Jesus' wife

“Jesus said to them, ‘My wife . . .’ [and that’s where the page is torn].” So reads one line of a business card sized scrap of papyrus unveiled on September 18th at a conference in Rome by Harvard Professor Karen King. She claims this is new evidence that some early Christians may have believed Jesus had a wife, whom King has speculated was probably Mary Magdalene.

(By the way, if that sounds familiar, it was a central plot point in Dan Brown’s novel, and then movie, The Davinci Code in which a massive cover-up has concealed a royal bloodline of Jesus through his child with Mary Magdalene. This is not really a new idea. It is common for European secret societies to invent a grandiose heritage for themselves.)

Within hours, news agencies around the world advertised the announcement with headlines like “Ancient Papyrus Could Be Evidence that Jesus Had a Wife.” This week, several experts in Coptic (the language on the papyrus) insisted that the scrap of papyrus in question was a forgery. And there was a whole new set of headlines.

What has not appeared in the press (at least not yet) is the startling “new” evidence revealed by an Anglican vicar to a shocked rural Texas congregation which proves not just that some early Christian’s believed Jesus had a wife, but that in fact Jesus was married.

Let's look at Luke's gospel, chapter 5. This passage came up in the Daily Office readings this past Wednesday. The situations here is that some complainers came up to Jesus and asked why his disciples were eating and drinking in all festive delight while at the same time John the Baptist’s disciples and Pharisees were fasting according to pious Jewish custom.

Listen to what Jesus says to them in verses 34-35: “Can you make wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? The days will come, when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days.”

Did you catch what Jesus is saying here? His disciples are wedding guests—at his wedding! He’s the groom! And in fact, I’ll give you another shocking detail. The New Testament actually gives us the name of the bride, and many old churches actually house pictures of her.

If you walk into the large Abbey Church of St. George in Regensburg, Germany, you will find the whole interior covered in beautiful frescoes. And if you go to the center of the church and look up into the dome, you will see a huge painting of a crowned woman holding a processional cross and seated on a throne. Her name, the name of Jesus’ wife, is Ekklesia (a Greek name that means “assembly” or “church”).

In our first reading today from Genesis (2:18-24), we read about how God invented marriage. But God didn’t just invent marriage, God is married. In fact, the human institution is a shadow of a heavenly reality as St. Paul describes it--a sacred mystery.

Throughout the Old and New Testaments, God is betrothed to his people. Through the Prophet Isaiah, God told the people of Jerusalem, “As a young man marries a young woman, so shall your builder marry you, and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God marry you” (Isaiah 62:5).

That’s why the Old Testament prophets call idolaters adulterers. That’s why God is jealous of the relationship he has with his people. That’s why the Song of Songs overflows with vivid erotic poetry (don’t tell the kids). That’s why Hebrews 13:4 says “Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept undefiled, for God will judge the adulterer and fornicator.” That’s why God cares about chastity.

That’s why Jesus tells us in the gospel today (Mark 10:2-9) that divorce is not an option. That’s why St Paul describes Jesus as our bridegroom and his Church as his bride. That’s why in the book of Revelation, the joy of heaven is compared with the joy of a great wedding banquet.

That’s why the intimacy of marriage is the best comparison we have to intimacy with God, as we find in the writings of many saints and mystics. That’s why we cannot reinvent or redefine marriage. It’s not ours to do with as we please. God created man and woman for each other in the beginning.

In Genesis we read that “the two shall become one flesh.” That’s why Jesus gives us his flesh to eat and blood to drink at the altar. Genesis explains that in marriage, a man leaves his family and clings to his wife so that "the two shall become one flesh.” Marriage is not created so much by vows or promises or covenants or rings or even love. Marriage is created by the union of the body. “The two shall become one flesh.” To be our husband, to make us his bride, Jesus gave us his body.

Why did he consider the cross to be a noble sacrifice? Why does God care so much about human marriage? It is because he is entirely, deliberately, eternally, passionately, and hopelessly in love with you. His is a love that overcomes fear, a love that embraces the good of another, a love that involves suffering, a love that doesn’t count the cost, a love totally naked before another, a love that is the total gift of self.

To make us his bride, Christ gave us his Body--his flesh to mingle with ours, his blood to mingle with ours. "And the two shall become one flesh." All of baptized believers are married to Christ. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one try to tear apart.

St. John wrote in his Revelation (19:7-9), “Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his Bride has made herself ready . . . Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.”

"Is divorce lawful?"

Mark 10:2-9 
Pharisees came up and in order to test [Jesus] asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" He answered them, "What did Moses command you?" They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."

In today’s gospel, the Pharisees came to test Jesus with a very difficult question. Divorce was epidemic in those days; it had become a serious problem. It had come to the point that many divorces had no grounds at all. So they came asking Jesus to take a stand on a hot-button issue. “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” they said.

Now there were two different rabbinical schools of thought about the legitimate grounds for divorce, so they were probably asking him to take sides or setting him up for criticism. The Hillel school basically argued for no-fault divorce--that most anything could be deemed just grounds (this view became dominant in Jewish thought). In contrast, the Shammai school argued that divorce was only acceptable in the case of very serious transgressions. We should also note that in Judaism (even today) a man divorces a woman; a woman cannot divorce a man.

Jesus basically tells them they ought to know the answer. What did Moses say? Write out a certificate of divorce. Notice that every time that they came to Jesus asking about something in the Torah, he always did two things: he made the application more strict than it had become and he directed them back to God’s purpose in the first place. You might think that after awhile they would have stopped asking.

Jesus does the same thing here. Our Lord explained that Moses allowed you to divorce because he knew that your hearts were hard and cruel, but that’s not how God planned it in the beginning. God made the man and woman for each other; that’s why they come together as husband and wife. So what God has joined together, let no man tear apart.

In the next few verses following our reading, back at the house in private, the disciples ask Jesus to clarify the matter. Did he really mean to be so strict? And Jesus basically tells them that remarriage is adulterous. In the parallel text in Matthew they are despondent, saying, "Maybe it’s better not to marry." But that’s not what Jesus was trying to say either.

Jesus is calling us back to God’s will from the very beginning. We have a tendency to turn the exception into the rule. We did it in Jesus’ day and we have done it in our own day. And God wants us to look beyond the exceptions to the ideal—to the way it was supposed to be in the beginning which means, before sin came along and messed it up.

Jesus wants a godly harvest in our homes. Why is God so protective of marriage and the family? For two main reasons: first, Paul tells us marriage is a great mystery (sacramentum in Latin) of the union between Christ and his bride, the church. God is betrothed to his people. That’s why idolatry is like adultery. That’s why in the book of Revelation, heaven is pictured as a great wedding banquet—with the bride (the church) ready to meet her bridegroom (Christ).

Second, God is protective of the family because we are adopted into God’s family. When we are baptized, we are joined to Christ, and so we can call God Father. In Hebrews we heard how Jesus took human nature to make us part of God’s family. God warns us to flee from anything that would endanger the family. We care about our own families, wouldn’t God be protective of his?

The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

"For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord." (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17)

"And the temple of God in heaven was opened; and the ark of his covenant appeared in his temple, and there were flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder and an earthquake and a great hailstorm. And the temple of God in heaven was opened; and the ark of his covenant appeared in his temple, and there were flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder and an earthquake and a great hailstorm. A great wonder appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars." (Revelation 11:19--12:1)

Hymn 278 - "Sing the chiefest joy of Mary when on earth her work was done, and the Lord of all creation brought her to his heavenly home; where, raised high with saints and angels, in Jerusalem above, she beholds her Son and Savior reigning as the Lord of love."

O God, who hast taken to thyself the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of thine Incarnate Son: Grant that we, who have been redeemed by his blood, may share with her the glory of thine eternal kingdom; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

Bishop Donald Parsons at FIFNA

This is Bishop Donald Parsons' address at the 2012 Assembly of Forward in Faith, North America. I always love hearing Bishop Parsons give a talk--a cross between Fulton Sheen and Johnny Carson. His Grace is the Sometime Bishop of the Diocese of Quincy and the Sometime Dean of Nashotah House (where he still teaches). It is also worth noting that as far as I am aware (shhhhhhh), he's the last Catholic bishop in the Episcopal Church USA.

Reginal Cardinal Pole, lay minister

Reginald Pole was definitely pushing the boundaries of lay ministry. Of course, he represents a different era when such things were not quite as unusual. He was on an ordination track, you night say. And Pole was appointed to several benefices (an office of clergy which carried with it a living, i.e., salary) before his ordination.

He was appointed as a lay canon of Salisbury and York and lay Dean of Exeter Cathedral in 1529 when he represented King Henry VIII in Paris, persuading the theologians of the Sorbonne to support Henry's annulment from Catherine of Aragon. He broke with Henry in 1536 on the issue of the annulment and was made a Cardinal and Papal Legate to England by Pope Paul III in 1537.

In 1542 he was appointed as one of the three Papal Legates to preside over the Council of Trent, which began in 1545. After the death of Pope Paul III in 1549 Pole, at one point, had nearly the two-thirds of the vote he needed to become Pope himself at the papal conclave of 1549-1550. His personal belief in justification by faith over works had caused him problems at Trent and accusations of heresy at the conclave. Pole returned to England in 1554 as Papal Legate.

POLE WAS FINALLY ORDAINED a priest on 20 March 1556 was and consecrated and enthroned as Archbishop of Canterbury two days later. He served in that office until his death in 1558.

Let's review here: starting in 1518, as a layman, he was a pastor on the staffs of large churches, then he was a lay cardinal (and nearly pope), then he served as Papal Legate in England which required him to sit in judgment on priests and bishops in order to restore papal catholicism in England. At last, after 38 years of official lay ministry, he was ordained and concluded his life with two years as Archbishop of Canterbury. A little out of order?

That's why they call it 'matrimony'

This afternoon, I was looking up something in my handy 'Pocket Catholic Dictionary' by John Hardon (an excellent resource, btw). As I was thumbing through the pages, my eye caught the entry "Consummated Marriage." It aroused my interest, so I took a peak. The brief definition concluded by noting, "Contraceptive intercourse does not consummate Christian marriage."

It surprised me a little, either because this was a detail I had forgotten or one I never learned in the first place. But after giving it a moment's thought, it not only made sense, but even seemed amazing that I could have ever been ignorant of something so obvious. After all, that's why they call it "matrimony." It's about making a woman into a mother.

"Individuals can leave this church"?

In light of the recent charges made against nine bishops of the Episcopal Church for attaching their names to an amicus brief explaining the polity of the Episcopal Church, I thought I would post this email exchange I had with a parish in the Diocese of Dallas over a member transfer last year. (Names have been changed.)

When parishes and dioceses began leaving the Episcopal Church in the last several years, the mantra we heard from TEC leadership was, "Individuals can leave this church, but parishes and dioceses cannot." But according to a parish in the Diocese of Dallas, individuals cannot leave either. There is no way out.

Subject: membership transfer

To whom it may concern: 

I have not yet received a response about the requested transfer of membership for Jane Doe (see attached letter). Please send it to my attention (The Rev'd Timothy Matkin, Trinity Episcopal Church, PO Box 387, Dublin TX 76446). Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

Father Timothy Matkin 

________________________________________

Subject: RE: membership transfer 

Dear Fr. Matkin, 

After speaking with my Rector, I am unable to assist you with this transfer as Trinity is no longer in communion with the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth. 

Sincerely, Mrs. Y

Parish Coordinator Episcopal Church of the XXXXX

________________________________________ 

Subject: Re: membership transfer 

Dear Mrs. Y, 

Thank you for checking on this, but I think you have been misinformed. We are currently a congregation of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth (thus, in communion with our diocese and bishop) and we have been since its founding in 1982. And we were a part of the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas before that since it's founding in 1895, Bishop Garrett having organized Trinity Church in 1884. 

Even though the Fort Worth diocese dissolved its union with the General Convention in 2008, our communion relationships have not changed. We are still full constituent members of a province of the Anglican Communion, we still have our companion relationships with two dioceses in the Anglican Communion, we still share a number of ministries with the Diocese of Dallas, such as the Renewal Center. I have celebrated the Eucharist in Episcopal churches in Dallas three times since 2008, and served as clergy at a Happening in the Diocese of Dallas last year. I have received three transfers of members this year from two Episcopal Church dioceses--Texas and West Texas. 

That being said, it really doesn't matter anyway. This is a matter of record keeping and paperwork, not a test of conscience. We are not asking your Rector to take a position on any controversial issues of the day, only to certify that your parishioner Jane Doe is a baptized member, her date confirmation, etc., and to remove her from your membership roles. In return, we will certify to you that she has been added to ours. You might want to review Canon I.17.4 on the transfer of members between congregations. The section falls under the canon on the rights of the laity. Jane is entitled to this right under law as a member of your church. You will notice that the canon does not discriminate as to what ecclesiastical entity she is moving her membership to. It only states that the lay person concerned is seeking to be "enrolled in another congregation of this [i.e., TEC] or another Church." 

The form you were sent is simply for the sake of convenience. If you prefer to go through the formality of having her contact you to for a formal certificate and you having to type one up, so be it. Jane has become a valued part of our Trinity family, and I insist that her rights under canon law be honored. You will note that the relevant section concludes, "(d) Any communicant of any Church in communion with this Church shall be entitled to the benefit of this section..." As a parish of the Episcopal Church, I'm sure you will honor the canons and your own parishioner by respecting Jane's rights in this matter. 

I appreciate you attending to this matter promptly, and I look forward to your response. 

Sincerely, 

Father Timothy Matkin 

________________________________________ 

Subject: Jane Doe 

Father Timothy Matkin: 

I am delighted that Jane Doe has found a church home in your parish and even more pleased that you value her membership, she is a lovely lady and I pray God’s blessing upon her and your church family. 

The point is we are an Episcopal Church and you are not in spite of the sleight of hand action your leadership has carried out and therefore a canonical transfer is not possible – period. This happened when your Bishop and Convention voted to revoke it’s relationship with the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, USA. 

By saying this I in no means am suggesting you are a cad, a villain or an imposter to catholic order – you just aren’t an Episcopalian. In fact I am sure you are a fine person and priest and that you pastor a lovely church family. What I am happy to do is to commend Jane Doe to your pastoral care and do so with my best wishes. 

Blessings 

Fr X

________________________________________ 

Subject: Re: Jane Doe

Dear Father X, 

Thank you for your reply. Please understand that your opinion of our ecclesiastical status, of whether we are truly Episcopalians or not, is entirely irrelevant here. 

This is a matter of record keeping and paperwork, not a test of conscience. We are not asking you to take a position on any controversial issues of the day, only to follow canon law in respecting the rights of your parishioner to be certified of her status and removed from your membership roles. 

You might want to review Canon I.17.4 on the transfer of members between congregations. According to the procedure outlined there, I will have her contact your church to "procure a certificate of membership." 

Sincerely, 

Father Timothy Matkin 

________________________________________ 

Subject: RE: Jane Doe 

Fr Matkin: 

Actually my opinion of your status is entirely relevant to this discussion and I find your dismissal of it entirely consistent with the practice of Bishop Iker’s church. If you would re-read Canon I. 17. 3–6 Title I Section (d) you will find the language that makes a transfer impossible. 

(d) Any communicant of any Church in communion with this Church shall be entitled to the benefit of this section so far as the same can be made applicable. 

The fact of the matter is you are not in Communion with General Convention and you have no desire to be so. I personally find your claim to be the Episcopal Church a fraud and look forward to the courts clearing this misconception up. 

I say again what I have already said; “… we are an Episcopal Church and you are not in spite of the sleight of hand action your leadership has carried out and therefore a canonical transfer is not possible – period.” 

Blessings 

Fr X

________________________________________ 

Subject: Re: Jane Doe 

Father X, 

The canon we are looking at is about the rights of the laity, not the rights of the clergy. Jane is a member of your congregation and she is entitled to her rights under the law. 

Sincerely, 

Father Matkin 

There was no response from Jane Doe's church at this point, so we simply had to create a new certificate of membership based upon her testimony rather than a letter from her church. What blew me away about this exchange was not just the seeming inability of Father X to read and understand the canons, but that his views of my diocese led to a mistreatment of his own parishioner.

A study of religious deconversion

"In a study of religious deconversion, we analyzed 50 on-line testimonies posted by former Christians, and in these testimonies we found four general explanations for deconversion. The first explanation, which I wrote about last week, regarded intellectual and theological concerns about the Christian faith. The second, which I elaborate here, regards a failed relationship with God. Almost half (22 of 50) of the writers expressed sentiments that in some way God had failed them by His not doing what they thought He should." 

It's worth a look. Here's the rest.

Father as priest

Priesthood is essentially fatherhood. That’s why we call our pastors our spiritual fathers--they father a community. It is a special relationship, modeled on the fatherhood of God. St Paul wrote to the Corinthians, “Though you have countless teachers in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor 4:15).

Adam was the first priest because he was the father of his family. He spoke to God on their behalf and spoke to them on God’s behalf. He was the one who offered their sacrifice and taught them the faith. And this same pattern followed for generations. Eventually, God ordained men to serve in this capacity for a community in the Old and New Testament priesthoods.

What most people don’t understand is that the father’s role as priest of his own family, for whom he is responsible before God, remains. He is the one who is to lead them in prayer and make their offerings. He is the one who is to teach them the Faith of the Church. And he is the one who has the authority to bless his children.

Just like the priest in church, a father should put his right hand on his child’s head and say “I bless you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.” And a father should offer longer benedictions (Latin--“good word”). Say things like, “May you be wise and just and caring and merciful. May you be prosperous and generous and faithful. May you find a loving husband/wife and many children." And so on.

A helpful reminder on this Father's Day.

The 'Anglican Summa' on the Trinity

The ten volume series Dogmatic Theology, by Dr. Francis Hall has been called the Anglican version of Aquinas' Summa Theologica, and rightly so. While it does not follow the same format, it is exhaustive in scope and is scholarly in content, yet fully accessible to the layman.

It was written by a priest and professor of the General Theological Seminary of the Episcopal Church. The project was conceived by Francis Hall in the late 1800s, and the ten volumes were published between 1907 and 1922. The content is thoroughly orthodox and Anglican. It was hailed as a monumental achievement in the life of the American church.

In the fourth volume on the Trinity, Father Hall notes the profound importance of the subject matter by explaining that "the doctrine of the Trinity is the interpretive principle of all Christian doctrine, the ultimate basis for of Christian ideals and hopes, and the most vital and inspiring of all the truths which human minds can contemplate" (vol. IV, pg 2).

He goes on to say, "The doctrine of the Trinity must occupy the central place in any sound or adequate conception of spiritual realities. It constitutes the postulate of the doctrines of the Incarnation, of the Atonement, of the Church, of justification and salvation, and of the coming kingdom of God. If it were shown to be false, these doctrines would have to be modified beyond recognition, and Christianity would become something quite other than it actually is" (vol. IV, pg 2-3).

Everlasting life or everlasting death?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines death as the separation of soul and body. This is a good theological definition, and as far as I am aware, harmonizes with all other Christian definitions of death (or what Revelation would call "the first death").

The definition comes in section 997, which has more to say in response to the question What is rising? It says, "In death, the separation of the soul from the body, the human body decays and the soul goes to meet God, while awaiting its reunion with its glorified body. God, in his almighty power, will definitively grant incorruptible life to our bodies by reuniting them with our souls, through the power of Jesus' Resurrection."

The completion of our salvation is not just our (re)union with God, but also the reunion of our immortal soul with our resurrected body on a resurrected (or renewed) earth. I bring this up to highlight a discrepancy between orthodox Christian doctrine and modern American folk religion, which tends to talk about salvation in terms of going to be with God in heaven forever. Such a view tends to see the body as a shell for the soul, which is "the real me," an idea captured best in the infamous funeral parlor poem "I'm Free."

Don't grieve for me, for now I'm free 

I'm following the path God has chosen for me. 

I took His hand when I heard him call; 

I turned my back and left it all. 

I could not stay another day, 

To laugh, to love, to work or play. 

Tasks left undone must stay that way; 

I've now found peace at the end of day. 

If my parting has left a void, 

Then fill it with remembered joys. 

A friendship shared, a laugh, a kiss; 

Oh yes, these things, I too will miss. 

Be not burdened with times of sorrow;

Look for the sunshine of tomorrow. 

My life's been full, I savored much; 

Good friends, good times, a loved ones touch. 

Perhaps my time seems all to brief; 

Don't lengthen your pain with undue grief. 

Lift up your heart and peace to thee, 

God wanted me now-He set me free!

This popular theology (which is actually the manifestation of a Christian heresy) is labeled "Christo-Platonism" by Randy Alcorn's in his book Heaven. He points out that for Plato, matter is a hindrance to spirit, which means our bodies are a prison for our souls. Alcorn notes that, "But according to Scripture, our bodies aren't just shells for our spirits to inhabit; they're a good and essential aspect of our being" (pg 475). Jesus came to redeem our souls as well as our bodies. That's the significance of the incarnation and the resurrection--the redemption of matter.

Which got me to thinking . . . If your view of salvation is being eternally free from your body so that you can live with God in heaven, then do really believe in everlasting life? Or do you believe in everlasting death?

The Hail Mary and Memorial Day

The "Hail Mary" consists of two scripture quotes (Luke 1:28 and 42) followed by the petition, "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death." It is the most common petition made by living Christians to a departed Christian, asking the Mother of Jesus for her prayers.

The word "pray" means "ask", but it is often used in the wider sense of any communication, particularly communication directed to God or through God to the angels or the saints and other faithful departed. Protestants often object to the idea of prayer to the angels or the saints, despite the fact that such prayer is explicitly in the Bible: “Praise him, all you angels of his; praise him, all his hosts” (Psalm 148:2).

If you accept the authority of the apocyphal/deuterocanonical sections of the Book of Daniel, there is also the song of the three young men in the fiery furnace (a Morning Prayer canticle in the Book of Common Prayer): “O ye Angels of the Lord, bless ye the Lord: praise him, and magnify him for ever. . . . O ye Spirits and Souls of the Righteous, bless ye the Lord: praise him, and magnify him for ever.”

Even if you don't consider that canticle to be scripture, and are unsure about the interpretation of Psalm 148:2 (or consider it an exception to the rule), you have prayed to the saints and angels if you have ever sung the hymn "Ye watchers and ye holy ones." Consider the words of that hymn (included in most Protestant hymnals):

1. Ye watchers and ye holy ones,

Bright seraphs, cherubim and thrones,

Raise the glad strain, Alleluia!

Cry out, dominions, princedoms, powers,

Virtues, archangels, angels’ choirs:

 Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!

 2. O higher than the cherubim,

More glorious than the seraphim,

Lead their praises, Alleluia!

Thou bearer of th’eternal Word,

Most gracious, magnify the Lord.

Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!

3. Respond, ye souls in endless rest,

Ye patriarchs and prophets blest, Alleluia! Alleluia!

Ye holy twelve, ye martyrs strong,

All saints triumphant, raise the song.

Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!

The first stanza addresses the nine choirs of angels, the second addresses the Blessed Virgin Mary, the third addresses the holy souls as well as the patriarchs, prophets, the holy apostles, the martyrs, and all the saints to join in the praise of God. Note that the first three stanzas are exclusively prayer to the angels and saints. The fourth stanza finally addresses the present congregation and all the living to join together in praise.

It occurred to me today that there is at least one other occasion when Christians pray to the dead who might otherwise object to it theologically. That is on Memorial Day, when we not only pause to show respect for our honored dead (and some pray for the repose of their souls) but when we also address them directly with the prayer, "Thank you." Some might object by saying we are simply thanking God for them and their sacrifice, and certainly that is done. But it is sheer ignorance to say that no thanks are directed toward those fallen in battle themselves (as we see in the cartoon above).

Having realized what they're doing, some might object on the ground of "necromancy"--that the bible forbids contact with the dead. But this is a misunderstanding of terms. Necromancy is an attempt to harness diabolical powers to (among other things) conjure up "familiar spirits." The Bible condemns this occult practice, which includes attempting to communicate with spirits through trances, seances, and incantations (see Leviticus 19:26, 31; 20:6, 27; Deuteronomy 18:10-12; 1 Samuel 28:4-18; Isaiah 8:19; 47:12-14). Asking the saints for their prayers is not necromancy; nor is offering them our thanks or asking for their intercession.

It seems to me that the fundamental problem is that those who object to prayer to anyone but God have equated prayer with worship (which is odd in light of the frequency that the phrase "prayer and worship" is invoked in evangelical circles). Prayer (communication) and worship (giving divine honors to God) are two different things. Just as you can worship without prayer (e.g., making an offering, or silently adoring God's presence), so you can also pray without worship (e.g., "Thank you for laying down your life to defend our freedoms.").

Why the Holy Ghost is not "she" (in English)

I noticed recently in Bonnie Anderson's note of retirement from the presidency of the House of Deputies of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, she mentioned that "the Holy Spirit blows where she will." This is not an unusual occurrence. It is quite common for Christian feminists (both Protestant and Catholic) to employ the feminine pronoun for God, especially when speaking about the Holy Ghost.

Feminist theologian Rosemary Rutherford Ruether has been particularly influential in spreading the use of "she" for the Holy Spirit. In her Women-Church book, Ruether makes frequent reference to Wisdom as "God the Mother"--one important step in the task of "re-imagining" God.

The ancient heresy of Gnosticism also venerated divine Wisdom (the Greek word Sophia) as the female principle of androgynous Deity (or God's daughter) which was trapped in creation by disobedience. She was the fallen creator of earth, air, fire, and water and mother of the evil demiurge who was the God of Israel. Gnosticism often reversed stories in the bible so that, for example, Jesus or Wisdom was the serpent in the garden of Eden, sent to tempt us away from obedience to the evil God of Israel.

In the bible, "wisdom" is used as a personification of God, especially in the "wisdom literature" such as Proverbs. Since wisdom is a word with a feminine gender, feminist theologians tend to run with this and proclaim that God has a feminine aspect (in a sexual rather than simply a grammatical sense). This feminine aspect is usually associated with God the Holy Spirit because the Hebrew word ruach also has a feminine gender.

We should note here that people do not have gender, they have a sex (male or female). Gender has to do with grammar; words have gender (masculine, feminine, or neuter). English does not make as much grammatical use of gender as other languages do, which is why this sounds rather silly to our ears. There are some familiar exceptions such as the use of "she" for a boat or other such vessel.

Wisdom has been associated with the Holy Spirit a few times in Christian literature. I know of at least two Church Fathers (Theopilus and Ireneaus) who do so. I'm not aware of any Scriptures that equate personified Wisdom (Sophia) with the Holy Spirit. The closest I can find is the role of wisdom in inspiration or prophecy. Or a reference to the "spirit of wisdom" in Is 11:2--though this seems to me to be the spiritual gift rather than the Spirit himself. On the contrary, the identification of both Logos and Sophia with the second Person of the Trinity (Jesus) dominates in comparison. Likewise, many Church Fathers make that connection between Sophia and Christ explicitly.

God the Holy Spirit as a divine Person has no sex (male or female) because he has no body. The same is true for God the Father; he has no body and thus no sex. Only God the Son has a sex, and that is because he had a male body. Grammatically, sex will dictate gender. That is why, for example, we have male and female versions of the same name, like Julian/Julia and Alexander/Alexandra. However, the opposite is not the case; gender will not dictate sex. For example, the Greek word for rock (petra) is feminine, but that doesn't mean that rocks are girls.

God the Son is "he" for two reasons: it is dictated by his sex and by his relationship (Son). With God the Father, it is only by relationship--his "fathering" of creation and his "fathering of the Son"--that he is known as "he." And what about the Holy Spirit. Since we do not have a gender indicated by sex or by relationship, let's look at the grammar.

The two Hebrew words used for spirit have a feminine gender. Ruach is "she"; Nephesh is also "she." In Greek, the word "spirit" (pneuma) is neuter. Our synonymous English terms "Holy Spirit" and "Holy Ghost" come from the Latin and German sides, respectively. The Latin spiritus is masculine. The German geist is also masculine. Thus, speaking correctly, the Holy Spirit would be "she" when speaking in Hebrew, "it" (though, a personal "it") when speaking in Greek, and "he" when speaking in English.

That's why the Holy Spirit is not "she"--it would be bad grammar.

Palm Sunday tutorial

The video below will show you how to braid palm leaves like this for Palm Sunday. They can be used on their own or incorporated into a stalk for the clergy. The stalk can be of any number of designs. There is no right way to do it. You'll probably start with a base of a dozen or so palms tied together like a stick. Then you can attach various braided items and palm bows, together with one or more bows of ribbon.

Here is the short instructional video.

Here is another video about weaving your palms into a fish.

The Devil in the details: Lent 5

This Lent, our theme is finding the Devil in the details of the Sunday gospels. On the first two Sundays, Satan was mentioned explicitly in the gospel. The next two Sundays, we had to look for him in the shadows. In today’s gospel, the devil is again mentioned explicitly (though you might have missed it).

Jesus refers to the climactic battle against Satan at the cross in the final verses: “Now is the judgment of this world, now shall the ruler of this world be cast out; and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” According to the voice of the Father, this hour of judgment will be the hour of the Son’s glory — the hour of his victory on the triumph tree.

Back in the beginning of creation, God made the angels to serve him in heaven and he created the earth as a home for mankind, who were made in his image. When some of the angels rebelled, they were cast out of heaven by St. Michael the Archangel and a host of angels. Jesus once said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Lk 10:18).

The devil and his demons were cast out of heaven, and cast onto the earth (see Isaiah 14:12 and Ezekiel 28:17). St. John records in his Revelation: “The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world -- he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him” (Rev 12:9).

The devil immediately went to work tempting humanity to rebel against God — to defile that image of the Creator within us and destroy our likeness to God. The devil reigns over disobedient hearts, and in that sense the world became his dominion (1 John 5:19).

Jesus refers to the devil as “the ruler of this world” three times in John’s gospel. The perfect obedience of Jesus to the very end and to the fullness of his being, (as shown in his crucifixion) brings the dominion of disobedience to an end. Victory over the ruler (or “prince”) of this world was won once for all at the hour when Christ gloriously poured out his life on the Cross.

Jesus said, “Now is the time for the judgment against this world (i.e., the verdict against the sin within it); now is the time for the unlawful ruler of this world
(i.e., this usurper to the throne) to be cast out.”

Now the kingdom of God would be definitively established on earth. Now his royal subjects could be reunited with God through the perfect obedience of Christ in his death and resurrection. Now the King would be lifted up on his throne of love and draw the whole world to himself.

He draws us today to his sacred Altar, where we “proclaim the Lord’s death” as St Paul says, “until he comes again.” There, Jesus offers us tokens of the transformation that can be a reality for all his people. He bids us to partake of the sacred Host, and to drink from the cup of everlasting salvation.

Most people think the word “host” used for the bread consecrated to the flesh of our Lord Christ has something to do with “hospitality,” but it does not. “Host” comes from the Latin word hostia, which is a sacrificial victim.

In the Eucharist, as on the cross, Jesus is both the Priest and the Victim — the one who offers sacrifice to God, and the offering itself. His sacred Body is laid on the corporal on the altar before the Father. His precious Blood, shed for you and for many so that sins may be forgiven, is presented before the Father in a chalice and covered with a pall.

To share with us his life, he has poured himself out unto death. St. Paul said that Christ “has delivered us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Col 1:13-14).

We should note how our forebears, especially in the early centuries of the Church, saw the cross as a sign of triumph and victory. Take the example of Venantius Fortunatus, a poet and bishop in the sixth century, who composed a hymn Pangue Lingua, sung on Good Friday around the world.

Sing, my tongue, the glorious battle,
Sing the winning of the fray;
Now above the cross, the trophy,
Sound the high triumphal lay:
Tell how Christ, the world’s Redeemer,
As a Victim won the day.

May God grant us grace to both behold and share in the victory of the cross. We will glory in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, for he is our salvation, our life and resurrection, by whom we are saved and made free.

The Devil in the details: Lent 4

This Lent, our theme is finding the Devil in the details of the Sunday gospels. On the first two Sundays, it was easy since Satan was mentioned explicitly. Last week, we had to look harder to find the devil in the shadows, working to corrupt and obstruct the worship of God. We’ll also have to look carefully for him again.

Today’s gospel is the story of the miraculous feeding with loaves and fish. But note how it ends: “Perceiving then that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by himself.”

The congregation became a mob who wanted Jesus to be the kind of Messiah they wanted, not the kind God the Father gave us. They wanted a revolutionary, a worldly king. God the Father wanted a willing servant, a sacrificial Lamb.

The devil has many tools in his arsenal to try to thwart God’s will. The other side of leading and luring one into temptation is pushing one toward sin with flattery and peer pressure.

Notice how Jesus responds. He does not stand around to hear the flattery and praise of adoring fans. He does not stay among them to be pushed into doing the wrong thing. Jesus retreats to the mountain —- to that place where he had so often found strength and comfort in solitude and prayer. Let us not listen to those who would stroke our ego and set us up for sin or who would force us into doing wrong.

Perhaps it was some of the same people in the crowd, calling him to be king, who would later call for his execution at the Praetorium. And how ironic that Jesus would end up taking the place of Barabbas (who actually had attempted a revolt) and was ultimately crucified between two of Barabbas’ disciples rather than Jesus' own disciples (whom the Lord had previously urged to take up their crosses and follow).

It happened the way it happened because Jesus ran from peer pressure and embraced the will of God the Father for us and for our salvation. Let us also flee from the diabolical pressure to reject God’s will.

The Devil in the details: Lent 3

This Lent, our theme is finding the Devil in the details of the Sunday gospels. In the first week, the devil appeared as Jesus’ tempter in the wilderness, who is hell-bent on destroying as much goodness as possible. Last week, we heard Jesus describe the apostle Peter as “Satan” because he was literally doing the devil’s work in trying to obstruct Jesus’ way to the cross (and thus to our salvation). We too can do the devil’s work when we interfere in God’s plans.

So where is Satan in our reading today—John’s account of Jesus cleansing the Temple. True, he’s not mentioned explicitly in this passage, but if we look closely, we’ll find the devil lurking in the shadows.

When I was growing up, my grandmother used to tell me that of all places, the devil is most active in church, because that’s where he’s threatened the most and where he stands the most to lose. You can be sure that whatever Jesus is up to, it is in direct contrast to Satan. Here, Jesus is driving the animals out of Solomon’s portico and overturning the tables of the money changers in the Temple. When his disciples looked back on this, they remembered the psalm: “Zeal for thy house will consume me.”

Why was Jesus so upset in the first place? An entire business had grown up around the Jewish sacrificial system. You were to bring an unblemished animal to the Temple for sacrifice. When your animal was inspected, they usually found a blemish.

“But don’t worry, you can trade yours in for this other unblemished one for a price.” So you trade in your animal and you pull out your money to pay the fee. “Oh, I’m sorry, you can’t use Roman coins here. They have an image of Caesar on them, who claims to be a god. That means your coins are idols, and of course no idols are allowed here. But don’t worry, you can trade in your Roman coins for some Temple coins, for a price.”

And thus, the Israelites coming to worship at the Temple, according to the Torah, were being defrauded for doing so (and not once, but twice over). The devil loves corruption, so this was very pleasing to him, of course. But if there’s one thing he really hates, it’s the worship of God.

Jesus, on the other hand, loves worship. His whole life was an act of worship. Jesus was zealous for the Temple, and for the worship of God. He could not stand by and let this corruption go on.

How do you feel about worship? You may not hate it the way the devil does, but if zeal for God’s house doesn’t fill your heart, the devil is having his way. Satan hates worship and tries to foster anything that would corrupt worship, or distract us from worship, or make us fight over worship, and thereby reduce the glory and adoration that we give to God.

In a book on the liturgy he wrote before becoming Pope Benedict, Josef Ratzinger noted, “I am convinced that the crisis in the Church we are experiencing is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy.” Our liturgy has been disintegrated and watered down over the past decades.

One principle of liturgics is Lex orandi, lex credendi “Law of prayer, Law of belief.” Which is to say, what we pray shapes what we believe, and what we believe shapes the way we pray. Change your prayers, and your beliefs will adapt accordingly.

We’ve seen all kinds of liturgical abuses and corruptions—like avoidance of the masculine pronoun for God and Jesus, avoidance of words like Lord, kingdom, and any mention of sin. So now we have a whole generation to whom the idea of the incarnation and the lordship of Christ (who is also our Savior from sin) is totally foreign.

The devil loves wars over worship because it distracts us from glorifying God. Congregations are split and divided about music —- traditional chants, old fashioned hymns, modern choruses, contemporary Christian hits, etc. The devil loves anything that will divide us and distract us from our task of giving worship to God.

In C. S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters, the demon Screwtape advises his underling Wormwood, “I warned you before that if your patient can’t be kept out of the Church, he ought at least to be violently attached to some party within it.”

Corrupt, obscure, distract, divide and conquer, anything you can do to stop the worship of God —- that’s the devil’s plan. God’s plan is different -— “Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness; let the whole earth stand in awe of him” (Psalm 96:9).

When Jesus cleanses the Temple, they remember Psalm 69:9, which was taken as a mark of the Messiah -— “Zeal for thy house has consumed me.” Should this not also be a characteristic of the Christ-like disciple?

Zeal is fervent love, total commitment to the worship of God. In Hebrew, "zealous" is actually the same word also translated as "jealous." We heard the Ten Commandments today in our first reading. When God commanded us not to worship other gods (idols), it was explained that our God is a jealous God.

His zeal, his fervent love is for our worship. We should be zealous for God as he is zealous for us. May God ignite in us the zeal of love that burned in the heart of Jesus as he bore his passion.

The Devil in the details: Lent 2

This Lent, I will be preaching on the theme of finding the Devil in the details of the Sunday gospel readings.

Last week, we heard about how the devil fell from heaven and is a defeated foe, but like a wounded animal, still dangerous. He knows he’s doomed, so all he can do is make as big a mess as possible for us and for God on his way to hell.

The devil’s chief weapon against us is temptation; he even tested Jesus in the wilderness during his forty days of fasting and prayer. St Padre Pio once said, “Remember, the Devil has only one door with which to enter into our soul: our will. There are no secret or hidden doors. No sin is a true sin if we have not willfully consented.”

St Peter reminded us that the devil is always prowling about, looking for opportunity. We must therefore, be sober and be vigilant to resist him.

There once was a couple trying to make it on a very tight budget. The wife came home to her husband after a day of shopping. She had spent way too much on a fancy evening dress. As she showed it too him, she said, “I know I spent too much on this dress, but I tried it on and it just looked so tempting in the mirror.”

The husband said, “Well why didn’t you just say, ‘Get behind me, Satan’?”

She said, “I did! . . . But then the Devil told me how great it looked from the back.”

In today’s gospel, we pick up just after Peter has confessed that Jesus is the Christ. Another evangelist, St Matthew, informs us that it was on this occasion that Jesus blessed him for that statement of faith with a new name (Peter/Rock) and with the gift of authority—the keys of binding and loosing.

Now Jesus starts talking about what lay ahead—suffering and death on a cross, and Peter would have none of it. He rebukes Jesus and Jesus rebukes him. So we have gone from Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ to Jesus’ confession of Peter as Satan in just four verses.

Peter pulls Jesus aside and argues with him . . . “Suffering? Death? I just told you that you’re the Messiah, and you agreed! But that’s not what the Messiah is like.”

It was on old temptation of the devil resurfacing on the lips of Jesus' own apostle--the one he had just called the rock of his Church. The devil hates the cross, because it sealed his fate and God’s victory. A triumphant worldly king of a Messiah is no real threat to the Devil.

But Jesus saw right through it. He knew his path led to the cross at Jerusalem. “Get out of my way, Satan! You are not on the side of God, but of men.” The Amplified Bible reads: “For you do not have a mind intent on promoting what God wills, but what pleases men.”

After this, Jesus called all the disciples together and explained to them that being a disciple means following his lead, not blocking his path. “If anyone would come after me,” Jesus said, “let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”

How often have you and I gotten in the way of God? How often have we opposed his work, just by speaking our minds? By sharing words of doubt or criticism or even despair?

We can be Satan in a particular circumstance—we can sin, we can being doing the Devil’s work (just like Peter did in that instant), merely by what we say to someone else at a critical moment in their life. It can tempt them or it can bless them.

In formulating her moral theology over the centuries, the Church has found nine ways of being a participant in the sins of another: by counsel, by command, by consent, by provocation, by praise or flattery, by concealment, by partaking, by silence, and by defense of the sin.

To illustrate, (and since it’s that time of year) let’s take the example of cheating on your income taxes.

1. By counsel. “Don’t you know how to avoid an audit? Stop by and I’ll show you.”

2. By command. “You have to do this because we are all in it together.”

3. By consent. “The government does immoral things. We should pay full price.

4. By provocation. “I double dog dare you to do it. Come on, you chicken”

5. By praise or flattery. “Good for you for sticking it to them. Serves ‘em right!”

6. By concealment. “It didn’t see anything. I wouldn’t know anything about it.”

7. By partaking. “Listen, our Treasurer can give us all receipts for huge deductions.”

8. By silence. “It will be our little secret. I won’t tell if you won’t tell.”

9. By defense of the sin committed. “Well everybody’s doing it. They just write it off.”

The Devil loves to get in the way when it comes to doing the right thing, and these are nine ways we become Satan, nine ways we participate in the sin of the Devil. Don’t follow him; don’t let yourself do the Devil’s work. We are called to follow Jesus, to walk the way of a disciple. It’s our duty to avoid sin and foster goodness—both in ourselves and in others.

Stay focused on Jesus; keep him as number one in your life. The more you are focused on yourself, the more you are prone to sin and to unhappiness. The more you are focused on the Lord, the more your path will stay clear of sin and the more happy and humble you will become.

Being a disciple means following his lead, not blocking his path. “If anyone would come after me,” Jesus said, “let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”

The Devil in the details: Lent 1

This Lent, I will be preaching on the theme of finding the Devil in the details of the Sunday gospel readings. Jesus called him the “Father of lies” (John 8:44) and St John the Divine called him the “Deceiver of the whole world” (Revelation 12:9). Our goal will be to become familiar the with ways of “Old Scratch” so that we might be less likely to fall into his traps in the future.

Interestingly, just a few days after I decided to preach on the devil, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was taking heat for talking about the devil a few years ago in a speech to Catholic students at Ave Maria University.

He said, “The Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country—the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age?”

Santorum was right about that. The devil has his sights on any force for good—our nation, the Church, the family, children, your soul—all are under attack. This Lent, let us arm ourselves for the spiritual battle.

The late Pope John Paul II said that “Spiritual combat . . . is a secret and interior art, an invisible struggle in which [we] engage every day against temptations.” (Of course, there’s no struggle if you offer no resistance.)

There is an ongoing battle, a clash of good and evil, and you are the ultimate prize—precious human lives, human souls, creatures God made in his own image.

Just who and what is the devil? The Bible tells us that he is a fallen angel—a being created to serve God, but who chose instead to rebel. He began as Lucifer (“the shining one”), but through pride he became known as Satan (“the Adversary” or “Enemy”).

He enticed about a third of the angels to join him. At the judgment of God, St Michael the Archangel led the host of angels to expel Lucifer and his demons from heaven. Jesus once said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:17).

The Prophet Isaiah wrote, “How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the dawn! . . . Didn’t you say to yourself: ‘I will be as high as heaven; I will be more exalted than the stars of God; I will be the supreme leader in the privileged places; I will be higher than the skies; I will be the same as the Most High God’? But you shall be brought down to hell, to the bottomless pit. And all who see you will despise you” (Isaiah 14:12-16).

The devil is a defeated foe, but (like a wounded animal) he is still dangerous. Like the Nazis retreating into the heart of Germany, or the Iraqis retreating from Kuwait, the Prince of Darkness has enacted a “scorched earth policy.” Those armies devastated the land and cities they had once occupied their retreat. They could not win, so did their best to ruin the spoils of the victors.

The Devil seeks to destroy everything that is good, everything which glorifies God. He knows his ultimate destiny; he knows hell was created for him. He just wants to destroy as many lives and take as many with him as he can.

St. Peter tells us in his first letter, “Be sober, be vigilant. Your adversary the Devil prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking some one to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experience of suffering is required of your brethren throughout the world” (1 Peter 5:8-9). This Lent, we will talk about how to resist him, firm in our faith.

Even our Lord himself suffered the assaults of the devil in his ministry. Today’s gospel tells us about the high point of his baptism, and the low point of his desert ordeal—all in the span of two verses.

The other evangelists tell us that the desert was for Jesus a time of spiritual struggle. We know that he was tempted in the wilderness. At his baptism, a voice had proclaimed, “Thou art my beloved Son.”

“Are you really the Son of God?” the Devil whispered. “Is the cross really necessary?” Jesus confronted evil whenever this truth was revealed.

I’ve always found it odd that there are some Christians who do not believe that there is actually a devil. Such a view is unbiblical, of course, but there is a greater problem that arises. If there is no devil, how is Jesus tempted? God tempts no one, as were are told by St James. Jesus is alone; is he tempting himself? Then he would not really be God, nor would he be “my beloved Son,” which is precicely the doubt that Satan was trying to instill.

St Theodore of Mopsuestia points out that Jesus defeated the devil’s temptations, not as God (i.e., by just saying it and it being so), but through his humanity. This was to teach us by example “that it is not through miracles, but by long-suffering and patient endurance that we must prevail over the Devil . . .”

The Devil hates the crucifixion, because that sealed his fate and God’s victory. You see, there is a power that overcomes death, hell, and the grave. That power comes from Jesus Christ—living in you by the Holy Spirit. There is something in your life stronger than temptation and sin. It is the grace of God, poured out in the shed blood of Jesus.

The Devil’s great fear is that after filling the world with sin (and filling your life with sin), God would find a way to take it all away, to undo all the Devil’s work. The Devil was right to be afraid!

We’ll learn more about the Devil’s ways this Lent. Meanwhile, “Be sober, be vigilant!”