On the Articles: Article XIV

The Day of Pentecost commonly called Whitsunday

GOD, who as at this time didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people, by the sending to them the light of thy Holy Spirit: Grant us by the same Spirit to have a right judgement in all things, and evermore to rejoice in his holy comfort; through the merits of Christ Jesus our Saviour, who liveth and reigneth with thee, in the unity of the same Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.

XIV. Of Works of Supererogation
Voluntary Works besides, over and above, God’s Commandments, which they call Works of Supererogation, cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety: for by them men do declare, that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do, but that they do more for his sake, than of bounden duty is required: whereas Christ saith plainly, When ye have done all that are commanded to you, say, We are unprofitable servants.

Rounding out the discussion of works in the Articles of Religion is Article XIV discussing works of superogation. This seems at first, particularly to modern eyes, a somewhat complicated and confusing article, however ultimately its message is quite simple. Thinking back to ideas of merit in the medieval Church, and particularly to the abuses related to that concept, acts of superogation were works that were above and beyond what was required, for instance beyond acts of contrition done to demonstrate true repentance, that would then in fact earn some form of credit with God.

Ultimately there are many problems with this concept. It suggests then that God would owe us something. In some cases, that the grace we receive from God has somehow been earned, and indeed one of the worst abuses of this concept involved transferring this credit with God to others, often through the system of indulgences.

The article itself becomes clearer in these circumstances. It says plainly that voluntary works, the definition of works of superogation, which are done beyond what is commanded, cannot be taught [as earning merit or grace] without impiety or arrogance. It is arrogant, the article continues, because such a teaching requires the individual to say that they can do more for God than he asks for. This takes it upon the individual to, in a way, do more than is called for, and further seems to go against Christ’s own teaching from St Luke’s gospel, 17. 7-10, which is partly quoted. In this, the parable of the unworthy servants, Christ instructs that when you have done your duty, acknowledge it. To do more would be to assume to know the will of your master. In that same way, the article suggests, that these works of superogation take on the individual the assumption to know what God desires of them beyond what has been proclaimed.

To further link Christ’s teachings, he says in St Matthew’s gospel that, “You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect,” (St Mt 5. 48). How can there be anything beyond our duty to God when we are called to be perfect in all things? Similarly, as St Paul teaches, “whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him,” (Col 3. 17). Again, this makes clear the pattern that our duty to God is in all things. It is arrogant to believe that there is a possibility of doing more than what God commands us to do, because he tells us to do all things for him!

To get a clearer picture of Christian duty, we can look to the Catechism in the Book of Common Prayer, which says:

My duty towards God is,
To believe in him, to fear him, and to love him, with all my heart, with all my mind, with all my soul, and with all my strength:
To worship him, to give him thanks, to put my whole trust in him, to pray to him:
To honour his holy Name and his Word:
And to serve him truly all the days of my life. (BCP, 548)

Again by this definition, even were we not to fall short, it would be impossible to do more than God requires of us, as he asks for all that we are and all that we have.

There is a clear link to Article XV as well, which discusses the fact that Christ alone is without sin. If it is Christ alone that is without sin, then all fall short. If all fall short, then it suggests we do not even fully complete our duty to God, then again how can we possibly be expected to do more than is asked of us?

God has an absolute claim on us, and as Christ says in the parable recorded in St Luke’s gospel and quoted in Article XIV, when we have done all that is commanded of us, all that is left to do is recognize that we can do no more!

Thinking back to Article XI, which proclaimed that it is not by merit of personal works but by the merit of Christ himself that we are justified before God, so there is also a clear link between this article claiming that it is impiety and arrogant to teach that works of superogation somehow gain one merit. It is this link that also ties this section of the Articles of Religion together, with Articles XI – XIV broadly defining salvation, through faith and apart from works, but with works being counted as evidence which proceeds from a saving faith.

At the time when the Articles were initially published there was a great need to demystify conceptions of merit, something ultimately done also by the Roman Catholic Church over time as it has moved to recognize many of the medieval superstitions and abuses that led to the continental Reformation and which were addressed by England as well when the Book of Common Prayer and Articles of Religion were compiled.

Today, while individual articles such as this one may hold less importance than they did when doctrines on Works of Superogation remained popular and common, it still helps to create a clear picture of what the Church teaches regarding the role of works and the role of faith in God’s plan of salvation, with particular emphasis on ensuring Biblical grounding for these teachings.

On the Articles: Article XIII

The Sunday after Ascension Day

O GOD the King of Glory, who hast exalted thine only Son Jesus Christ with great triumph unto thy kingdom in heaven: We beseech thee, leave us not comfortless; but send to us thine Holy Ghost to comfort us, and exalt us unto the same place whither our Saviour Christ is gone before; who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost, one God, world without end. Amen.

XIII. Of Works before Justification
Works done before the grace of Christ, and the Inspiration of his Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make men meet to receive grace, or (as the School-authors say) deserve grace of congruity: yea rather, for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they have the nature of sin.

 The words of this article, particularly its opening line, can sometimes be confusing. Words done before the grace of Christ, and Inspiration of his Spirit, are not pleasant to God. The most obvious interpretation of this involves looking at it through the lens of works and God’s favour; it is a restatement of the fact that we cannot earn God’s favour through our good deeds, called works. Yet that is not where the article ends. Indeed, it is not even where the sentence ends.

Much like Christ in the antitheses the Article calls us to go further, and reinforces the point that God doesn’t just care about what we do, but what we think and why we do things. You have heard it said you cannot earn God’s grace by good works, it says good works done before justification remain outside God’s will and are sinful in their nature.

This may require a bit of unpacking. It is easy to accept the first part that we cannot earn points with God through good works, whether before or after justification, but to say that good deeds done before justification are sinful in nature seems difficult to accept. At the core of this article is the question, what is the difference between a good work done by a Christian versus a non-Christian. The answer, according to the article, is fundamentally linked to the nature of good works.

Good works are not just about some form of secular, philosophical evaluation of outcomes. Two people who donate their time, treasure or talents to the less fortunate in equal measure, in secular terms would have been said to have done the same good. If both donate $100 of groceries to a food bank, or spend an evening volunteering at a soup kitchen, the secular world would generally agree that both had done an equal good. Yet this article says that the actions of the Christian are pleasing to God while the actions of the non-Christian have a sinful nature. Why would that be? It only makes sense, however, when considering the fact that we are discussing Christian works, and their importance is evaluated not on the basis of secular philosophies of outcomes, but on their role in our Christian journeys.

If good works are the proceeds of faith, or as the article puts it, the “Inspiration of his Spirit,” then it is clear that in general non-Christians would not be able to do good works, unless in particular circumstances the Holy Spirit were working through them, and there are examples in Holy Scripture of the Holy Spirit working through non-believers both in the Old Testament and in the New.

This contrasted with some of the medieval doctrines of the Western Church, and the ideas of the School-authors, a reference to Christian Scholastics of the medieval period, who developed the idea of grace of congruity, which said that because their actions mirrored so closely the good works of Christians, similar works of non-Christians conferred some form of grace, though not salvation. Ultimately this rejection of that principle seems far more consistent with Scriptural doctrines, both in terms of the antitheses and also the story of the rich young man who followed the law yet refused to give up his wealth. He outwardly followed the law out of obligation but when prompted to act out of an inward love of God he was unable to.

This helps us to differentiate what a good work is for Christians versus a non-Christian good deed. A good deed is rooted in secular morality, and might consist of characteristics of altruism and the promotion of the common good. Works, in the Christian sense, are rooted in submission and obedience to God’s will. They will often line up with secular ideas of good deeds simply because of God’s love for his creation, yet at the same times because we are dealing with the spiritual, there are certain good works which might not be evaluated as good deeds because their benefit is in the realm of the soul which cannot be quantified or evaluated in secular terms.

A corollary to this point is that something might be a good deed, because it can be morally justified, but yet not be a good work because it is not rooted in obedience to God. It may well be sinful. Indeed, as this article states, it is rooted in a sinful nature by virtue of the fact that it uses some system of secular morality to judge whether or not it is good, and not the simple question of God’s will.

Does this suggest that all deeds done apart from Christ are sinful then? What is the meaning of saying that such actions have the nature of sin? The answer to the former is that no. Going back to the previous example of a Christian and non-Christian, both of whom donate $100 of groceries to a food bank. It is not a sin for either of them to do this, but for the Christian it is a good work, and an act proceeding from a saving faith in loving obedience to God. For the non-Christian, however, it is not proceeding from obedience to or love of God, but rather something else. Sin is ultimately turning from God, and so while we often think of sin as in some way being harmful to others, even good deeds can have a sinful nature (having turned from God).

With the rise in those who describe themselves as spiritual but not religious, this remains an important affirmation that you cannot buy your salvation, and a reminder that as good as you are, apart from God, you cannot please him. As Lewis puts it in Mere Christianity:

The Christian way is different: harder, and easier. Christ says “Give me All. I don't want so much of your time and so much of your money and so much of your work: I want You. I have not come to torment your natural self, but to kill it. No half-measures are any good. I don't want to cut off a branch here and a branch there, I want to have the whole tree down. I don't want to drill the tooth, or crown it, or stop it, but to have it out. Hand over the whole natural self, all the desires which you think innocent as well as the ones you think wicked-the whole outfit. I will give you a new self instead. In fact, I will give you Myself: my own will shall become yours.”

On the Articles: Article XII

Saint Philip and Saint James the Apostles

ALMIGHTY God, whom truly to know is everlasting life: Grant us perfectly to know thy Son Jesus Christ to be the way, the truth, and the life; that, following the steps of thy holy Apostles, Saint Philip and Saint James, we may stedfastly walk in the way that leadeth to eternal life; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Saint James the Brother of the Lord, Martyr

O HEAVENLY Father, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning: We bless thy holy Name for the witness of James and Jude, the kinsmen of the Lord, and pray that we may be made true members of thy heavenly family; through him who willed to be the firstborn among many brethren, even the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Fifth Sunday after Easter commonly called Rogation Sunday

O LORD, from whom all good things do come: Grant to us thy humble servants, that by thy holy inspiration we may think those things that be good, and by thy merciful guiding may perform the same; through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

XII. Of Good Works
Albeit that Good Works, which are the fruits of Faith, and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God’s ludzement; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith; insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.

If there is one topic sure to set a protestant on edge it is a discussion of works. The Epistle of St James famously discusses the importance of works, for which the greater reformer Martin Luther termed it the Epistle of Straw, and even went so far as to seek to remove it from the Canon of the New Testament. Article XII on good works relates to Article XI dealing with Justification, two key concepts during the time of the continental reformation and which required clarification in England when the Articles began to be compiled and promulgated.

In pre-reformation Medieval western theology, a good work was something used to earn merit, the favour of God. While this included morally good acts, significantly, others were merely acts of piety laid upon sinners by priests in order to confirm penitence. Saying the rosary, fasting and other such acts of contrition were considered good works. This practice was rejected by the continental reformers, and leading to that overall perception of anything relating to works as needing rejection. It seems as though in some places, particularly with uneducated laity and poorly educated clergy, misconceptions of the role of these acts of penitence could have been normative, and so the Anglican response in the Articles needed to clarify this matter, despite rejecting much of the broader premise of Martin Luther and other protestants.

The opening line of the Article makes clear that good works cannot earn one merit or put away sins. This is a line of argument acceptable to the protestants, however it is notable also in that it fits in line perfectly with the Roman Catholic doctrines, just not practice. The Article goes on, however, to say that good works are a necessary procession of a “true and lively Faith” which might otherwise be termed a saving faith. This distinction draws reference to the Epistle of James, which itself is often contrasted with Paul’s Epistles where he seems to suggest the opposite. It also distinguishes it far more from the Protestant position of the reformers.

Much like some of the disconnect between the Roman Catholics at Trent in the counter-reformation and Martin Luther and the reformers before them, terms were being used in a different sense, and each party did not entirely recognize that as they objected to eachother’s statements on the matter. To quote Fr Kenneth Ross:

It was a similar variation in the use of key words which made St. James and St. Paul appear to contradict one another in the New Testament. Each appealed to the story of Abraham, St. James to show that faith without works did not justify, and St. Paul to show that it did. It is clear, however, that St. James was using faith in the sense of intellectual assent: in his use of the word the devils had faith (S. Jas 2. 19), but they were certainly not justified. St. Paul, however, by faith means personal commitment to the Saviour. And by works St. Paul was thinking more particularly of works undertaken in order to win God’s favouir and rewards, whereas St. James meant the works which are the necessary consequence of a life surrendered to Christ.

It was this negative view of works among the continental reformers that lead many protestants to reject the sacraments, beginning to view them as works of man. This view is wholly rejected by the Articles, by which the Sacraments are wholly accepted as works of God, who transmits grace through them. This was a rejection of a position held by the Father’s of the Church and universally recognized. St Ambrose of Milan writes in his On the Myteries that, “Believe, then, that the presence of the Godhead is [in the waters of Baptism]. Do you believe the working, and not believe the presence? Whence should the working proceed unless the presence went before?” This position was integral to his entire explanation of all the Sacraments, and was not a novel or innovative position. It was purely an overreaction to the concerns over

In this way the Article agrees with both Biblical authors as it states both that we cannot by our own works earn our salvation forgiveness of sins, but at the same time they are the necessary fruits of saving faith. The final clause of the article states that as a tree can be known by its fruit, so can faith be known by its works. This emphasizes the Scriptural foundation of Anglican understanding of the faith, and also reinforces the English reformer’s rejection of many of the more extreme views of the continental reformers.

In dealing with Salvation, Articles XI and XII introduce justification and works, while Articles XII and XIII continue to expound on the role and limits of works for Christians, laying out clear boundaries on the purpose, limits and Christian understanding of works.

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 Pudding

Feast of St Luke the Evangelist

ALMIGHTY God, who calledst Luke the Physician, whose praise is in the Gospel, to be an Evangelist, and Physician of the soul: May it please thee that, by the wholesome medicines of the doctrine delivered by him, all the diseases of our souls may be healed; through the merits of thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Twentieth Sunday after Trinity

O ALMIGHTY and most merciful God, of thy bountiful goodness keep us, we beseech thee, from all things that may hurt us; that we,being ready both in body and soul, may cheerfully accomplish those things that thou wouldest have done; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Last month, the lectionary took us through the Epistle of James. James contains a number of verses many Christians are familiar with. One that really strikes me is Jas 2. 17: “So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.” This verse, and the broader discussion of faith, works and salvation from Jas 2. 14-26, was mentioned in a homily by my priest who suggested the way to view this is that St James is saying, so far as faith is concerned, the proof is in the pudding.

This verse in itself leads to a number of interesting discussion topics on the nature of justification, saving faith or true faith versus the profession of faith and whether works proceed from true faith or play some role in salvation, justification and sanctification.

A perhaps more interesting question is can this verse be applied more generally to the Church or just to the individual? If the proof is in the pudding for the individual, how might that apply to the Church?

To begin, what specifically does St James suggest? “If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled”, without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?” (Jas 2. 15, 16). Here St James suggests that our faith and deeds must connect, but to break that down a bit more, what is he saying? The faith is to be rooted in Christ’s teachings.

The fact that you would be concerned for a brother or sister who is lacking in basic necessities is related to the faith imparted by Christ. So it is not enough to have some kind of faith, it must be true faith, rooted in Christ’s teachings. Next, it is insufficient to simply teach or preach Christ’s teachings, they are to be lived out if they are to be truly taught.

The real key is not simply that something should happen based on our faith, but that part of that faith is doing something. If you truly believe in Christ Jesus then you will want to do these things. This is perhaps made clear further on in the chapter, where he writes, “You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works,” (Jas 2. 22). Here he introduces the discussion of Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac to show the connection between Abraham’s faith in God and his willingness to act on that faith by sacrificing his son Isaac.

So to conclude, there are really three things being discussed here. Christ’s teachings, belief in them, and willingness to act upon them based on that faith.

How might this be seen to apply to the Church?

Christ’s teachings are simple enough. It is clear the Church cannot teach what is contrary to Christ. Article XX of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion says, “it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.” That is simple enough, until you realise that God’s Word written is not always clear.

Just as the term true faith was used previously to describe the type of faith which reflects the teachings of Christ and moves the individual to good works to live out that faith, so to must there be good doctrine.

Luckily, there is a way of deciding whether or not an interpretation of Scripture is good or not and that is to test it against the understanding of the Church Fathers. If you look back and since the patristic age it has been taught that a given verse means A and you suggest it means B, it is likely that your interpretation is somehow in error. While it is true that not all of the fathers were always correct—some fell into error quite often, St Augustine of Hippo even revised many of his early views as he matured in faith—the greater body of their work is an accepted standard by which Christians today can judge the interpretation of Scripture. The Creeds are another great example of something by which we can test interpretation of Scripture. For centuries, the Nicene Creed has been the sufficient Christian statement of faith accepted East and West. If a doctrine similarly runs counter to the Nicene Creed it is incorrect.

It is important to remember this grounding in Scripture. In modern times, arguments for innovation are often presented in the form of “I sense it is the movement of the Spirit that we do X.” This view seeks to ground doctrine not in God’s word, but in personal revelation. For those who have a background in some charismatic protestant denominations, this can actually be a common occurrence leading to discord within a local church community. When you claim authority directly from the Spirit, you are claiming it cannot be tested simply against Scripture because it is a new revelation.  However, Scripture itself points in some cases to this being untrue.

In St John’s Gospel, Christ offers a prayer for the Church: “And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one,” (St Jn 17. 11). This is Christ’s singular prayer, that the Church be one, be united. Also here, he reaffirms the previous teaching that he and the Father speak as one. It suggests that when the Holy Spirit comes, the helper Christ spoke of when he had just said:

When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (St Jn 16. 13-15)

Here, Christ again says that there will be unity between what he has said and what the Spirit has said. Just as he says in Chapter 17 that he and the Father are one, here he had said that he and the Spirit are one. What the Spirit reveals will not contradict what Christ has taught. Similarly, Christ’s prayer was that the Church would be one, and if that is the case, God would not send the Holy Spirit to grant new revelation only to small subsets of Christians, but to all Christians.

So if doctrine is to be rooted in the teachings of Christ that is held in accord with orthodox faith and understanding of those teachings, what then is works? The work of the Church is found in the liturgy, which encourages and nurtures the body to do good works.

Doctrine of the Church ought to be reflected in the words said each week, and ought to inspire the people to fulfil those doctrines throughout the week. As St Teresa of Avila once said, “Christ has no body on earth but yours, no hands but yours, no feet but yours. Yours are the eyes through which Christ’s compassion is to look out; yours are the feet with which He is to go about doing good; and yours are the hands with which He is to bless us now.” The liturgy is when we gather each week to be nourished in God’s grace and then go forth to do what he teaches. To evangelize, to comfort the sick and afflicted and to care for the poor.

Doctrines of the Church, and our understanding of them, ought to be rooted in the same understanding of our personal faith that sees the need for true faith to give birth to good works. Perhaps the most important consideration here then becomes, if faith without works is dead, what might that imply for the Church if it strays from the model which St James provides with respect to true faith?

On the Sacrament of Holy Baptism

The Feast of the Conversion of St Paul

O GOD, who, through the preaching of the blessed Apostle Saint Paul, hast caused the light of the Gospel to shine throughout the world: Grant, we beseech thee, that we, having his wonderful conversion in remembrance, may show forth our thankfulness unto thee for the same, by following the holy doctrine which he taught; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Third Sunday in Epiphanytide

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, mercifully look upon our infirmities, and in all our dangers and necessities stretch forth thy right hand to help and defend us; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Epiphany of our Lord

O GOD, who by the leading of a star didst manifest thy only-begotten Son to the Gentiles: Mercifully grant, that we, who know thee now by faith, may be led onward through this earthly life, until we see the vision of thy heavenly glory; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ, who with thee and the Holy Ghost liveth and reigneth, one God, world without end. Amen.

Of all the sacraments, Holy Baptism is the most important as it is the one which is the gatekeeper to the others. It is the means by which a person becomes a Christian and enters into the communion of saints.

In the Anglican tradition, Baptism is considered a Sacrament of the Gospel because it was explicitly ordained in the Holy Scriptures by Christ. In the Gospel of St Mark, Christ gives the Great Commission saying, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned,” (Mk 16. 15-16). He did not say simply to believe, but that you must believe and be baptized. This was noted in Article XXV of the Articles of Religion which both recognized its place in the Gospel and provided a reminder of the efficacy of baptism.

Going further, Article XXVII speaks directly to the sacrament of Holy Baptism. It begins with a reminder that Baptism is, “a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened,” which makes an important distinction. Holy Baptism might on its face be compared to the baptism of John which was given to the Jews. The Acts of the Apostles records St Paul’s journey to Ephesus where he meets with some disciples and the following exchange occurs:

And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said,“Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John's baptism.” And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 19. 2-5)

Here, while the disciples he met did not understand the difference initially, St Paul clearly draws home the point that Christian Baptism is not simply a matter of baptism with water. John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance, whereas Christian Baptism is a sign of membership in the community of believers, more akin to circumcision for the Jews than John’s baptism. This point is made clearer still by Christ’s words again:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” (Jn 3. 3-8)

Christ makes it very clear that Baptism is part of the required method of entry into Heaven. This is similarly made clear in the Articles of Religion as Article XXVII continues saying that Holy Baptism is not merely a distinction made to discern Christians from non-Christians, but:

it is also a sign of Regeneration or New-Birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed, Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God.

Again, it is a reminder that through the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, God’s grace is conferred.

This view of Baptism is accepted among Catholic Christians, however various protestant denominations take issue with the efficacy of sacraments in general and the role of various sacraments in particular. With Baptism, there are some denominations that do not view Baptism as more than a visible symbol of coming to Christ, but they do not see the Holy Spirit as being conferred through the sacrament. They reject the sacramental life of the Early Church that is one of the key components of Catholicism.

The purely symbolic understanding of Baptism is on its face a failure to express the fullness of the Bible’s teachings on the nature of Baptism. Indeed while there is some contention within Anglicanism on the status of the sacraments which will be discussed elsewhere, there is no such contention when it comes to Holy Baptism. Baptism is a Sacrament of the Gospel, defined clearly and fully in Scripture both in the Gospels from Christ’s mouth as well as recorded among early Christians in the Acts of the Apostles.

It is the way in which Christians sacramentally enter into the Christian faith, and it is, as Christ says, a requisite part of our salvation. This brings to mind a concern, reasonably held until explored, that such a view of Baptism confers on it the status of a work, and place this understanding of Baptism in contradiction of Article XI which states we are justified by the merit of Christ and by faith, not by our own works.

There is a simple response to this concern, however, to answer the question of who is truly acting in Baptism, or rather who is doing the work? The answer comes back to the Book of Common Prayer’s definition of a sacrament, an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace. The action in Baptism is therefore God conferring grace, Baptism is merely the means by which it is received and not a work.

Holy Baptism is the way in which we begin a new Christian life, and its relationship to the Supper of our Lord as the way in which we are subsequently nourished in our new life in Christ.