More thoughts on liturgy

Posted on April 19, 2009 by me

From Sacred Ground Music:

Liturgy is gaining popularity again. It has wide appeal to emergent communities because it seems to make the sacred accessable, and hearkens back to a time where the church seemed to be more…pure…authentic. Whether this is a passing trend remains to be seen. I hope it isn’t! Liturgy has much to offer, and I continue to grow in my appreciation of it.

First, liturgy helps us to keep the facts of faith from becoming muddled. The Apostles and Nicene creeds and hymns like the Nunc Dimmitis and Magnificat witness to a message that doesn’t change with history and trends. Whereas the speed of life seems to narrow our focus to the tyranny of the so-called urgent, what liturgy points to remains unchanged and becomes a vital source for touching the eyes of our hearts and restoring our sight.

Second, liturgy is pedagogy: a repeated reenactment of the redemption story. In this reenactment we are doing more than going through the motions of some kind of divine skit. Redemption happens. Through confession and absolution, scripture readings, the preaching of God’s word, and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper God meets us with his gifts of forgiveness and strength to live our faith. Spiritual amnesia comes easily. The repeated reminder of our need for grace and forgiveness is vital for us to remain what Luther called “pure receivers”. Without this, we so easily drift out of the arena of God’s favor. In a word, liturgy keeps me humble. It doesn’t leave room for the cancer of self-effort.

h/t to Paul T. McCain

Posted in Church, The Liturgy | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Easter reflections

Posted on April 15, 2009 by me

In America, we typically look ahead, rather than behind. Once a holiday is over, the decorations are ripped down and packed away, and it’s off to plan the next big event. But, just give me a moment to offer a couple of thoughts about Easter, as I’m still celebrating.

Easter has not been my favorite holiday, aside from maple cream flavored Easter eggs (which I can no longer eat). This was especially true for the last 20-some years, as Easter reminds me of my Dad’s death.  For most of my life I have tended to separate holiday celebrations from any religious significance, being one of those who sees all days alike (Rom. 14:5), in spite of having a very incarnational theology.  However, over the last couple of years I have become more and more incarnational, as well as liturgical. Christmas has taken on a new meaning for me, as has Easter.  I realize that the dates are somewhat arbitrary, but that’s not the point; the point is our meaning and purpose in the celebration.  As it turns out, Easter has become my favorite holiday.

Easter has always remained the focus of the Eastern liturgical year, while in the West Christmas took precedent.  I honestly can see both points; the incarnation is astounding. On the other hand, the Resurrection is the foundation of our faith; as Paul pointed out in 1 Cor. 15, if Christ didn’t rise from the dead, then neither shall we – and then we are to be “pitied more than all men.”

This year, I was struck by a new realization that also emphasizes the importance of Easter: atheists hate the Easter holiday.  This surprised me at first; I expected them to brush it off and go about life as normal. After all, most Evangelical Christians don’t really put a lot of stock in the day itself.  And, like Christmas, Easter has it’s share of non-religious aspects: chocolate bunnies, egg hunts, and so on.  We all know these accoutrements come from pagan fertility celebrations, so what’s the big deal?

Joe over at Debunking Christianity posted an “Easter Sunrise Blasphemy” which gives his perspective. Then, as I perused a few more atheist blogs Easter morning, I started to see a trend.  Whether it’s the whole concept of the cross and what that means – sin, judgment and death – or the meaning of the Resurrection, it apparently hits a nerve wity many atheists, much more so than Christmas.  Perhaps it’s that Easter is exclusive (even though most of us believe Christ died and rose for all mankind); or, perhaps it’s that Easter is intolerant of other faiths, or non-faiths. Or, perhaps Easter is simply the watershed issue in Christianity: either Christians are wrong and celebrating in vain,  or we’re right and non-Christians are missing out.

Whatever the issue, as I read through these posts, I kept thinking, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of salvation to all those who believe.”  Easter is exclusive, in that only those who have experienced resurrection can understand and share in the celebration. Easter is also intolerant and divisive; it says boldly, “we’re right” (and by default, “you’re wrong”).  Or, in other words, “I’m resurrected (and you’re just dead).”  It is the watershed of Christianity.  And I, for one, make no apologies for this; in fact, I celebrate Easter, along with millions of other Christians.  This is not to say that I don’t have sorrow for those like Joe who say, “I hate Easter.”

Easter – the Gospel – also happens to be inclusive: It is available to all.  However, as it turns out, Easter is only exclusive in that requires death in order to celebrate it.

Ay, there’s the rub…

Posted in Theological Musings | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Atheist convert A.N. Wilson deconverts (back to Christianity)

Posted on April 14, 2009 by me

Perhaps one of the more famous Christians-turned-atheist is author A.N. Wilson, who wrote biographies of people like C.S. Lewis & Tolstoy, as well as the “demythologizing” Jesus: A Life.   In this morning’s Mail Online, he writes,

For much of my life, I, too, have been one of those who did not believe. It was in my young manhood that I began to wonder how much of the Easter story I accepted, and in my 30s I lost any religious belief whatsoever.

Like many people who lost faith, I felt anger with myself for having been ‘conned’ by such a story. I began to rail against Christianity, and wrote a book, entitled Jesus, which endeavoured to establish that he had been no more than a messianic prophet who had well and truly failed, and died.

Why did I, along with so many others, become so dismissive of Christianity?

He blames the anti-Christian attitudes of Britain for much of his loss of faith, which “lends weight to the fervour of the anti-God fanatics, such as the writer Christopher Hitchens and the geneticist Richard Dawkins, who think all the evil in the world is actually caused by religion.”  He discusses some of these attitudes, then writes,

For ten or 15 of my middle years, I, too, was one of the mockers. But, as time passed, I found myself going back to church, although at first only as a fellow traveller with the believers, not as one who shared the faith that Jesus had truly risen from the grave. Some time over the past five or six years – I could not tell you exactly when – I found that I had changed.

When I took part in the procession last Sunday and heard the Gospel being chanted, I assented to it with complete simplicity.

He then goes on to explain in part why he began to once again believe – and it is not perhaps what you would think, unless you understood the true nature of Christianity, as celebrated in Easter.  He concludes the article with

Materialist atheism says we are just a collection of chemicals. It has no answer whatsoever to the question of how we should be capable of love or heroism or poetry if we are simply animated pieces of meat.

The Resurrection, which proclaims that matter and spirit are mysteriously conjoined, is the ultimate key to who we are. It confronts us with an extraordinarily haunting story.

J. S. Bach believed the story, and set it to music. Most of the greatest writers and thinkers of the past 1,500 years have believed it.

But an even stronger argument is the way that Christian faith transforms individual lives – the lives of the men and women with whom you mingle on a daily basis, the man, woman or child next to you in church tomorrow morning.

Christ is risen indeed!  There is hope; but then, some of us already knew that.

Posted in Faith, Science & Doubt | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

More Bart Ehrman, Interrupted

Posted on April 14, 2009 by me

I’ve been posting a bit about Bart Ehrman’s ridiculous book, Jesus, Interrupted, and linking to Ben Witherington‘s series (now up to part 4) examining Ehrman’s claims.  In post #4, BW writes,

The early church, as we begin to see already in Papias, was confident that their ultimate source documents went back to apostles, prophets, eyewitnesses and their co-workers, which is why these 27 documents are in the NT. They were composed by Paul (with help of scribes and co-workers), Peter (1 Peter with help of Silas probably), Mark, Luke (both co-workers of both Peter and Paul), the 4th Evangelist (drawing on Beloved Disciple written sources. The Beloved Disciple composed 1-3 John himself), the compiler of Matthew, James, Jude, perhaps Apollos in the case of Hebrews, John of Patmos, and at the very end of the NT period, the compiler of 2 Peter, drawing on Petrine and other materials.

In short, the NT can be traced back to about 8 people, either eyewitness apostles, or co-workers of such eyewitnesses and apostles. Early Christianity’s leaders were largely literate, and some of them, like Paul and the author of Hebrews, were first rate rhetoricians as well.

The post contains an immense amount of information on how to evaluate ancient literature, and specifically on the authorship and integrity of the New Testament documents.  I don’t know who needs this more, the atheists who are waving Ehrman’s book like a flag, or fundamentalists.

Every Christian should have some real understanding of where the Bible came from and why it’s believable; otherwise, fools like Ehrman come along with their incredibly bad scholarship, or claims about “other gospels,” throwing people to and fro.  The Bible is an extremely reliable set of ancient documents, supported by other documents. It doesn’t exist in a vacuum, as many people seem to think.  It didn’t just fall from the sky, and it wasn’t handed over to Joseph Smith to read with magic glasses.

One book I really want to read – when I have time – is Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham (mentioned by BW in his post).  Another I am adding to my list is BW’s future book What’s In A Word, whenever that comes out.  These days it’s not enough to slap a bumper sticker on your car or wear a WWJD bracelet (not that it ever was), or live from emotional high to emotional high; Christians are faced with all kinds of ridiculous claims by people looking for reasons not to believe. We should all be ready with enough knowledge of the truth to call a fool a fool.

Posted in Faith, Science & Doubt, Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment