Princes, Kings and Queens

Our Order of Worship from Sunday just passed had a profound quote, worth sharing:

“Be not angry that you cannot make others as you wish them to be, since you cannot make yourself as you wish to be.”
Thomas A’Kempis

And, yesterday afternoon, as C. S. Lewis (esp. Narnia) fans, we had to go see Prince Caspian. Very enjoyable, though from recollection it doesn't follow the book as well as the first. I'm rereading it to confirm those thoughts. Reviews called it "darker" in tone and more violent than the The Lion, Witch & Wardrobe. Didn't see that. There was, however, severe underlighting at the very first part of the movie that made the beginning hard to visualize; and some of the dialogue, overridden by the sound track, seemed a bit difficult to follow.

But, all this was made up for in the scene where Caspian was urged by Nikabrik to bring back the White Witch. Without revealing a lot of what happens, the immagery following Edmund's rescue of Peter and Caspian, while keeping the White Witch at bay, is majestic beyond description. That moment, for followers of Narnia, is worth the price of admission unto itself.

So, where do I stand on the film? If you're a Narnian at heart you'll love it. Great filmmaking? Probably not. A good afternoon's entertainment for the family? Absolutely!

A question

Exerpted from todays news:

Myanmar's military regime distributed international aid Saturday but plastered the boxes with the names of top generals in an apparent effort to turn the relief effort for last week's devastating cyclone into a propaganda exercise.

"We have already seen regional commanders putting their names on the side of aid shipments from Asia, saying this was a gift from them and then distributing it in their region," said Mark Farmaner, director of Burma Campaign UK, which campaigns for human rights and democracy in the country. "It is not going to areas where it is most in need," he said in London.

The junta has refused to grant access to foreign experts, saying it will only accept donations from foreign charities and governments, and then will deliver the aid on its own.

So rather than an observation today, I offer earnest questions:

What is the Christian response to this tragedy?

Should we provide means for the "Herodians" to further their power and position, knowing that almost all aid and comfort sent will not be provided to those most needy or rather withhold aid because of the same knowledge; or even work counter to the current administration and their directives in an effort to provide sustenence and care for the least of these, by force if necessary, knowingly circumventing the government and furthering the civil unrest?

Truly, I don't know.

You only have to die

Went to see John, His Story at the theater last Saturday night. It was performed by Jeanette Clift George’s A D Players from Houston and was uber well done; her take on The Gospel of John in one act. Part of it really got me to thinking “outside the box”, as I am wont to do from time to time. In the 3rd chapter of John, Christ says: “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” I understand that conventional wisdom says this speaks to Baptism and is in fact the basis for that Sacrament.

A while back I also started a post on Robert Farrar Capon's Kingdom, Grace and Judgement that I never got around to finishing. I was struck by Capon’s thoughts regarding salvation. He emphasizes, more than once, the point that: "Death is absolutely all of the Resurrection we can now know. The rest is faith."

Which put into my head the song lyric: "You only have to die." Took me a good half hour to recall where that music was from. I kept thinking of a James Bond movie, but finally realized it's in Jesus Christ, Superstar, one of my favorite musicals. I continue to be awed by the profundity of Rice and Weber's music and lyrics, as I am likewise by Fr. Capon's theology.

I think where I'm going with this is that we are frequently blind to the true teachings of grace. No one, I repeat NO ONE, is going to make it:
1.) on their own works. It doesn't matter how good we are, we are all still sinful.
and
2.) without dying, accepting death, our actual physical death, in this world.
Both of those statements seem to be absolute truth.

What Capon was emphasizing is not live for today because tomorrow you have as good a shot as anyone at justification; but rather, that God found His creation so wonderful that He was willing to undertake the ultimate sacrifice to redeem it. For in truth, only He was capable of meeting the requirement of a perfect sacrifice.

Which finally brings me back to “being born again.” What do you suppose was John’s thought regarding that particular passage? An injunction to practice Baptism or rather possibly that only by the acceptance of physical death as we know it are we able to be born again into new life.

Quien sabe? “You only have to die.”

A God Moment

I just experienced a God moment.

Wife & I went down to Houston Saturday to visit the son (who's a 1st year Law Student). Friday he completed and turned in the Appellate Brief for one of his classes which constitutes about 75% of the Semester's grade in that particular class. Following all that work he finally had part of a day he and the daughter-in-law could share with us. In Law School you really do work pretty hard and personal time is at a premium. We all enjoyed a nice dinner as well as brunch the next morning before returning home. It was quality time.

While driving home from the visit I was listening to a Johnny Russell CD (Greatest Hits) that has one of my favorite tunes on it - Catfish John. I made comment to the wife that probably one reason the song meant so much to me was that one of my friend Roscoe Johnson's nicknames was "Catfish." Rocky was well about 45 years older than I, a black man, and he and his wife "Lil" baby sat me as a child. He worked at our family business for 'nigh onto 35 years. "I was proud to be his friend." He died a bunch of years back and I was the sole white person at his well attended funeral. He and his wife had no natural children but adopted a baby girl (Roxanne) much later in life. She was the absolute apple of his eye and did my wife and I the great honor of inviting us to the renewal of her Wedding Vows several years back, long after both her parents had passed on.

Anyway, listening to the music driving back got me to reminiscing about Rocky and Roxanne. I've not had contact with Roxie (or her husband) since that Vow Renewal. But back to my God Moment. I answered the phone here at the office this afternoon and Roxie's husband was on the line, looking to find an item needed for the place where he now works. I was blown away. Having not seen, spoken of or even thought about them for several years until driving home yesterday while listening to a piece music, I get a phone call today.

All I can say is: "Thank You, Lord, for the personal contact." And Rocky: "Keep a Jax cold for us to share when we next meet up."

John 19:25-27

Is a part of the Lectionary we read this Palm Sunday past. From the NIV:

“25Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, ‘Dear woman, here is your son,’ 27and to the disciple, ‘Here is your mother.’ From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.”

Ever the skeptic, it intrigued me. Conventional wisdom says that Christ was referring to John (The Beloved) when speaking to His Mother saying “here is your Son.”, and to John when saying “Here is your Mother.” However, everything pointing to John being there seems to hinge upon the pronoun “his” in the passage: “this disciple took her into his home.”

I can find no other reference to the Apostles being at the Crucifixion and have always recognized Mary of Magdalene as a Disciple (note that I didn’t say Apostle). Searching out the Synoptics, I can’t find any passages to contradict John’s description of those near the Cross. Figured out where I’m headed with this, yet?

Here then, is my heresy. What’s to say that Christ wasn’t speaking to John but to Mary Magdalene when He said: “Here is your Mother.”? The earlier part of the passage can certainly be interpreted as Christ speaking to His Mother in regard to His condition, saying behold, “here is your Son”; rather than instructing Her the Disciple is to be taken as Her son.

Obviously as a disciple Mary was loved by Christ, and is shown to be one of His favorites. I don’t believe that could be argued either. But for the pronoun “His”, there seems only circumstantial support and tradition for Jesus’ speaking to John. I’m not smart enough to translate from the original Greek and even were I so, after 2.67 years of EFM I might be tempted to question the possibility of a recension or redaction somewhere along the line.

The question then becomes: “Where does that leave me?” Truly, I don’t know. What I do know; however, is that Christ was crucified for the redemption of God’s creation. In that simple statement I find the salvation of this world, myself included. And that’s really all that matters, isn’t it? So, I guess I’ll just go home and reread The DiVinci Code.

Location, Location, Location

For as long as I can remember and probably as long as I’ve been Episcopalian, I’ve always sat on the Gospel side of center, at the side aisle, about a third of the way back from the crossing in whatever Church I was attending or visiting. Habits certainly die hard, don’t they?

We have long been members of the old downtown Parish here. Our Church was organized in 1868 and we’ve been in our current location and structure since 1879. That’s only 32 years after Texas Independence and three years after the end of the War of Northern Aggression. Over the years, our historic structure has had several additions since it was first built. It so happens that the extension of the Nave which occurred some many, many years back begins about a row or possibly two in front of where we sit. You can see the joint where the original flooring stopped and where the “new” flooring begins. There’s a seam across its entire width.

While attending Maundy Thursday Services last week, following Communion, during the Stripping of the Altar, my mind wandered a bit. In EFM we’re working on all the different Reformations in Europe in the 16th Century. This, in turn, caused me to consider that much like our house of Worship, I’m somewhere between the past and today: trying to remain faithful to our tradition and yet be cognizant of modern knowledge and reason. And no, I didn’t forget culture, it was omitted for purpose.

That faithfulness presents a hard line to walk, but then that’s probably why I embrace Anglicanism. The Elizabethan Settlement (aka the Via Media or “Middle Way”) seems a successful attempt at bridging differences in the practice of faith while remaining true to fundamental principles of Christianity. Would that we were so fortunate as to have that wisdom and guidance today we would be much the better for it.

Chocolate Eggs and Jesus Risen!

Y'all all have a Happy Eastertide

So I was bored

So I was bored and took yet another test which told me what I already knew about myself, or at least the way I see myself. Every time I try one of these evaluations I hope to gain some new insight but all I really receive is affirmation. Here it is for your reading pleasure:

Your score on this personality test was 45%

 

Others see you as sensible, cautious, careful & practical. They see you as clever, gifted, or talented, but modest not a person who makes friends too quickly or easily, but someone who's extremely loyal to friends you do make and who expect the same loyalty in return. Those who really get to know you realize it takes a lot to shake your trust in your friends, but equally that it takes you a longer time to get over if that trust is ever broken.

Personality Quiz
Take More Quizzes