On Human Nature

The First Sunday in Advent

ALMIGHTY God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armour of light, now in the time of this mortal life, in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty, to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and ever. Amen.

 For most children, at some point in their school career they will be asked that basic philosophical question about the nature of humanity. Are humans, by nature, evil or good? It is a complex question that many philosophers throughout the ages have struggled with. For children, it is perhaps a simpler question of examining the world around them and reporting on it.

They see evil, murder, theft, sexual violence, war and conclude that it is part of human nature to do evil. Others might, in the midst of that evil, particularly if they are not touched by it directly or are perhaps by virtue of their parents shielded from it in some way, conclude that humanity is by nature good.

Children who are shielded from the news and other sources of violence might conclude that humans are generally good because that is what they experience around themselves. Those who see evil—murder, theft, sexual violence and immorality and war—might conclude that humans are by nature evil. Sure enough, when something bad happens or someone sins, how common is it for someone to suggest that it is human nature?

Even within Christian communities, when someone speaks of their own trouble with temptation and sin, how common is it for someone to suggest that it is simply human nature that we sin or otherwise succumb to temptation? Is that correct?

It is not. God did not create humanity to sin. Indeed, we are made in his image and likeness.

In the ancient Church, worship was for the saints while it was adoration that was reserved for God. Today, we worship God and adore babies. As Fr Michael McKinnon once joked, however, there is only one adorable baby in human history, and that is Christ himself.

Yet when we consider the nativity and incarnation, it’s not simply to think about the adorable baby he was born as (in both senses, certainly), but rather what the implications of the incarnation are. In this season of Advent, as we anticipate the incarnation, it seems appropriate to consider what Christ’s taking on a human nature implies about our own humanity.

Isaiah contains a number of prophesies related to the coming and incarnation of Christ the Messiah. St John of Damascus, in considering Isaiah 7 which contains the famous prophesy that, “the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel,” (Isa 7. 14), suggested that Christ’s incarnation reflects on human nature itself, that, “by the transgression [of Adam and Eve] we were driven from the natural to the unnatural, but the Lord led us back from the unnatural to the natural. For this is what is the meaning of in our image, after our likeness.”

To St John, then, humans are by nature good, and this is reflected in Scripture both in the creation story of Genesis, but further in the discussion of Christ’s nature and explication on why the incarnation occurred as it did. This view of the natural state of humanity being good, impaired by sin to the unnatural state of sin, was shared by other early fathers of the Church.

St Gregory of Palamas, a 14th century theologian venerated primarily in the East, wrote extensively on the incarnation, again affirming the beliefs of the fathers. He describes how Adam was created undefiled, until he turned aside from God, tempted by the pleasures of the flesh and underwent the defilement of sin. In so saying, he argues again that by nature, man is good and it is the tyranny of sin which, contrary to our created nature, pushes humanity towards evil.

In his own words, “originally God created the first Adam undefiled and he was new until he voluntarily obeyed the devil. He turned aside after the pleasures of the flesh, underwent the defilement of sin, grew old and fell into what is contrary to nature.”

St Gregory spoke to the incarnation of Christ, noting that the purpose of the incarnation was that in coming among as us as man, Christ could take our sins upon himself, a full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice for all and for all time. In order to do this, though, a number of things were needed.

Christ was not conceived by ordinary means, but by the Holy Spirit, such that:

he was the only one neither shapen in iniquity nor conceived in sin, that is to say in the fleshy pleasure, passion and unclean thoughts that belong to our nature defiled by transgression. The point of this was that the nature he assumed should be entirely pure and unsullied, so that he himself would not need to be purified but would, in his wisdom, accept everything for our sake.

Note again how St Gregory stresses, as St John of Damascus did, that human nature had been defiled by the transgression of Adam, yet in Christ’s incarnation and pure life he was able to die, not because of his own sins, but in order that he be a sacrifice for ours. He writes further, “Born of a woman that he might restore the human nature created by him.”

Sin and evil are not humanity’s nature, they are a corruption of our natural state. In as much as Christ had a dual nature, both fully God and fully man, humans too can be viewed, in some respects, as being of a dual nature: our natural state, as we were created before the fall, and our current state, corrupted in sin. In his sacrifice St Gregory writes, Christ has made, “his flesh an inexhaustible source of sanctification with abundant power to wash away the defilement of our first parents, and sufficient to sanctify everyone who came after them.”

When we see evil in the world, injustice, violence, hatred or any other kind, it should not be viewed as part of our nature. It is alien to us. What we are seeing is the nature of sin, and often enough lives lived in slavery to it.

St Paul wrote often using the imagery of our slavery and bondage to sin. He also wrote, however, that in Christ there is freedom. Our shackles will be removed. Our sins will be wiped clean. In Christ, we come closer and closer to true human nature, the image and likeness of God in which we were first created.

In this season of advent, it is this reality that we are called to reflect upon. The true meaning of the Nativity of our Lord.

On Christ’s Nature

The Feast of the Reign of Christ

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, whose will it is to restore all things in thy well-beloved Son, the King of kings and Lord of lords: Mercifully grant that the peoples of the earth, divided and enslaved by sin, may be freed and brought together under his most gracious rule; who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

The Sunday Next before Advent

STIR Up, we beseech thee, O Lord, the wills of thy faithful people; that they, plenteously bringing forth the fruit of good works, may of thee be plenteously rewarded; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

One of the early controversy’s over Christ’s nature in the early Church involved acceptance of his humanity. This seems a bit off for Christians and non-Christians today, for whom acceptance of his humanity is easy and it is the acceptance of his divinity which proves troubling for many, but which is a mandatory matter of faith for Christians, as it says in the Nicene Creed, Christ is, “God, of God; Light, of Light; Very God, of very God… Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man.” Christ is fully God and fully man. In St Paul’s letters, and indeed throughout the entire New Testament, there is another narrative on Christ, one which can perhaps be traced back to some of Isaiah’s prophecies on Christ.

Isaiah 53 is the famous prophecy of the suffering servant. Famous among Christians because it is often read in Advent, foretelling the coming of Christ:

He was despised and rejected by men;
    a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
    he was despised, and we esteemed him not. (Isa 53. 3)

The idea of the suffering servant was something difficult for Jews to reconcile with the the Messiah. To them, he was going to be like one of the Judges; a military leader sent to unity the Jews and drive out the oppressors, in this case the Romans.

It is from some of these earliest prophetic Scriptures about Christ that we begin to understand that the earlier conception of Christ as being only glory and hope were incomplete.

Suffering and hope function together in Scripture. St Paul famously recounts in his epistle to the Romans how suffering produces endurance and character which leads to hope. He then goes on to more explicitly state that our hope is found in Christ, in that, “while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us,” (Rm 5. 6, 8).

In our Christian walk, it is common to look with anticipation for glory and hope. Our faith is, after all, the writer of Hebrews says, “faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen,” (Heb 11. 1). We have hope in salvation through Christ. It is through his sacrifice that we have hope for reconciliation with him and anointing in the Holy Spirit. This is no mean thing, and it is on Christ’s death and resurrection that Christian faith hinges.

For some, there are times when they cannot see God’s love and when hope seems beyond reason. There are times when all we can see is Christ’s suffering, or read about the oppression and captivity of the Jews in the Old Testament. St Paul himself suffered greatly during his ministry, but never allowed his perspective to become dominated by his own suffering. No matter what, he  held to the hope of salvation offered in Christ.

The wholeness of Christ is to recognize that he came both with suffering and with joy. As Nicky Gumbel points out, “the Christian faith uniquely combines laughter and tears, joy and solemnity.” In Psalm 126 we are told:

Those who sow in tears
    shall reap with shouts of joy!
He who goes out weeping,
    bearing the seed for sowing,
shall come home with shouts of joy,
    bringing his sheaves with him. (Ps 126. 5, 6)

The duality of Christ is held in these verses. Christ does not promise that we will live a life of ease, he promises truth and asks us to follow him to come to know his Father. Very explicitly, Christ says, “And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me,” (St Mt 10. 38). There is promise of great glory, but never to the exclusion of suffering or pain.

In the midst of suffering, it is possible that it cane dominate our perspective, excluding any consideration of hope or glory. St Paul reminds us, though, that, “the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us,” (Rm 8. 18). When we place our sufferings in their eternal context, they are made incomparably small next to the glory that awaits those who have faith in Christ Jesus.

There is comfort for those who suffer both in their future prospects and also in the present time. Christ foretold the coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. In a number of places throughout Holy Scripture, the Holy Spirit is described as a comforter. The Holy Spirit comes alongside us and dwells within us to comfort and strengthen us. Perhaps most comfortingly, in those times of extreme suffering when we cannot form words to express our suffering and petitions to God to help us endure, St Paul tells us that, “the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words,” (Rm 8. 26). God hears our hearts, and indeed through Christ’s human nature is able to share in our human suffering. Indeed, St James reminds us of the hope in our suffering in that he who perseveres in suffering is blessed, “for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him,” (Jas 1. 12).

Christ’s dual nature is one that reminds us of his own teachings: “I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world,” (St Jn 16. 33). This life is one of tears and joy, one in which we, in Christ, have married together suffering and endurance with hope and joy. When we are faced with suffering, it is not an indication of the absence of God, but rather a natural course of our lives in which we are called to mirror Christ’s suffering and endure, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, so that in the end we will inherit the joy and glory that has been promised to us.

Wisdom of Saints: St Hilda of Whitby

Feast of Hilda, Abbess of Whitby, 680

O GOD Most High, the creator of all mankind, we bless thy holy Name for the virtue and grace which thou hast given unto holy women in all ages, especially thy servant Hilda; and we pray that the example of her faith and purity, and courage unto death, may inspire many souls in this generation to look unto thee, and to follow thy blessed Son Jesus Christ our Saviour; who with thee and the Holy Spirit liveth and reigneth, one God, world without end. Amen.

Details of St Hilda’s life are few and far between, with most of the account coming from St Bede’s history of the English Church in which he devotes a chapter to her life (Book 4, Chapter 23). Her story is notable for her piety, devotion to Scripture, her wisdom and role in the Synod at Whitby and finally by virtue of the fact that as a woman she retained the respect and influence that she did in seventh century Christendom.

St Hilda was born in 614 in Northumbria in England. Her father was Prince Hereric of Deira and her mother Lady Bregswith. Her father was the nephew of King Edwin of Northumbria. Born pagan, King Edwin was converted to Christianity around 627 and the royal household followed suit, with St Hilda being baptised that year at the age of thirteen.

While there is justifiable scepticism over whether or not someone has truly come to faith when they are converted to Christianity as the result of a monarch of head of their household being converted, St Hilda demonstrated throughout her life a profound commitment to Christ, and deep wisdom that comes from God (Jas 1. 5; 3. 17). St Bede records that when Hilda was still young and at a point when they were living in exile under Cedric, king of the Britons, her mother, Lady Bregswith, had a dream in which her husband, Hereric, was taken away from her and she was searching for him. No matter where she looked, she couldn’t find him. Finally she found a necklace and as she examined it the necklace blazed with bright light that filled all Britain with its brilliance. The dream is considered prophetic of St Hilda’s life, as her love of Christ, the wisdom she gave and the exemplar life she lived shone forth Christ’s light throughout Britain.

While she is viewed as having a devout and chaste youth, it wasn’t until she had reached maturity that she became determined to fully dedicate her life to Christ. At the age of 33, St Hilda chose the consecrated life, having become a nun in the Benedictine order. She had originally sought to travel to the continent. St Bede describes her determination, saying she sought, “to live an exile for our Lord’s sake… so that she might the more easily attain her eternal heavenly home.” St Bede goes on to record that St Aidan of Lindisfarne, known as the Apostle of Northumbria due to his missionary work throughout Northumbria, called on St Hilda to establish monasteries in Northumbria rather than simply living abroad. While himself a bishop, St Aidan was firmly rooted in the monastic Celtic traditions which had Christianised Britain from Iona in the north, rather than in the Roman tradition which had begun at Canterbury in the south.

St Hilda remained in Northumbria, and her noble upbringing aided in her establishment of a number of successful monasteries throughout the region. She was first made Abbess of the monastery called Heruteu (modern Hartlepool). There she earned an even greater reputation for piety and devotion to God. While she herself was Benedictine, she organized the monsastery using the traditions of St Columba and the Rule of the Irish Church. After some time as Abbess there, she established a new double monastery called Streanaeshalch, known more commonly as Whitby in 657. It was established under the same strict disciplines and Rule of Life as her previous monastery had been governed, but in this case the double monastery provided both for monks and nuns. Hilda as Abbess was considered both just, fair and wise, and as her reputation, particularly for wisdom, grew she began to be sought out for counsel by all manner of people, from bishops to kings.

She was extremely devoted to the study of Holy Scripture—a notable commonality among many of the wisest of saints—and it should be no surprise that no less than five of the monks who entered her monastery would eventually go on to ordination and consecration as bishops.

It should be noted that as an Abbess in the Celtic tradition, she was the supreme authority in the area, above even the bishops. This historical development stemmed from the missionary reality that bishops were based in cities which were connected by roads, whereas when St Patrick arrived in Ireland there were no cities or roads and so it was the monasteries that he formed which became central to the administration and maintenance of faith. When St Columba brought to the faith to Iona, that monastic-based form of Christianity began to spread throughout Britain, and was the tradition in which St Hilda had been raised.

This placed St Hilda in an important position when her monastery played host to the Synod at Whitby in 664, a synod convened to seek to determine the future of the Church in the region and whether it would continue in the Celtic tradition or would seek to adopt the more Roman styled Christianity which had arrived in Kent. St Hilda herself was a supporter of her own tradition, though the Synod ultimately sided with Rome.

In 673 and for the remainder of her life, she was afflicted with a painful illness. St Bede described it, saying God gave:

her holy soul the trial of a long infirmity of the flesh, to the end that, according to the Apostle’s example, her virtue might be made perfect in weakness. Struck down with a fever, she suffered from a burning heat, and was afflicted with the same trouble for six years continually; during all which time she never failed either to return thanks to her Maker, or publicly and privately to instruct the flock committed to her charge; for taught by her own experience she admonished all men to serve the Lord dutifully, when health of body is granted to them, and always to return thanks faithfully to Him in adversity, or bodily infirmity.

Her ability to endure and rejoice in suffering and her continued faith and rejoicing in the midst of great physical pain was an example to many, and again helped to bring many to faith in Christ by her example.

St Hilda was a patron of the arts and writing, beyond promoting learning, particularly study of the Scriptures, and some of the only words of her own in existance are a poem attributed to her, which if not written by the saint herself, certainly exemplifies her faith and teachings:

Trade with the gifts God has given you.
Bend your minds to holy learning,
that you may escape the fretting moth of
littleness of mind that would wear out your souls.

Brace your wills to action
that they may not be the spoils of weak desires.

Train your hearts and lips to song
which gives courage to the soul.
Being buffeted by trials, learn to laugh.
Being reproved, give thanks.
Having failed, determine to succeed.

On the Marks of Mission

The Twenty-Fourth Sunday after Trinity

O LORD, we beseech thee, absolve thy people from their offences; that through thy bountiful goodness we may all be delivered from the bands of those sins, which by our frailty we have committed. Grant this, O heavenly Father, for Jesus Christ’s sake, our blessed Lord and Saviour. Amen.

While the four Marks of the Church, that it is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, might be the four traditional marks used to identify the Church, and which are referenced in the Apostle’s Creed and listed in the Nicene Creed, the Marks of Mission are much more commonly referenced in Church documents in the modern Anglican Church of Canada. The Marks of Mission were articulated by the Anglican Communion in the mid-1980s as a means of describing the central mission of the Anglican Communion as a church. There are five marks, of which only the first two are distinctly Christian, namely to proclaim the Good News of Christ and to teach, baptise and nurture new believers. The remaining three Marks are characterized more as social activism, namely to respond to human need in loving service, to transform unjust power structures in society and to promote peace and reconciliation and finally to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew life on the earth.

To be clear, while there are no Christian distinctives in the majority of the Marks (unless one considers describing the earth in terms of creation as distinctly Christian), that does not mean the Marks of Mission are un-Christian. Far from it. Yet at the same time, when the final three marks are pursued far more vigorously than the first two, it does leave one to pause and question the purposes of the marks and the broader vision of the church in terms of mission.

One could argue that the goal of the Marks is to sanctify society. It envisions a society in which violence is never considered as a tool, there is some form of justice for all, creation is respected, the Gospel is proclaimed and all people are brought to Christ. And yet, centuries before the Marks of Mission were proclaimed, St Francis of Assisi noted that, “if you sanctify yourself, you will sanctify society.”

His point was that the Anglican Church of Canada seems to be doing things backwards: focusing on, as an institutional priority, sanctifying society in some way, or rather advocating for it, while assuming that the sanctification of individuals will come later. It should not be ignored that the first Mark is to proclaim the Gospel, and yet a quick search of ‘mark of mission’ on the Anglican.ca website or on anglicanjournal.ca turns up references almost exclusively to the fourth mark of mission, that of transforming unjust structures of society and opposing violence. One news article describes a church seeking to live out the marks of mission, and its description of that points exclusively to human service, social activism but with no connection to the first two marks, and indeed an emphasis on how they avoid evangelism at their events.

The view that the social justice marks must be persued as a priority places an emphasis on social activism rather than personal sanctification, and thus implies that sanctification is a result of those good works. Yet St Paul suggests in Romans 14 that works that do not proceed from faith proceed from sin (Rm 14. 23b) and this interpretation is supported by the work of the scholastics and Article XIII. This viewpoint seems stringent, but reinforces the fact that without God’s grace, we are slaves to sin. It is in Christ that we are set free from sin, and it is through the strengthening and empowering of the Holy Spirit that we do good works in faith. Just as we are saved by faith and not works, society will be sanctified by our faith, with in turn sanctifies us, and not by our attempts simply to sanctify society through works alone.

It is important to remember this distinction between the individual, the Church and society. To go back to the Marks of the Church, rather than the Marks of Mission, which Mark is it that suggests the Church is meant to be an institution of social change? What part of Holy Scripture describes the goal for a sanctified society for which the Church is working towards?

The only real argument that could be made would be for the society of the law called for in the Old Testament for the Jews, and yet Christ fulfilled the law and the New Testament proclaims freedom from the particular laws of the Jews. The Good News of the Gospel, which the first mark calls to be proclaimed, along with Christ himself, is that there is a route to personal salvation and sanctification through faith in Christ and the reception of the Holy Spirit! It is not something that occurs through the actions of the Church, rather the Church itself is established in order to transmit this Good News and the teachings of Christ to all people in all times. The Great Commission is to do so. The Church was created to fulfil that commission, yet so far as the Anglican Church of Canada is concerned that is a lower priority.

When the Church moves beyond salvation and Scripture, as the church is doing in Canada, it risks its own authority. Looking at the third Mark of Mission, for instance, in some cases it might be clear how we are to respond to human need. Feed the hungry and clothe the poor is a simple enough prospect, but what about more complex issues? By what metric do we determine what is unjust? To some, closed communion is unjust, and yet to others it is for their benefit on the basis of Holy Scripture (I Cor 11. 27-29). Secular views of justice would suggest turning anyone away is unjust, yet Scripture itself suggests that if someone receives communion without proper preparation they receive it to their condemnation and it is therefore just that the church prevent them from receiving without proper preparation.

Exploring deeper issues of poverty, discrimination, criminal justice all go well beyond Biblical teaching and open the door to questions of how the church will base its decisions on what is unjust. It also shows the dangerous precedent of using secular reasoning to inform the Marks of Mission. Scripture makes it clear that we are to care for the poor, but when the Marks demand addressing systematic issues of injustice, it requires proscriptive efforts that go beyond what Scripture teaches. Are priests now to be political scientists and sociologists, working to determine what policies a government ought to apply in order to address issues of injustice in the world? Does it in any way fulfil a Christian calling to simply seek to use institutional powers of the church to draw awareness of outsiders to these issues?

Coming back to St Francis of Assisi it is through the individual that change must occur. It is the invisible church—the gathering of all the faithful—that must make the difference. Good works are the proceeds of faith as the Epistle of James tells us (Jas 2. 26), and it is the individuals who are called to make the difference.

When the Church speaks to outsiders, it is moralizing. When it is the faithful, inspired by their faith and empowered by the Spirit, who act, it is a witness to others. As we are sanctified, we will sanctify society. The Marks of Mission may not be the best guide for the Church, but they remind us of what we as individual Christians are called to do, and in particular the order in which we are to fulfil them, first by coming to faith, being nurtured in it and when it is mature to act upon it and by our good works transform society and be a witness to others that they might come to faith in Christ themselves.

On the Marks of the Church

Remembrance Sunday

ALMIGHTY Lord and everlasting Father, who wouldest have the kingdoms of the world become the kingdom of thy Son Jesus Christ: Bestow thy blessing, we beseech thee, upon all who labour for peace and righteousness among the nations, that the day may be hastened when war shall be no more, and thou shalt take the nations for thine inheritance; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Octave Day of All Saints

O ALMIGHTY God, who hast knit together thine elect in one communion and fellowship, in the mystical body of thy Son Christ our Lord: Grant us grace so to follow thy blessed Saints in all virtuous and godly living, that we may come to those unspeakable joys, which thou hast prepared for them that unfeignedly love thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Twenty-Third Sunday after Trinity

O GOD, our refuge and strength, who art the author of all godliness: Be ready, we beseech thee, to hear the devout prayers of thy Church; and grant that those things which we ask faithfully we may obtain effectually; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Each Sunday, the Nicene Creed is recited and contained within it is the line “And I believe One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.” This is known as the four marks of the Church, four characteristics which help to define what the church is. Some of these characteristics, such as what it means to be Catholic, have already been addressed in part previously, but taken together as the marks, they paint a particular picture of what we as Christians profess to believe in.

We profess belief in one church. There are a number of points that can be taken from this. First and foremost, it must be remembered that Christ ordained one visible Church. As Christ said, “on this rock I will build my Church.” St Paul describes it saying the Church is:

“built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit,” (Eph 2. 20-22).

When we speak of the Church, it is a reference not just to the collection of all those who confess the name of Christ, but a reference to the institution Christ created by which his Apostles were sent out to the world. The goal of the Church is made clear in both Christ’s Great Commission (St Mt 28. 16-20) and his prayer that we be one (St Jn 17. 11). It is clear also that this distinguishes the Church from God’s people in the Old Testament. The Church is one for all people, as the words of the Nunc dimittis say, “my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel,” (St Lk 2. 30-32).  Christ invites all people to him and offers the graces invested in his Church to all people. One Church, created by Christ for all people.

The second mark of the Church is that it is Holy, and it presents an interesting duality. To be Holy is to be set apart. It is clear from Holy Scripture that all Christians are called to a life that is set apart, and it is also true that the Church itself is set apart because its doctrines come not from the world, but from the teachings of Christ handed down through the Apostles. In I Timothy, St Paul exhorts Timothy to guard the deposit of true teaching that has been entrusted to him (I Tim 6. 20). This establishes an interesting duality for the Church, in that it is both holy and set apart and that it is being transformed by God’s grace and made holy, just as those who are in Christ are  holy and are being made holy by his grace.

It is perhaps easier to look at this concept in the personal sense, in that it is easier to see how as Christians we are made holy, and yet that does not prevent us from sinning. Yet still, by God’s grace, we are continually transformed and sanctified (Heb 10. 14). It is no different when speaking of the Church which, while established by Christ, is lived in and maintained by those of us who fall short. It was set apart and made holy, yet it is by God’s grace that it is continually being made holy.

The third mark of the Church is that it is Catholic. Indeed, in the Apostle’s creed only the middle two marks (holy and Catholic) are mentioned. Catholicity here is sometimes, particularly among protestants, viewed as meaning universal, but it speaks to a greater truth relating to Christ’s foundation of the Church as being for all people, not that all people are universally the Church. This speaks to those teachings and doctrines which were received and held by Christ’s Church east and west when it truly was one in unity of faith, word, Sacrament and ministry.

These principles are an expanded core of Christian unity today and ought to be considered universal, though they are not. It remains in that sense that the mark of Catholicity of the Church is also a mark of universality. Holy Scripture was not made for any one person, but the canon of Scripture was made for all people, to draw them all to Christ. Similarly the Sacraments, chiefly speaking here of Holy Baptism and the Eucharist, initiate all people and feed all people in their faith.

The final mark of the Church is that it is Apostolic. The office of Apostle is now defunct, but the meaning of the word remains critical to all Christians. It again speaks to multiple meanings. First and foremost it informs the idea of maintaining that which is Catholic. Christ established his Church and that Church is the Catholic Church. He ordained his Apostles to pass on what they had received. Today bishops hold that role as guardians of the faith and Apostolic Succession refers more than to simply being able to trace a line of bishops back to the first century, but rather speaks to that maintenance of the faith, word, sacrament and ministry of that Church.

Fr Michael McKinnon summarizes this sentiment saying it refers to:

Those communions or fellowships of the once undivided Catholic church who have maintained the one canon of Scripture, the one faith, articulated in the creeds and councils of the Church, the one Sacramental life, emphasizing the sacraments of Baptism, and being born to new life, and the Supper of the Lord, and being nourished in new life, and the one apostolic ministry, with the threefold order of bishops, priests and deacons, and which taken together comprise the once undivided Catholic Church.

The emphasis in his statement is on the maintenance of those beliefs and practices, with an emphasis on the threefold order of ministry as the chief method of maintaining those beliefs.

These marks of the Church teach provide a valuable statement about our faith, and rightly so as an integral component of the Nicene Creed, itself and sufficient statement of Christian belief. When we recite the Creed, fully understanding what is meant by One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and further when we seek to live out our faith in that Church, we are responding to and answering Christ’s prayer that we be one.

On Burdens

The Feast of All Saints

O ALMIGHTY God, who hast knit together thine elect in one communion and fellowship, in the mystical body of thy Son Christ our Lord: Grant us grace so to follow thy blessed Saints in all virtuous and godly living, that we may come to those unspeakable joys, which thou hast prepared for them that unfeignedly love thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Twenty-Second Sunday after Trinity

LORD, we beseech thee to keep thy houseahold the Church in continual godliness; that through thy protection it may be free from all adversities, and devoutly given to serve thee in good works, to the glory of thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

For several weeks now, I have often been attending Great Vespers at a local Eastern Orthodox Church. This past Saturday in particular, I drove past a Roman Catholic parish on my way to grab a friend who was joining me for Great Vespers, and saw their parking lot packed to the brim with cars for a Saturday evening mass. Arriving for Great Vespers, I was again struck by the number of people I saw there week after week, most of whom also attend Divine Liturgy the next morning.

The final blow came in that the Eastern Orthodox parish I attend recently moved and began meeting in an Anglican Parish as their old building had become too small and was becoming run down. The Anglican Church could easily accommodate them because their congregating had been declining for some time and they did not offer any Evening Prayer services, and were able to fit Divine Liturgy between their two Sunday morning services of Holy Communion.

My own experience in Anglicanism suggests there is much more of a culture of viewing Church as a burden on one’s time. Fitting Church in between the more important events. It’s too much to ask someone to come for Holy Communion on Sunday morning, let alone something on an evening as well. It’s too much of an imposition to suggest we attend an evening service. Especially if it’s on a Saturday or Sunday. And forget asking people to spend a minute more than two hours on Church on a Sunday. In and out.

To some, this almost becomes a burden on their time and their lives. These days we are all busy as the pace of the modern world continues to increase and more and more pressures are placed on our time, particularly on families who have children who all are interested in being participants in various after school teams and activities.

Where does the Church fit into all of this? How much time should be made for faith? The answer to that question is ultimately personal. St Paul recognized that different Christians at different times in their lives required different things in order to nurture their faith (I Cor 3. 2). For someone who is new to Christianity and faith, it could be overly burdensome to ask them to give up significant portions of their time when they’re still trying to figure out what everything means. For those who are more mature in their faith, however, more might be expected.

So if the expectation is not too much for all Christians, why is it that week after week Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians will attend multiple services a week, whereas in Anglican parishes it seems the congregation will get antsy if the homily is a minute longer than normal.

Records exist of similar complaints throughout the history of the Church. In the fourth century, St John Chrysostom wrote in response to those who were failing to come for the Eucharist on Sundays, saying:

I hear of their saying things of this kind, “the present stifling heat is excessive, the scorching sun is intolerable, we cannot bear being trampled and crushed in the crowd, and to be steaming all over with perspiration and oppressed by the heat and confined space...” What then am I to say to those who advance these pretexts? I would remind them of the three children in the furnace and the flame, who when they saw the fire encircling them on all sides, enveloping their mouth and their eyes and even their breath, did not cease singing that sacred and mystical hymn to God, in company with the universe, but standing in the midst to the pyre sent up their song of praise to the common Lord of all with greater cheerfulness than they who abide in some flowery field: and together with these three children I should think it proper to remind them also of the lions which were in Babylon, and of Daniel and the den: and not of this one only but also of another den, and the prophet Jeremiah, and the mire in which he was smothered up to the neck. And emerging from these dens, I would conduct these per sons who put forward heat as an excuse into the prison and exhibit Paul to them there, and Silas bound fast in the stocks, covered with bruises and wounds lacerated all over their body with a mass of stripes, yet singing praises to God at midnight and celebrating their holy vigil. For is it not a monstrous thing that those holy men, both in the furnace and the fire, and the den, and amongst wild beasts, and mire, and in a prison and the stocks, and amidst stripes and gaolers, and intolerable sufferings, never complained of any of these things, but were continually uttering prayers and sacred songs with much energy and fervent zeal, whilst we who have not undergone any of their innumerable sufferings small or great, neglect our own salvation on account of a scorching sun?

These words are particularly appropriate to refer to given that it is All Saints’ Day, when we recall the lives, joys and sufferings of countless saints throughout the years who have lived and died in the love of Christ. As St John Chrysostom puts it, who are we to complain of the heat of the sun when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were thrown into the fiery furnace but did no more than continue to praise God.

Could it be, to a degree, that the answer is cultural? Anglicanism is ultimately the cultural incarnation of Catholic Christianity within the Anglosphere, whereas Roman Catholicism is more culturally representative of continental Western Europe and Eastern Orthodoxy of Greek in particular and Eastern European in general Christianity. As their cultural backgrounds are foreign to North America and the United Kingdom, it is easier for them to turn to their church community as a cultural enclave, and further to see themselves are remaining in some ways outside of mainstream culture of those countries in which they live. To that degree, it becomes easier to avoid the Church being influenced by secular society in the way in which Anglicanism seems to be.

This ought to be cause for concern. Anyone who accepts the truth of Christianity, ought to recognize its importance. When we gather, it is to be nourished in our faith, either directly by God’s grace through the Eucharist or encouraged through teaching or simply to show our love of God in worship together. To be unwilling to accept the importance of gathering in community for these purposes, particularly when other traditions show it remains an entirely viable possibility within our society, shows another sign of our unwillingness to submit completely to God, the desire only to commit on our own terms and to withhold, knowingly or unknowingly, parts of our lives from him.

All Saints’ Day is a day in which we commemorate all those saints that came before us, and it is a time in which we ought to consider and reflect upon their lives and the examples of faith they gave to us. If St Paul could endure torture and persecution and rejoice in his suffering, perhaps it’s not such a burden to ask modern Anglicans to endure an extra minute or two of teaching without complaint. If the New Martyrs of Libya can be executed while confessing their faith in Christ Jesus as Lord, perhaps it is not too much of a burden in our society to ask of us to give up a few hours of our Saturday evening to turn our hearts to God in praise and thanksgiving?