Thanks to one of my followers on twitter
Tag Archive for 'twitter'
One of my followers on twitter, a university professor, in response to my recent post about Richard Dawkins pointed me to an article by Michael Ruse. Michael Ruse is an atheist. He is a philosopher of biology. Ruse is well known for his arguments against “Intelligent Design”. But Ruse holds that it is possible to reconcile the Christian faith with evolutionary theory. That, of course, is the position of Francis S. Collins, who led the Human Genome Project. If you haven’t read The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
Richard Dawkins is a genius. The Selfish Gene, published in 1976, is one of the truly great books of the 20th century. … Which brings me to the supreme paradox. The God Delusion has been a smash-hit, best seller. And yet, you know, it is a very bad book. …
I think The God Delusion is badly written, but far worse … is the succession of half-baked, sophomoric arguments. Sophomoric not in the sense that the topics are unimportant but in the sense that you think that you uniquely have come upon these issues. As I have said elsewhere, after reading the book, for the first time in my life I was sorry for the ontological argument. And that is just the start. The tripe about causation leaves one aghast. The nonsense about Hitler and Christianity is simply pure ignorance. Putting the holocaust down to Hitler’s Catholic training is ludicrous. As an aside: The whole argument putting German anti-Semitism down to Christianity is about on a par with the trendy Creationist claim that German anti-Semitism is the fault of Charles Darwin and the Victorian sentiments expressed in the Descent of Man.
I have been puzzled as to why someone who, as I say, I regard as an author of genius, could be — not so much ignorant as — willfully contemptuous of the whole range of philosophy and theology and modern history and much more. It is not a question of conclusions. For what it is worth, I have no more religious belief than Dawkins and I too deplore the influences of American Evangelical Christianity, not to say the disgusting revelations of Catholic priests and sexual abuse (and the even more disgusting ways in which the hierarchy have too often tried to block inquiry).
I have been reading a short autobiography that Dawkins has penned for a book on behavioral biologists, and I think I may have found a clue. It lies in the British system of education. (Or, let me cover myself. It lies in the British system of education that held sway 50 years ago when Dawkins was being educated. I know whereof I speak, for I too went through the system at that time, although in nothing like as distinguished a fashion.)
In the 1950s, while at school around the age of 15 you started to specialize. You would drop the extraneous subjects and start to focus on what you were going to make a lifetime commitment. (Since I was going towards the physical sciences, I dropped geography, for instance.) Then the last couple of years at high school you really start to focus down on the sciences (physical or biological) or various humanities areas. In going to university, it is the departments that make the choices (at Oxford, Dawkins’s alma mater, it is the colleges) and as an undergraduate you really specialize. (I still remember that, at Bristol in my first year, we did eight hours of mathematics and nothing more. Not even a physics class. The other two years were different only in that we did 12 hours of mathematics and nothing more.) Graduate work is not a great deal different, because the English doctoral degree is based purely on the dissertation (at least it was back then). You didn’t even have to know about other areas of your subject.
I am not saying that Dawkins’s educational experiences were as narrow and awful as mine, but if you read his autobiography you will see that they are part of the same genus if not species. And of course the result is that you end very good at what you do and pig ignorant about everything else. If you are good at what you do, in a top institution, there is little wonder that you feel pretty good about yourself, and don’t feel the need to know a whole lot more. Why would you?
Speaking both as a historian of science and as an ardent biological evolutionist, I look to the past to make sense of the present. Nothing can explain genius completely. Believe me, I have spent a lifetime trying to understand Charles Darwin. But for me, Richard Dawkins’s background throws considerable light on both The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion.
Let us pray in silence for grace to keep Lent faithfully.
pause
Almighty and merciful God,
you hate nothing that you have made
and forgive the sins of all who are penitent;
create in us new and contrite hearts,
so that when we turn to you and confess our sins
we may receive your full and perfect forgiveness;
through Jesus Christ our Redeemer
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God now and for ever. Amen.
A reflection on this Ash Wednesday collect/opening prayer is found here
A reading from the gospel according to Matthew Chapter 6 beginning at verse 1.
6:1 “Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven.
2 “So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.
3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,
4 so that your alms may be done in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
5 “And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.
6 But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
16 “And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.
17 But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face,
18 so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
19 “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal;
20 but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal.
21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
Ash Wednesday – A Service for the Beginning of Lent
A few simple suggestion during Lent
What is Lent – especially translating it to the Southern Hemisphere
Some ideas for Lent:
- Tweet less; Facebook less; blog less
- Pray more; read more; meditate more
- Do less; go to less meetings; have less meetings at church
- spend more time with friends, with family, with those you find difficult
- Go out less; have less/no coffees; drink less/no wine
- Give away the money you save
- Give away the money you save plus (##)%
- visit the sick; write letters; start a journal
Add your reflections on the collect/opening prayer; your thoughts on the gospel reading; your ideas for Lent – in the comments section
Today, Bill Warner became the 50,000th follower of Liturgy on Twitter. And if you understand how twitter works: @Liturgy is included in nearly a thousand lists!
I don’t know if there is a “typical” follower of @Liturgy, Bill has had nearly four decades of experience in the computer industry, with the last two decades as a CEO. His service to the community include board directorships in the Association for Corporate Growth, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Cooperación Ortopédica Americano Nicaragüense and the Triangle Community Foundation’s Entrepreneurial Partnership. Liturgy, this site and blog, the twitter site, and the facebook page, are all about making connections between positive, healthy, intelligent spirituality and the various ordinary and extra-ordinary lives we all lead. I was moved and encouraged by a recent comment in the good discussion on the value of the NRSV:
I enjoy your blog immensely. I only started reading it a few months ago, but it has become one of those blogs where every article is a must-read. For a non-liturgical Protestant seeking more liturgical worship, your blog has been a wonderful find. Thank you for providing this excellent resource.
Thanks to all of you for your support and encouragement.
The dark side of the internet
As with any powerful gift (eg. money, sex, power), the internet can be used for great good and for great evil. From time to time I receive stories of marriage failures attributed to the internet, cyber-bullying, cyber-stalking. The internet can be a tragic time-waster. Anonymous trolls can make comments online that they would never dare to make if their identity was known, or face to face – as they roam around the web solely to start fights. The internet can be damagingly addictive. It is an easy place for intellectual property theft. The list can go on.
A new study by UK psychologists has confirmed what probably most of us realise – there is a link between internet abuse and depression. It is unclear whether internet abuse leads to depression, or whether depressed people are more likely to misuse the internet.
What are your suggestions for keeping your internet use healthy, accountable, ethical? What do you see as significant negative issues in the use of the internet? I know many will appreciate collective wisdom, some guidelines, even suggested rules for oneself.
The pope has issued a proclamation challenging priests “to proclaim the Gospel by employing the latest generation of audiovisual resources (images, videos, animated features, blogs, websites) which, alongside traditional means, can open up broad new vistas for dialogue, evangelization and catechesis.”
Internationally there are some Anglican blogging bishops (I try to keep up with these in the links section). Of the 31 bishops in our province, not one blogs as far as I know (the bishop-elect of Dunedin blogs – we shall see if that continues). Of the more than one and a half thousand Anglican priests in this province I’m aware of a couple that blog, and a few more on twitter. The official website of the province has not been updated in more than a year. Maybe there are Roman Catholic blogging bishops and priests in New Zealand. I am not aware of them. There are still parishes and ministry units without even a website – in spite of web-hosting and production being free and easy now, with advice and help provided on this site. Every parish can have a facebook page (and a twitter). Blogging has never been easier using wordpress or blogger. Such things are not, as those in the church often make them appear to be, things that require great planning and debate. These things take less than 10 minutes to set up. Nothing manifests the yawning gap between average young people and average churchgoers more than the unwillingness of most churchgoers to embrace late 20th century communication technology. The church can be so last millennium!
The pope is on youtube (his videos do not appear to be able to be embedded), and has an iPhone and facebook app, pope2you. Let’s urge him to take his own advice and start blogging. If he is reading this: “I’m very happy to swap links with you”. Some suggestions for the name of the papal blog? “Mass communication”? Maybe not “Papal Bull”. (Definitely not “Red Shoe Diaries”!)
The “Virtual Abbey” has been around for a bit, but with a different name. Now with a clearer name, and a website, this group prays some of the Daily Offices on twitter daily. For the rest of the planet things are a bit out of sync – it is USA based, and remember they celebrate the liturgy last on the planet.
Those who make New Year resolutions: have you thought about praying at least one Office daily? As well as the Virtual Abbey, there are lots of resources in the Virtual Chapel of this site. If you pray the office you might encourage others by placing a badge on your site or blog.
If you know any other quality resources like these, or have positive suggestions for New Year’s resolutions, you are welcome to share them below.
The image above shows the number of visitors to this site over the last four years. In the last month, the average has been 1,500 visitors a day, with about 250 of those daily being regulars here.
Top stories this year were communion on the moon and the end of the Anglican communion, with more than seven thousand visitors each. About half of those arriving here are looking for specific information. Very popular is information about praying the Liturgy of the Hours. The Virtual Chapel is a top resource. The free online-version of my book Celebrating Eucharist also continues to be ranking near the top of the more than 2,000 pages of this site. There was also high interest in Ash Wednesday, Lent, and Easter resources, and, of course, recently Advent and Christmas. The blog is regularly a top landing page. I am interested that only about 5% of visitors come directly from Twitter (with more than 42,000 followers there, I might have expected a higher proportion) – but it is difficult to tell if once found, if people then go directly to this site. Similarly for facebook – only about 1% of visitors come from facebook.
Over 10,000 messages have been filtered out by the spam filter (sorry if your appropriate, un-anonymous, good comment got caught up in that – see the comments policy).
This site is produced by one person, in my spare time, any costs come out of my pocket, I learn to use all the software, I’m grateful for hints and help from friends – but anything that doesn’t work – is my fault 
I’m grateful for your enthusiasm and encouragement – that you find the material useful and visit here and place links on your own site and encourage others to visit encourages me to continue putting effort into this site. May God bless us all as we, in the Year of Our Lord 2010, grow in union with God together.
New Zealand is following other countries in having an “atheist bus campaign”. Atheists are raising $NZ10,000 to mimic the UK campaign and place “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” on several buses in major New Zealand cities. Approximately 12 buses in Auckland, 8 in Wellington and 4 in Christchurch will feature the ads for 4 weeks. Television presenter Mike Hosking caught organiser Simon Fisher on the hop with his first question “why bother?” Hosking, who thinks there probably is no God, cannot see the motivation or purpose for the campaign – and Fisher reacted as if he had never thought of this most obvious of questions. That was soon followed by Jo Kelly-Moore, the Vicar of St Aidans, in Remuera, clearly running circles around Fisher’s weak points.
Rather than fear, or tut-tut, this campaign, I welcome the opportunity for some serious dialogue. One of my followers on twitter interestingly pointed out that Fisher’s language echoed the Alpha course. Alpha may be OK for introducing people who have no idea about Christianity to it – but please can we not stay at the level of alpha – please can we move on towards kappa or further. The website of the NZ Atheist Bus Campaign, over which (rather than the soundbite TV debate) they have full control – does not appear to give an adequate definition for “God” which the site is dedicated to stating “probably does not exist”. The discussions, which I am welcoming, may help Christians to move beyond rather simplistic definitions of God (alpha) towards the classical definitions in which God is not merely “a supernatural being” alongside other beings (”supernatural” or “natural”) – as if adding God to this coffee cup results in now having two “objects”. And with the rather regularly trite comment that atheists believe in merely one less god than Christians do… Hence, Christians and other theists, may be enriched by this discussion into deepening the expression of their faith, revisiting the apophatic tradition (alongside the more common kataphatic approach) of Christianity, emphasising the transcendent nature of God (alongside God’s at-Christmas-time-particularly-appropriate immanent nature).
Let’s have some nuanced discussion, rather than the popular Richard Dawkins approach of pitting the best of science against the most simplistic, childish, flat-earth theism, where every few sentences Dawkins drops a clanger demonstrating his lack of reading of any theist up to beta, let alone kappa! Let’s acknowledge the great damage that bad religion and bad theology and bad spirituality have done. But I don’t see Dawkins giving up sex or money just because of the great damage that sex and money have done in human history! And let’s not pretend that Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong are particularly good exemplars of the USA version of this campaign which had the slogan: “Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness’ sake.” Are those atheists an explanation of what “good” means in a world without a god? Can you be good for goodness sake? Or do we need help to be good? And might being good (for goodness sake) be a sign of God – rather than a denial? Fisher’s slight of hand without any explanation, that “atheism” means “humanism” certainly needs justification. It seems to me that it is belief in God and the sacredness of God’s creation that leads to valuing human life – it will take a lot more than a tweet-length bus slogan to convince me that atheism naturally leads to people caring for others as a consequence.
There’s also a need to tidy other definitions:
Theist – believes in God
Atheist – believes there is no God
Agnostic (type A) – believes it is not possible to know
Agnostic (type B) – “I don’t know…”
Also the word “belief” can do with some clarification. Belief in God as a solely cerebral affirmation is a relatively new usage. “I believe in God” is originally more about trust, about commitment – in the sense of I believe in democracy, I believe in the All Blacks. Certainly “I believe in Jesus” has nothing to do with the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth which is accepted by all but the most extreme of scholars – yet popularly, and amongst some young people, they equate belief in Jesus alongside belief in the tooth-fairy, or at this time, Santa.
Alongside the atrocities of religion, let’s also list off some of the positives: art, music, science, technology, literature, genetics (Dawkins take note), the concept of the Big Bang (a real shock originally mocked by atheists), Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Dante, Shakespeare, Mozart, Bach, Beethoven,…
Alongside the need to clarify the definition of “God”, we are invited to clarify the nature of “God”. “Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” is based on an impression of an almighty punishing ogre in the sky. As Kelly-Moore made crystal clear in the TV interview, nothing could (should!) be further from a Christian perspective of God, a God who is love.
So, in summary, let’s not react against these ads – they are a wonderful opportunity not only to deepen our own reflection, but to clarify the misunderstandings between us. Atheists can be prophets, challenging the idols that Christians present. And just as God does not agree with all done in God’s name – however frequently and fervently God’s name is repeated – so God is not absent from atheists’ lives – however frequently and fervently denied.
If you like the image above, you can drag and drop it into your own blog post
or use the following HTML
You can also produce your own (you can give your version in the comments below)
In passing, spend four minutes listening to Johann Sebastian Bach’s Jesu Joy of Man’s Desiring
Jesu, joy of man’s desiring
Holy wisdom, love most bright
Drawn by Thee, our souls aspiring
Soar to uncreated light
Word of God, our flesh that fashioned
With the fire of life impassioned
Striving still to truth unknown
Soaring, dying round Thy throne
Through the way where hope is guiding
Hark, what peaceful music rings
Where the flock, in Thee confiding
Drink of joy from deathless springs
Theirs is beauty’s fairest pleasure
Theirs is wisdom’s holiest treasure
Thou dost ever lead Thine own
In the love of joys unknown
Vincent Murphy, one of my followers on twitter, and a regular commenter on this site, has on his site uncovered the program for the creation of the universe (you can follow the verses in Genesis 1 indicated eg. // 1:1-5):
[word@god ~]# cat creation.word
#!/bin/word // 1:1-5
begin creation
public earth = new domain();
earth.content = 1/0 * void();
earth.startCreation(’spirit’);
var light = new creation();
try {
earth.addChild(light); }
catch {
throw(E_BAD,’LIGHT FAILURE’); }
earth.light.status = E_GOOD; // all ok
list day(’Day’,'Night’) =
earth.light.filter(dark==false,dark==true);
earth.templates.day = day; // save for future days
earth.today = 1;
earth.days[earth.today++] = byVal earth.templates.day;
//firmament routine // 1:6-8
var f = new creation();
for (var a in earth.waters)
if (a.index>f.index)
{
f.waters.addChild(a);
earth.waters.removeChild(a);
}
private heaven = f;
earth.days[earth.today++] = byVal earth.templates.day;
earth.waters.defragment(); // 1:9-13
var dryland = earth.waters.getFreespace();
var seas = earth.waters.getUtilisation();
try { dryland.generate(E_GRASS,E_HERB,E_FRUIT) }
catch { throw(E_BAD,’LIFE ON EARTH NOT GOOD’); }
dryland.status = E_GOOD;
earth.days[earth.today++] = byVal earth.templates.day;
//lights in heavens, use for signs/seasons/days/years // 1:14-19
var lights = Array();
lights[0] = new light
(size = 10,
attach = earth.templates.day[Day]);
lights[1] = new light
(size = 2,
attach = earth.templates.day[Night]);
foreach (lights as l) heaven.addChild(l);
var stars = Array();
for (var a = 0; a < inf; a++) stars[a] = new star();
foreach (stars as s) heaven.addChild(s);
if (earth.checkStatus()) earth.status = E_OK;
else throw(E_BAD,’LIGHTING ERROR’);
earth.days[earth.today++] = byVal earth.templates.day;
earth.generate(E_WATERCREATURE, E_FOWL); // 1:20-23
earth.setGenerationSpeed(1000);
foreach (earth.creation as x)
if (x.typeOf == E_FOWL) x.setDomain(earth,heaven);
earth.generate(E_WHALES);
foreach (earth.creation as x)
x.limitChild.typeOf=x.typeOf; //after their kind
if (earth.creation.checkStatus()) earth.status = E_OK;
else throw(E_BAD,’CREATION ERROR’);
foreach (earth.creation as x) x.nice–; //more CPU
earth.days[earth.today++] = byVal earth.templates.day;
var livingcreatures = // 1:24-31
Array(E_CATTLE, E_BEAST, E_CREEPING);
earth.generate(livingcreatures);
foreach (earth.creation as x)
x.limitChild.typeOf=x.typeOf; //after their kind
if (earth.creation.checkStatus()) earth.status = E_OK;
else throw(E_BAD,’CREATION ERROR / LIVING THINGS’);
//man project
var man = new creation();
man.style = byVal earth.parentNode.style; //cp God
foreach (earth.creation as x)
if (x.hasLife) x.addController(man.groupId);
man.addVariant(E_FEMALE);
man.addVariant(E_MALE);
man.addFood(livingcreatures,E_GRASS,E_HERB,E_FRUIT);
man.nice–;
earth.creation.addChild(man);
foreach (earth.creation as x)
if (x.hasLife && (x.typeOf == E_BEAST || x.typeOf == E_CREEP ||
x.typeOf = E_FOWL)) x.addFood(E_HERB);
if (earth.getStatus() && heaven.getStatus()) return (E_VERYGOOD);
else throw(E_BAD,’FAILURE ON DAY 6′);
earth.days[earth.today++] = byVal earth.templates.day;
daemonize();
//TODO: rest
//TODO: expose parent API to creation
//TODO: invoke interactive-mode man object (sometime later)
end program
[word@god ~]# date
Mon Jan 01 00:00:00 GMT 0000
[word@god ~]# ./creation.word
Creation started as pid 143. To stop type: kill -9 143
Got status: E_VERYGOOD
Appending output to creation.log
[word@god ~]# _
Occasionally one encounters an internet troll. Their aim is merely to pick a fight. Recently I had a person on twitter take issue with my calling myself a priest.
This person claims to be a church leader (not a priest!) in a well-known denomination, claims to be able to read Greek, etc. But he could not and would not answer my simple question posed in different ways: “what is the origin of the English word priest?” Even after I twice sent him links on the etymology of the English word priest. Instead, I got a barrage of responses about Maryolatry, Christ’s unrepeatable sacrificial death, the inefficacy of works, the absence of Christ in the Eucharist, the priesthood of all believers, the evils of tradition, and on and on it went…
The word priest came up in last Sunday’s reading didn’t it:
Hebrews 10:11-14,(15-18),19-25
11 And every priest stands day after day at his service, offering again and again the same sacrifices that can never take away sins.
12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, “he sat down at the right hand of God,”
13 and since then has been waiting “until his enemies would be made a footstool for his feet.”
14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying,
16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,”
17 he also adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”
18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.
19 Therefore, my friends, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus,
20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh),
21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God,
22 let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who has promised is faithful.
24 And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds,
25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
The problem is akin to the issue with the English word “love”. Generally people have become more nuanced with that word, clarifying if they mean love (agape, αγάπη) or love (eros, ἔρως), etc. We need to do the same IMO with the word priest.
The English word priest derives from the Greek presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος), in fact it is a contraction that can still be spotted from the original word PRESbuTeros. [Just as the English word bishop derives from the Greek episcopos (επίσκοπος) and is also a contraction that can still be spotted from the original word: ePISCOPos.]
The word used in the letter to the Hebrews reading above, in the concept of priesthood of all believers, in the Old Testament for Levites, etc. is NOT presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος). It is a completely different word: hiereus (ἱερεύς). Unfortunately the English word priest does double duty. It is rightly used for the ordained elder in a community, the presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος), as it has from the beginning of Christianity. It has also come to be used for hiereus (ἱερεύς).
Unfortunately, because of this simple dual usage of the English word, theological confusion reigns. Many abandon the Christian tradition going back to the New Testament of leadership by a priest/presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος) on some sort of misunderstood assumption that our shared hiereus (ἱερεύς) has overthrown the New Testament and undivided-church tradition of such leadership by a priest/presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος). Unfortunately the prevalence of clericalism in some quarters, where priest/presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος) is treated as some sort of sacred caste, has in fact made the issue worse, not better.
Because of the misunderstanding between the terms, many think and act as if getting the laity to act more like a priest/presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος) is somehow affirming the priesthood of all believers when it does nothing of the sort – it is unfortunately merely clericalising all the baptised rather than affirming and living any real vocation to our shared hiereus (ἱερεύς) with Christ. Getting laity up the front in worship and dressing them priest/presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος)-like, advocating for the abolition of priestly/presbuteros (πρεσβύτερος) presiding at the Eucharist, and so forth is not about understanding the hiereus (ἱερεύς) of all Christians whatsoever, it is merely showing an ignorance of the multi-faceted vocations that are offered within the one body of Christ, the church.
No comments from internet trolls please
I provide wonderful resources for those who genuinely want to work harder at understanding the original biblical texts.
I am an avid fan of the Matrix and the way that it tells the story of Christ (amongst other stories). My followers on twitter will be aware of my passion even from my profile image.
Here is a video from the Russian actor’s group “Big Difference” (Bolshaya Raznitsa / Большая Разница): What if Matrix was shot in the silent films’ era? Enjoy!
If you have never seen the Matrix, here is a 5 second summary which should help you understand the previous video:
UPDATE Since I put up the above two videos, I have been shown the following also: “Matrix Runs on Windows XP”
If you are hesitant about getting online, starting a blog, organising a parish or group website, setting up a twitter profile – let me encourage you not to hesitate. Any of these are now so simple to set up, free, and easy to run. They need not be time-consuming. You may not know the positive good you are spreading through a ripple effect. I receive many tweets, comments, and emails affirming the value of a cyber-presence. Here is one recent email as an example
You may be interested to learn of the ripple effect of your website. Some time ago I visited it after reading about your “Liturgy of the Notices” on the [...] list. After reading your recommendation I bought Benedictine Daily Prayer and began observing the Liturgy of the Hours. I put a brief note about this on the [...] Facebook page, a site I check into very infrequently. Another member contacted me about this after buying the book, asking for help in navigation, so I sent him the list of page numbers for a couple of offices and he figured it out after that. His life has become so enriched from observing the hours, as has mine, he is now becoming a Benedictine Oblate.
Thank you for all your good work. I’m sure there are many more blessings you’ve spread that you don’t even know about.
So if you have wondered whether to get online – I hope this post is the encouragement you need to give it a go.
Update: I am thrilled with the interest in this post, which is currently running about a reader every 8 seconds. It is also gratifying to see such helpful and positive comments. If there are any developments, rather than altering this post I think I would produce another – I already have some ideas in mind. So if you are interested, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or other ways of seeing what is new here.
Update: part 2 of this reflection is here
A few hours ago there was an absolute internet frenzy as people predicted and then reported, tweet by tweet, the announcement from the Vatican and the joint press conference by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of Westminster.
Let me add my own initial thoughts to this confusing dust-cloud following the announcement that the pope will create “Personal Ordinariates” for Anglicans who wish to come home to Rome. Archbishop Rowan said that it would be a “serious mistake” to view the development as a response to the difficulties within the Anglican Communion. As we in New Zealand say: “Yeah right!”
To anyone who has been watching the direction that Pope Benedict has been moving, and those he has been welcoming into his fold, the commentary that this is “surprising” is itself surprising. Just to mention recent events that have been in the news: the reconciliation with Holocaust-denying Bishop Richard Williamson and his Society of St. Pius X, the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum” giving wider possibility to celebrate the pre-Vatican II Latin Mass, reconciliation with the traditionalist “Transalpine Redemptorists,” and so forth. I want to highlight some things I have not yet seen mentioned:
- married priests in Anglican Personal Ordinariates will have to marry prior to ordination to the diaconate
They will not be able to marry after ordination. Should his wife die, or he gets divorced (sorry – his marriage is annulled) he will not be able to marry. Roman Catholic deacons can be married, but in order to do so, must be married prior to ordination. In the tweeting frenzy Scott Richert wrote, “There is no warrant in tradition for marrying AFTER receiving Holy Orders. None.” He may very well be right. I am genuinely interested in this point, and hope that people in the comments box below might provide evidence for or against this. My reply to him for clarification has not yet been responded to.
- bishops in Anglican Personal Ordinariates are celibate
- there has been no rescinding of Apostolicae Curae.
Anglican orders are not accepted by the Vatican. Anglican “priests” joining Anglican Personal Ordinariates in order to function as priests will have to be ordained twice (or at least conditionally ordained twice). And they will have to be males. Anglican “bishops” joining Anglican Personal Ordinariates in order to function as bishops will have to be ordained thrice (or at least conditionally ordained thrice). And they will have to be males. And celibate.
From a church (New Zealand Anglican) that leads Christian history in having created a “Tikanga” structure (where there are parallel episcopal jurisdictions according to cultural streams) I am intrigued by the concept of “Personal Ordinariates.” These are described by John Allen as “non-territorial diocese” (which sounds like an oxymoron to me!) My comment to Scott Richert and anyone else is: There is no warrant in tradition for “Personal Ordinariates.” None. But, of course, as usual, I am very very comfortable to be demonstrated wrong on this also. Please… anyone?
The end of the Anglican Communion?
As Mark Twain would say, “The reports of the end of the Anglican Communion are greatly exaggerated.” Andrew Brown, a regular person lining up for the funeral of the Communion, highlights his own weak grasp on the issues by declaring that only homosexuals can be celibate! Clearly heterosexuals, it would appear according to him, are either too weak or too immoral to be able to control their urges (not to mention that Andrew Brown is unable to distinguish doctrine from discipline). Scott Richert may have a slightly better grasp on the consequences for Anglicanism. Whilst no one would want to impugn curate’s-egg motives to the Archbishop of Canterbury, one cannot help wondering if there is just the flicker of a smile under that beard. In one Roman gesture he may be rid of, at one estimate, up to 2,000 of his CofE priests who have been holding out against his strong conviction for women in all three orders. Rowan Williams is well-known for ordaining openly practising homosexuals. Traditionalist Anglicans around the globe have struggled with women and with gays in a committed relationship being ordained. Commentators are repeatedly highlighting that this is an invitation from Rome to misogynists and homophobes.
In North America some Anglicans formed a new denomination The Anglican Church of North America (ACNA). This brings together two extremes of the Anglican spectrum – Rome-facing and Geneva-facing. This marriage of convenience, like the 1977 followers of the Affirmation of St. Louis, cannot last, as, at its heart it is united around being against one thing. Rome’s declaration cannot but affect it. If the Rome-facing ACNA (married) bishops can stomach losing their purple, pectoral crosses, honorary doctoral gowns, and complex titles, they may yet lead their groups home to Rome. This will impact the attempt of some Anglicans to produce a “covenant”. Nigerian “Anglicans” have already formally removed the Archbishop of Canterbury from their constitution. Sydney Anglicans, leaders in GAFON/FOCA/Mainstream, are now not only struggling with theology, church history, and liturgical practice, but have recently realised they haven’t been that good at investments either (their $265 million assets are now worth $105 million). This Geneva-facing, congregationalist end of the Anglican spectrum does not need a Communion in the way that others see it. Rome’s announcement may help towards trimming off the extremes leaving an Anglican Communion that is certainly leaner but hopefully spending far less energy on peripherals and with a stronger focus on the end of the Communion, in the sense of the purpose of the church.
It is not the numbers inside the church that is ultimately significant IMO. It is the focus on service – in the two senses: our liturgical worship of God, and our service to God by our care of people and God’s world. Anglicanism may yet, through this, become more clearly a 21st century church episcopally led, synodically governed, and adapted for the particular context in which it finds itself, working “together with other Provinces and with our ecumenical and interfaith partners to promote God’s reign on earth.”
Don’t miss this awesome little 2 minute video. A simple idea with an anagram most, I suspect, had noticed previously – but this takes that so much further without belabouring it. Beautifully produced by Wendy Francisco.
Recent Comments