of Mugabeland (oops, I meant “Zimbabwe”).
The “Jerusalem Declaration” lives through the looking glass in that kind of country of slippery meanings. Its Paragraph 1 says: “We, together with many other faithful Anglicans throughout the world, believe the doctrinal foundation of Anglicanism, which defines our core identity as Anglicans....” But it makes no attempt to define what “faithful” means. Does it mean “faithful to what Anglicans until the 1940s or ‘50s understood their faith to be”? Does it mean “faithful to the ‘Anglicanism Lite’ that rejects the authority of Holy Tradition and Scripture but thinks male-male and female-female sex is ‘yucky’”?
So as far as the GAFCON Declaration gives any guidance, anyone can call himself a “faithful Anglican”, provided he either bought a ticket to Jerusalem or knows someone who did. Even worse than what GAFCON did not say is what it said incompletely. Just look at the problems raised by some specific provisions of the “Jerusalem Declaration”:
“2. We believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God written and to contain all things necessary for salvation. The Bible is to be translated, read, preached, taught and obeyed in its plain and canonical sense, respectful of the church's historic and consensual reading.”
But St. Paul’s Epistles, which up until now have been accepted as inspired Holy Scripture of the New Testament, state that a Christian minister must be “the husband of one wife”. And, the plain, canonical sense of the word “husband” means “a man married to one woman”. There are only two possible outcomes when this standard is applied to GAFCON’s present membership: either Provinces such as Uganda, Australia, and others must be made to conform their ordination theologies and practices to the New Testament or, just as Katherine Jefferts-Schori does, the New Testament must be made to conform to what GAFCON’s members do. The Declaration, however, gives no clue as to which option GAFCON is going to select.
“3. We uphold the four Ecumenical Councils and the three historic Creeds as expressing the rule of faith of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church.”
The Eastern Orthodox say there are seven, not four, Ecumenical Councils. The Roman Catholics recognize those same seven, they just add twenty or so of their own local councils and label those, too, as “ecumenical”. So both major branches of the Universal Church are agreed that there are no fewer than seven Ecumenical Councils. Where GAFCON has decided to part company with three-fourths of all living Christians, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect it to explain why it did so?
“7. We recognise that God has called and gifted bishops, priests and deacons in historic succession to equip all the people of God for their ministry in the world. We uphold the classic Anglican Ordinal as an authoritative standard of clerical orders.”
But that “classic Anglican Ordinal” states that the “historic succession” is made

July 4 - Rev. Paul Taylor, LL.M

The bible tells us that righteousness exults a nation and sin destroys it. Alexis de Tocqueville was later to say “America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great!"

Righteousness is translated as strict adherence to the law of the old Testament. The law is designed to create just society and that is why it exalts the nation.
Deuteronomy points out that obeying the law creates wealth. Few read the bible. So I ask you to look at the Quakers. In a few generation Quakers tend to be wealthy materially because they adhere to the law. A similar analogy can be made with the Amish.
Sin on the other hand is destructive. One generation of sin will destroy several generations of wealth accumulation.
The problem is that we are all sinners. We are made righteous through Jesus Christ.
Through Christ we become the righteous of God. The people who came to America came were aware of this.

The earliest “governments” were based on the covenants of the old testament. These covenants became the foundations for the State constitutions and are copied into the Federal Constitution.

The people who formed this nation were not religious fanatics but they were people who believed in God and the righteousness of the Lord.
The declaration of independence references God.
They pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.
All of the signers knelt in prayer.

They lost family, friends, and fortune. They retained their honor and and their faith in Almighty God.

President Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist:
“The 1st amendment has created a wall of separation between church and state, but that wall is a one directional wall, it keeps the government from running the church, but it makes sure that Christian principles will always stay in government.”

Today we have a war against Christianity and Christian morals. It is illegal to pray in public. Harsh penalties await those who preach the gospel. All the major heresies that the apostolic fathers fought against are now preached in mainline churches. It is illegal to display the 10 commandments. Judges have disconnected from the people they serve. Justice for the people is quaint. Ruling for the special interest groups are common and PC ruling are the norm. Canon law is routinely enforced in the secular courts for PC churches. It is not PC to mention Easter. There is no Easter break in schools. There is spring break. There is a war on Christmas. Mentioning that some of the recent disasters might be punishment or at least a warning from God is truly frowned upon. The truly Godless media pounces like a cat on a hapless mouse.
Mentioning the bible and there is an injunction or fine. The Lord God of Israel that neither slumbers nor sleeps watches and judges. However, bleak things look one should remember that God is not mocked and he punishes the wicked.

H. Richard Niebuhr indicted liberal Protestantism for teaching "a God
without wrath who brings humans without sin into a kingdom without judgment
through a Christ without a cross."

Fifty-six men signed the Declaration of Independence. Their conviction resulted in untold sufferings for themselves and their families. Of the 56 men, five were captured by the British and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the Revolutionary Army. Another had two sons captured. Nine of the fifty-six fought and died from wounds or hardships of the war. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships sunk by the British navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts and died in poverty. At the battle of Yorktown, the British General Cornwallis had taken over Thomas Nelson's home for his headquarters. Nelson quietly ordered General George Washington to open fire on the Nelson home. The home was destroyed and Nelson died bankrupt. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their thirteen children fled for their lives. His fields and mill were destroyed. For over a year, he lived in forest and caves, returning home only to find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later, he died from exhaustion.
Kenneth L. Dodge, Resource, Sept./ Oct., 1992, p. 5.

Why Women's "Ordination" is a salvation issue - Fr Robert Hart

I am going to repost a comment I made on an earlier thread, not to blow my own horn, but to highlight vital theology that is often brushed aside. Zeroing in on the relationship between two of the sacraments (called also the Dominical sacraments) and salvation, requires this clear, to the point presentation. We welcome polite if robust dissent, because this is worthy of discussion, such discussion as it will not receive on just any blog. ______________________________________

The only theological position about sacraments and salvation that has ever been officially taught as the stated doctrine of both the Church of England and of Anglicanism everywhere, is in the Catechism. Whether the Reasserters like it or not, they cannot reject this and still believe in Anglicanism. Furthermore, whether or not it fits the SF and Reasserter unlearned "Young Life-Quasi-Baptist" theology or not, the Anglican position is based on scripture.

Now, the position I refer to, from the Catechism, is stated rather simply:

"Question.
HOW many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in his Church?
Answer. Two only, as generally necessary to salvation, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord."
(By the way, that is, "Two only as generally necessary to salvation," not "two only." A subject for another day)

These words "generally necessary" imply that God is not bound or limited to the sacraments, but that, in general, these two are necessary. Therefore, to treat them otherwise is dangerous to the salvation of souls.

The role that baptism generally has in salvation is explained in Romans chapter six, which chapter also clearly teaches that it is in baptism that one is born again- raised to new life with the risen Christ. The meaning is not hard to see, but it can be avoided by willful neglect.

The role that Communion generally has in salvation is clearly taught in John chapter six, particularly vs.53-57:

"Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me."

Those who deny that baptism and Communion are salvation issues, deny these portions of the Bible. Their claims to be standing firm for the faith of God's word should include a defense of these two portions of that word, which portions they simply do not seem to believe. They do not defend them as scriptural or as stated Anglican doctrine, when, in fact, they are both.

The sacrament of Communion, by which we feed on Christ's Body and drink his Blood, the food and drink of eternal life, is a vital part of the sacramental life that is generally available, and generally necessary. If this sacrament is rendered null and void by the corruption of Holy Orders, then people are not feeding on Christ, but rather they are neglecting the food and drink of eternal life.

The Reasserters may argue with this interpretation if they want (and they find it easier to silence then to argue), but how dare they say "it is not a salvation issue?" Like it or not, in the world of theology, where grown-ups talk about serious things, it is a salvation issue- at least in terms of the debate. That is not simply our view; it is a fact.

Fr. Robert Hart Sunday, June 29, 2008

courtesy Anglican blogspot

St. Peter June 29th Fr. Robert Hart

Acts 12:1-11
Matt. 16:13-19
One of the marks of Divine Inspiration is the honesty of scripture concerning the heroes of our Faith. Instead of the sort of whitewashing that appears in folk legends, like George Washington and the cherry tree, we see real human beings who fall, get up again, and receive the grace of God. We see St. Paul calling himself the chief of sinners, and the least of the apostles because he had persecuted the Church before his conversion. We see the confusion and misunderstanding of the apostles, their lack of faith when they could not drive the demon out of the boy, so that Jesus had to do it himself. So too the Old Testament, where we see the faults of Moses himself, losing patience and striking the rock twice. The sins of David are recorded, and the pain he expressed as he repented and wrote the fifty-first Psalm. We see the sins of Solomon, and indeed, of the whole nation of Israel, telling on itself in the words of the prophets.

So, when we see the ministry of St. Peter in the Book of Acts, and how much he begins to resemble Jesus himself, it is only after the Gospels in which we have seen him fall, crash into the cliff, and then repent. He denied the Lord three times before the rooster crowed, and he repented with bitter weeping and tears. This should comfort all of us, because the story demonstrates the mercy of God, the grace of God and the power of God.

It demonstrates the mercy of God, because Peter was forgiven. It demonstrates the grace of God because Peter was restored and transformed. It demonstrates the power of God, because Peter fulfilled the ministry to which he had been called.

"The gifts and callings of God are without repentance (Romans 11:29)." St. Paul wrote those words in a long text about why God has not cast away his people Israel (to this day), and grafts back into the tree every branch that abides not still in unbelief. The gifts (χάρισμα, charisma) and calling (κλῆσις, klēsis) given to Peter follow the same general pattern, as do all gifts and callings that come through the means of indelible sacraments.

The Lord called the restoration of Peter his "conversion." Hear these words from the Gospel of St. Luke:

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death. And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me. Luke 22:31-34

The word "conversion" does not mean that you change your religious affiliation, and it simply does not mean that you leave one part of God's One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church for another. It means that you are turning, whether quickly or slowly, away from sin, unbelief and weakness to God, who alone gives holiness, faith and power. In the case of Peter, he turned from the weakness of confidence in his own strength, so that he could be empowered by the Holy Spirit.

"Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death." Simon Peter was confident in the flesh, his own estimation of his love and courage blinding him to the truth about himself. This brings us to today's Gospel. For, shortly after Peter declares the truth, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God," and is told

St. John the Baptist June 24,2008 Fr Robert Hart


June 24, is the Feast of St. John the Baptist (in the Missal it is the Feast of his nativity).

I have a few thoughts for today.

In the Eastern tradition icons of John often show him with angel's wings. This is because of the book of Malachi. "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to this temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts." (Malachi 3:1)

The term "My messenger" is actually the name of the book and of the prophet whose words are recorded in it. Malachi (מלאכי) means "my messenger" or "my angel." This is significant, because Malachi was thought of as the last of the prophets, not last as in final, but the last to have appeared. The book is telling us that the final Old Covenant prophet, the true Malachi, will appear. So we see the ending of the book, the last part of chapter 4: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."

But, we know that the prediction about Elijah referred, rather, to the one whose coming would be "in the spirit and power of Elijah." So we hear the words of Gabriel to the priest Zechariah, John's father: "And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." (Luke 1:17) This is why our Lord said, "Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist." (Matt. 17:11-13. I have never understood why so many Christian eschatology enthusiasts simply don't believe what Jesus said).

John's parallel with Elijah is stunning. Ahab and Jezebel could not kill Elijah, but the Ahab and Jezebel of John's day, Herod and Herodius, "have done unto him whatsoever they listed." John turned the hearts of the people back to the God of their fathers, just as Elijah had done when confronting the prophets of Ba'al (I Kings chapter 18, especially v.37: "Hear me, O LORD, hear me, that this people may know that thou art the LORD God, and that thou hast turned their heart back again."). This was done by restoring the hearts of the children to the fathers, a unique phrase in scripture since it is the only verse with the commentary, or interpretation, of an angel from heaven. To have our hearts turned to the fathers means that they are turned to "the wisdom of the just."

To be turned to the wisdom of the just, to the fathers, requires the humility that it takes to learn from those who have known God and have gone before us. It means to learn from the Tradition that teaches the meaning of scripture, rather than arrogantly dismissing it in favor of our own ideas. It means to accept the "democracy of the dead" as G.K. Chesterton put it:

"Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around." - Orthodoxy, 1908

It means also that Christians bend an obedient ear to learn from those whose office it is to teach the word of God. "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." (Hebrews 13:17) Even if you really think the priest to be unworthy, bend your ear to the Tradition of the Church when he teaches the word of God.

John's baptism, the ritual bath from the Law of Moses, was applied to every Jewish person who came to him to confess and repent, and be forgiven. This ritual bath, baptism, was part of the process of conversion for Gentiles to Judaism, to wash away uncleanness. His message to his own people was clear: Convert back to the God of your fathers. John was a priest by birth, but his life away from the earthly temple in Jerusalem, as a prophet in the wilderness, spoke of the New Covenant that was soon to be established in the blood of the Son of God (Hebrews 8:13). A people prepared for the Lord will not be harmed by his Real Presence when the Lord suddenly comes to his temple, that new place where "we have an altar" (Hebrews 13:10). Rather, they will feed on his Real Presence as the food and drink of eternal life.


Courtesy:
http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/

2008

Fifth Sunday after Trinity - Fr. Robert Hart
Luke 5: 1-11

When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man... and Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.

To come face to face with God, in such a way that we recognize Him, brings us to the realization of our own unworthiness, of our own sins. We know from the Gospel of John that Simon had already met Jesus, and was aware that He was a holy man. Andrew, Simon’s brother and partner in their fishing business, had declared his belief that Jesus was the Messiah. Simon was ready and willing, as we see, to defer to Jesus, to give Him use of his boat, and even to follow His instructions about a matter that must have been, as this fisherman would have thought, outside the expertise of a carpenter and rabbi. Nonetheless, at the Lord’s word, out of respect for Him, and perhaps out of affection for Andrew as well, Simon Peter went out and let down the nets, despite what a wasted effort it had proved to be only a little while earlier. In what happened next he saw that this Rabbi was in command of nature, and that even the sea and the fish obeyed Him.

The Old Testament has a companion text, in the sixth chapter (vs.1-11) of the book of the prophet Isaiah. Like Simon Peter, Isaiah was going about his daily routine. The vision he saw took him by surprise. As he wrote it,

In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts. Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged. Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. And He said unto me, Go and tell this people Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.

Upon seeing the Lord, and hearing, as the angels cried, “Holy, Holy, Holy”-three times crying holy for each person of the Godhead- Isaiah was aware of his own sins. “Woe is me. I am undone, for I am a man of unclean lips..” As Simon, centuries later, would fall down at the knees of Jesus, saying “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man,” we see that Isaiah was suddenly overcome by the knowledge that he was not worthy to be in the presence of the Holy God of Israel. Isaiah already knew, as later Simon also knew, that God is holy; and each of them knew of his own shortcomings; but in these passages we see that each of them was suddenly face to face with God. Face to face with the Holy God who is like a refiner’s fire- indeed, as everyone will be if only at the Last Day, when He comes again in glory to judge the quick and the dead.

It is important that the angels in the temple cried that “the whole earth is full of His glory.” We can go about our daily lives in great comfort, in a state of relative calm, because the idea of the Lord upon a heavenly throne keeps Him just a bit distant, maybe even too far away to notice the every day sins we allow

TRINITY 5 LUKE v.i. - Rev'd Paul Taylor, LLM

The fifth chapter of Luke referred to a turning point
in the ministry of Jesus.
He is no longer able to preach in the Synagogues. So
he take his message to the great out doors.
John Wesley remarked that he loved comfortable churches to
preach in, but he said field preaching saves souls.

Why, you might ask would someone preach from a boat.
The answer is because the sound carries very well over the
water and the water amplifies the sound so many can hear it. Jesus
saw the crowd and he saw the 2 boats. So he asked the
fishermen to let him preach from the boats. They wanted to
hear God's word. They showed their desire by letting him
use one of their boats.
When he had finished preaching he asked them to set
out into the deep to catch fish. They were experienced
fishermen and knew that in the clear water the fish would
see the boat and the nets. That is why they fished at
night. Not only had they fished all night, they had caught
nothing. What is remarkable they did not tell him no. He
said to go and they did. They did so by faith.

So in impossible fishing conditions they set out and
dropped their nets. When they lifted the nets, they were
full. So full that the nets began to break and the boat
began to sink and the other boat had to come and help with
the catch and it too began to sink. They were astonished!
So much that Peter said Lord I am a sinful man.

There are several messages that one can draw from this:

First: The word of God is to be preached to the people
wherever they gather. In fact the early word that the
Greeks had for church was inglesia, (the gathering of the
faithful). It is a duty of the Christian.

In many cases that means preaching outside the church
building. The best preaching is faithful Christian witness
to the risen Christ in our daily lives.
This is required because you are the church.

A Priest is only a servant who is to serve bread and
wine at the Lord's table, but you are the church.

Second we are to be receptive to the requests of the
Lord. As you see from the holy text they were receptive and
obedient. First they loaned him the use of their boat and
second they went to the deep to drop their nets, knowing it
was not humanly possible to catch fish in the daytime. For
most people, the disaster of life is that they give up just
one effort too soon. If you hear and obey the word of God
that won't happen to you.
Third you should turn and follow him. Look at the example of St.Peter. Peter said depart from me for I am a sinful man, 0 Lord.

Fourth Sunday after Trinity - Fr Robert Hart



(In the Anglican Diocese of the Chesppeake we use the Psalm appointed for Morning Prayer both at Matins and at the Mass that follows)
Psalm 91
The Epistle. Romans. 8:18-23
The Gospel. St. Luke 6:36-42


Were it not taught to us that we can only understand the truth rightly in eternal rather than temporal terms, we should find some of the statements from today’s scripture readings to be quite fantastic, if not scandalous. I mean, specifically, Psalm 91. If read from a purely temporal point of view it makes no sense, promising long life and complete freedom from the very things which bring death and sorrow to ordinary men. Are Christians not ordinary? Are we not mortal, and subject to suffering and death? How could the Psalmist write such things?
Thou shalt not be afraid for any terror by night,* nor for the arrow that flieth by day.
I recall having a certain kind of misgiving and worry when the crazy snipers were terrorizing the DC area a few years ago, not only for myself, but for loved ones who might travel through Northern Virginia, or around Washington. I even recall wishing to avoid Montgomery and Prince George’s County- I certainly had no intention of needing to fill up my tank there. I admit that I was in a certain sense, afraid of the arrow that flieth by day.
For the pestilence that walketh in darkness, * nor for the sickness that destroyeth in the noonday.
Yes, but when I visit people in hospitals, and come across signs that require that I suit up in a surgical mask and gloves I do so. Let us remember that the devil himself used this very Psalm to try to tempt the Lord into leaping off the temple roof to make a big show. This Psalm can be misused, as anyone who has met the “faith and prosperity” crowd among the Charismatics surely can testify. Their error is the same in its effect as the pathetic “Christian Scientist” who, refusing to use medicine, sentences himself to an early grave.
The “faith and prosperity” teaching, for those who do not know, is a popular heresy which teaches, essentially, that anyone who has true faith will not be sick, or poor, or in want. Therefore, people who suffer illness, financial shortage, or any other inconvenience of this mortal life, are led by the spirit of error into believing that their own faith is insufficient to please God, be it in reality perhaps even larger than a grain of mustard seed. Nonetheless, woe to any who “in this transitory life are in sorrow, need, sickness or any other adversity.” Sadly, they are used to such theological cruelty, having been taught long ago that their love for friends and relatives cannot extend beyond this world, for they cannot even pray for the departed.
Their interpretation of scripture is very like the devil’s, as I said before, when he misquoted this Psalm to our Lord. In fact, come to think of it, it is more than simply like the devil’s interpretation.
A reading of this Psalm without an eternal perspective can become even worse, if we read it with such blindness, in the verses that follow:
A thousand shall fall beside thee, and ten thousand at thy right hand; * but it shall not come nigh thee. Yea with thine eyes shalt thou behold, * and see the reward of the ungodly.
This is the Psalm read often by men going into combat; my father was greatly comforted by this Psalm as he was on his way to France to fight the Germans. But, if you were to ask him, or any man who has seen war, do only the worst of sinners

Prayer and Meditation

Prayer is talking to God

Meditation is listening to God

This should be our daily prayer:

Please God, put your arms around my shoulders and your hand over my mouth.

Today's Gospel lesion is from the gospel of St. Luke. (Luke vi 36 – 42)
The sermon on the mount in Matthew and the sermon on the plain in Luke are quite similar. Luke mentions several things and
I wanted to talk to you about St. Luke's message on giving. Before you run out the door for fear of a second collection let me explain the reference in Luke.
This lesion is designed to draw us closer to God. God owns all the gold and silver in the world and he is not impressed with wealth, but God does take notice of what you do with his wealth while you are on this earth.

Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again. (Luke vi:38) This commandment is different than the strict laws of the Old Testament. The short form of the Old Testamant is that he who gives is blessed and he who does not is cursed. The New Testament is quite different.

The message about giving is repeated in many forms throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Sometimes the message is the comparison of spring time and harvest. Sometimes it's a refers to the wise man and how the wise man deals with wealth. Sometimes God gives a nudge to the stingy or forgetful. God asks us to trust him on this, and well we should. God promises eternal life and we trust him on that.

If we trust him here we should also trust him where He says give and it shall be given unto you full measure running over. The Lord loves a cheerful giver. However, I would note in passing that most pastors will accept money from a grouch.

The Bible talks in terms of the tithe. Most Anglicans are tongue tied and never tithe at all. However, the fiery prophet Malachi warns us that to fail to pay the tithes is to rob God. The prophet Malachi goes on to say that those who do pay the tithe will will receive a blessing from heaven that there will not be room enough to receive it.(Mal 3:10) And the prophet goes on to say that God will rebuke the devourer. Here we are merely doing what God commands us to do and yet he rewards us. Here is in the Old Testament there are tithes and offerings that are bought unto the temple. Offering to the temple are freely given. Yet this is not what Jesus is asking of us.

In the New Testament Gods gives. Then something happens. For example God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should have everlasting life. (Jn 3:16). God did not wait for man to give first. God gave first. His love was his gift. One cannot say that they have love without an act. Love has to be an act.

Today many of us have gotten away from biblical teachings because the word of God has not been preached for many years in the mainline churches.
If you are merely giving for a tax deduction, then you have your reward. The Hypocrites painted their faces when they fasted. They have their reward. A good example today of public giving is the Kennedy center. People who give are recorded for all to see. The very large donors have inscriptions carved into the walls. God gives no credit for these deeds as this is your sole reward.

So giving over and above the tithe and offerings is what we are talking about in this lesion. Giving over and above the obligations and special intentions that one usually bring to the church. We are talking about something very special.

Here like in the sermon on the mount we are given very difficult commandments. This

The Lord's Prayer:

PATER NOSTER, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen.

Peter Toon said: Father's Day: does it intrude into The Lord's Day?

First, there was Mother's Day and then in these days of equality there
was Father's Day. Both occasions provide an opportunity for commercial
companies to advertise their products as gifts for Mother or Father,
respectively. And, maybe, some good is done to American family life by
these "celebrations";despite the fact that families, where there
is a resident mother and father, are now in a minority in the spectrum
of modern families. Regrettably, both Mother's and Father's Day are
on Sundays, and this causes complications to those who celebrate
Sunday as the Lord's Day, the feast of the Resurrection.
Importing the theme of Father's Day into Christian worship and
congregational life on the Lord's Day is not without profound
difficulties and problems, from both a biblical and a social
perspective. With respect to the latter, many children do not know
who is their father, or, if they do, they hardly see him; and in
many cases "mother' is at odds with "father" because he is not paying
her what he should for the upkeep of children. So celebrating
Father's Day in a congregation where there is a good proportion of
single parent families may cause great pain of heart especially to the
children of absent fathers. But, from a biblical perspective,
celebrating human fatherhood on the Lord's Day, the festival of the
raising of the Lord Jesus, Incarnate Son, from the dead by the
Father, is at the very best only celebrating the image and likeness
instead of the Original. Let me explain. If we are not
feminists, and if we believe that it is right to use the Name of
"Father" for God, then we have to be clear;especially on this
secular "Father's Day;whether the Name of "Father" is a Name
that human beings out of their own wisdom and volition have come to
project on to, and use of, God, arising out of their experience over
the centuries of ancient "patriarchal" and modern "nurturing"
fatherhood; or whether this Name has been revealed by God himself,
and thus the original and right use of it in Christianity is solely
because it is a revealed Name, belonging to a real almighty Person,
the First of the Three of the Holy Trinity. My sense is that
most Christians, who are committed to the authority of the Bible and
who call God "Father," do generally think of God as Father in terms of
an enlarged ideal human father. This is the easier for them if their
experience of a father has been, and is, positive and good.
However, such an approach can so easily fail to take into account the
claim that the Name of "Father" is revealed by God, and especially is
revealed by Jesus Christ, who referred to "the Father" as "my
Father." Further, it does not seem to square with the particular
statement of St Paul who wrote: "I bow my knees before the Father,
from whom every family [fatherhood] in heaven and on earth is
named…" (Ephesians 3:14). We need to reflect upon what St Paul
said. The Apostle does not say that God is named by the names
used in human families (Father and Mother) but the opposite, that each
human family (and the word he uses is of what we call a tribe or
extended family) is named after God the Father. This is to say that
the human father (pater), as the head of, and as the
representative of, the family (patria), is not only a creature of
God, but, also, that he is to reflect in his character and actions, as
a father, the character and actions of God the Father. We recall that
in biblical thought to be "named" is much more than being given a
name or title. It carries the ideas of determining the character and
exercising authority over what is named. Thus God the Father by naming
the father in the family actually places him under his authority and
determines who he is to be, how he is to be and what he is to do
within and for the family. That is, human fatherhood is to reflect
divine Fatherhood, not the reverse. And the human family is thus to
benefit from this refection. And, we may add, that Christians
learn about the Father through his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who
had the most intimate relation to him and also taught us much about
the identity and character of his Father, who is The Father, and by
grace, "Our Father." In fact the only sure knowledge we have of The
Father is from his Incarnate Son. Any projections we may from our own
experience of human fathers are sure to be imperfect, incomplete and
probably very wrong. So, returning to the secular "Father's Day"
perhaps it is alright to allow it to enter Christian worship on the
Lord's Day if;and only if;it is to be the occasion for
(a) profound, spiritual worship of the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ and (b) meditation upon the real nature and character of human
fatherhood, as provided in the identity, nature and character of God,
the Father. Let us remember that baptized Christians are first of
all;from heaven's vantage point;adopted children of the
heavenly Father! And they are such whatever kind of human family-or
no family-they come from on earth.

June 13, 2007 The Revd Dr Peter Toon, M.A. M.Th.
D.Phil., President of the PBS 2007, www.pbsusa.org

III John 1:2:

Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

Alexis de Tocqueville 1805 – 1859 Anon

Alexis de Tocqueville, had an interesting view of America.

Americans, are a nation of adolescents. What they demand in their politicians is not competency but entertainment value. A fact that explains the success of many
politcians.

In America, with the exception of Congress, there is no criminal class

America is a country where they have freedom of speech but everyone says the same thing.

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.

The debates of that great assembly (Congress) are frequently vague and perplexed, seeming to be dragged rather than to march, to the intended goal. Something of this sort must, I think, always happen in public democratic assemblies.

American boosts mass thinking at the expense of the 'best and brightest”

"I sought for the greatness of the United States in her commodious harbors, her ample rivers, her fertile fields, and boundless forests--and it was not there. I sought for it in her rich mines, her vast world commerce, her public school system, and in her institutions of higher learning--and it was not there. I looked for it in her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution--and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great!"

The greatness of America lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults.

In order to enjoy the inestimable benefits that the liberty of the press ensures, it is necessary to submit to the inevitable evils it creates.

In the United States, the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from the necessity of forming opinions of their own. (In short, we are susceptible to demagogues)

As one digs deeper into the national character of the Americans, one sees that they have sought the value of everything in this world only in the answer to this single question: how much money will it bring in?

The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of functions performed by private citizens.

Scarcely any political question arises in the United States that is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question.

Harry Truman's view of Washington


"If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog"

Theology Exam

Jesus asked:

"And whom do you say that I am?"

Peter replied:

"You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, the ontological foundation of the context of our very selfhood revealed."

And Jesus replied:

"Huh?"


Hat tip to Dejan
anglican blog spot

"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." -‹Thomas Lipscomb