"The church is about transforming peoples' lives not letting them live in their sin and delusion. And one of the reasons for the decline is that if you have no specific salvific message to proclaim or a mission statement that does not make sense of peoples' real lives, there is little incentive to roll out of bed on Sunday morning if what you think you will hear in the pulpit is a rehash of the op-ed page of the New York Times or a major whine about why the Christian Church is homophobic."
From Virtuosity
David Virtue hits the nail on the when speaking of the decline of ECUSA. Indeed what he says is relative to many other denominations too. Sadly, though, it is worth noting that even traditionalist "continuing" churches can slip into this mindest, where something other than worship, evangelism, and mission becomes the most important thing.
Friday, March 31, 2006
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Church Restoration - Wrapping It Up
Well, as I prepare for new things in my career I am slowly phasing out of my work in church restoration (primarily in stained glass, but also other areas). This business has occupied four years of my life, and I have learned a great deal about art, churches, and people through it. I have a few observations and stats that some of you might find interesting. Keep in mind that there are exceptions to each of these, and also that some of the results may be due to the fact that I live in the mid-Atlantic region (i.e. mid-western churches are probably a lot friendlier).
My Best Customers:
ECUSA parishes. They really care about their buildings, and have given me lots of business.
Best Churches to Cold Call:
ECUSA parishes. They are incredibly friendly, I have found, and they love to show off their buildings. Next come orthodox parishes, then ELCA and LCMS parishes.
Rudest Churches to Deal With and Cold Call:
Roman Catholic... by far. Generally speaking, I have never met a more rude and arrogant bunch of people than the priests of the Archdiocese of Baltimore. And the more conservative the parish/diocese, the worse they are to deal with. Their cronies they have working for them at the "power tower" (the nickname for the Archdiocese's high rise office building downtown) are just as bad. After them come the Methodists, then the Presbyterians.
Churches that are the Hardest to Make Contact With:
Black churches that are not part of a mainline denomination. No one is ever at the building during the week. Next come the Roman Catholics... these guys do not even come to the door half of the time.
Churches Where You Are Most Likely to Get Hit On (by a man):
ECUSA parishes, followed by Tridentine-Rite RC parishes
Churches That You Can Count on Getting Very Little, if any, Business From:
Any conservative church that is part of a conservative denomination (e.g. not a FiFNa type of parish). PCA, LCMS, OPC, ARP, Continuing Churches, etc.... they usually do not care about externals and arts, or they are very poor, and prefer to funnel their money to ministry. Independant black churches are also usually too poor to do anything about their building, or do not seem to care that much about it. Orthodox churches are hard to get business from too. They always have "some guy over in Syria/Russia/Greece, etc." who is going to paint their icons, or design their windows, or something.
Churches Where There is Often a Pet Running Around the Building:
ECUSA parishes... I have seen dogs and cats in many a nave.
My Best Customers:
ECUSA parishes. They really care about their buildings, and have given me lots of business.
Best Churches to Cold Call:
ECUSA parishes. They are incredibly friendly, I have found, and they love to show off their buildings. Next come orthodox parishes, then ELCA and LCMS parishes.
Rudest Churches to Deal With and Cold Call:
Roman Catholic... by far. Generally speaking, I have never met a more rude and arrogant bunch of people than the priests of the Archdiocese of Baltimore. And the more conservative the parish/diocese, the worse they are to deal with. Their cronies they have working for them at the "power tower" (the nickname for the Archdiocese's high rise office building downtown) are just as bad. After them come the Methodists, then the Presbyterians.
Churches that are the Hardest to Make Contact With:
Black churches that are not part of a mainline denomination. No one is ever at the building during the week. Next come the Roman Catholics... these guys do not even come to the door half of the time.
Churches Where You Are Most Likely to Get Hit On (by a man):
ECUSA parishes, followed by Tridentine-Rite RC parishes
Churches That You Can Count on Getting Very Little, if any, Business From:
Any conservative church that is part of a conservative denomination (e.g. not a FiFNa type of parish). PCA, LCMS, OPC, ARP, Continuing Churches, etc.... they usually do not care about externals and arts, or they are very poor, and prefer to funnel their money to ministry. Independant black churches are also usually too poor to do anything about their building, or do not seem to care that much about it. Orthodox churches are hard to get business from too. They always have "some guy over in Syria/Russia/Greece, etc." who is going to paint their icons, or design their windows, or something.
Churches Where There is Often a Pet Running Around the Building:
ECUSA parishes... I have seen dogs and cats in many a nave.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Personality Type and Religious Leadership
Recently I found an interesting book entitled "Personality Type and Religious Leadership" (Roy Oswald and Otto Kroeger, 1988) in my seminary's library. It uses the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) test to assess strengths and weaknesses in the ministry, potential pitfalls, types of prayer, role and pastoral function, and more. It has been quite enlightening reading this book. My type accounts for about 10% of clergy. In thinking of ministering with other clergy in a parish setting much thought must be given to match clerical personalities for the best possible results. As clergy candidates are usually required to take this test (along with other tests too) it would behove church leadership to use the insight gained from them in assigning clergy, so that everyone can minister in the most effective way possible.
Monday, March 27, 2006
No Way APA
A wonderful anglo-catholic friend in the early stages of pursuing holy orders told me over some drinks the other night that he had come across the the "No Way APA" website. We joked at how silly it is. This site is run by someone who is obviously not excited about the APA and REC merging. For it exposes all of the "awful" catholic things that we do in the APA.
To be sure, it is accurate in some ways. Yes, we do offer the Blessed Virgin Mary the WORTH-ship (hyperdulia) that she is worthy of; we do recommend and practice private confession as it is one of the seven sacraments; we have lots of ritual (following Ritual Notes, of course); we celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass; we pray for the dead; and more. But it is inaccurate in other ways. First of all, we worship (dulia) other saints too...not only Mary. Also, the site suggests that we have only "semi-nuns". I object to that... we have full nuns, just to set the record straight (The Order of St. Athanasius).
It is worth noting that the "No Way APA" website has been condemned by the bishops of the REC, who, besides being thoroughly catholic, are in full support of merging with the APA. It is too bad that those running it do not take the time to learn and study about catholic theology. Sadly, their error is just as bad as the ultramontane Roman Catholic who erects all sorts of straw men about protestantism, and never takes the time to seriously study it.
To be sure, it is accurate in some ways. Yes, we do offer the Blessed Virgin Mary the WORTH-ship (hyperdulia) that she is worthy of; we do recommend and practice private confession as it is one of the seven sacraments; we have lots of ritual (following Ritual Notes, of course); we celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass; we pray for the dead; and more. But it is inaccurate in other ways. First of all, we worship (dulia) other saints too...not only Mary. Also, the site suggests that we have only "semi-nuns". I object to that... we have full nuns, just to set the record straight (The Order of St. Athanasius).
It is worth noting that the "No Way APA" website has been condemned by the bishops of the REC, who, besides being thoroughly catholic, are in full support of merging with the APA. It is too bad that those running it do not take the time to learn and study about catholic theology. Sadly, their error is just as bad as the ultramontane Roman Catholic who erects all sorts of straw men about protestantism, and never takes the time to seriously study it.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Comparing Recent Reading
Lately, I have begun reading The New Testament and the People of God by N.T. Wright. Lord willing, I plan to read his whole series on Christian origins (3 volumes thus far - around 3,000 pages). Wright, Anglican Bishop of Durham, is probably the world's foremost NT scholar. When I was seminary Raymond Brown (who taught at my alma mater for many years) and Joseph Fitzmeyer were viewed as demi-gods.... all we did was read their works, discuss their writings, etc. So, it is going to be nice to get another point of view, though those two are very fair and centerist scholars.
I think that the crisis in biblical studies and interpretation, in addition to the question of authority, are the most pressing issues facing the church today. They are, in my judgement, the direct cause of all of the heresy that the church has infected the church over the last 35 years or so. It is more than a question of authority (e.g. magesterium/papacy) alone, as some Christians seem to think.
The central problem is knowledge and interpretation. Wright advocates a critical realist epistemology and approach to the scriptures over and above a positivistic or completely subjectivist/reader-response type of approach. This reading is a nice contrast to John MacQuarrie's existentialist-Bultmannian approach in Principles of Christian Theology, which I am in the process of finishing up. Briefly, critical realism in the theory of knowledge still allows for something of a Kantian subject-object distinction typically associated with positivism, but also affirms that we genuinely interact with the "object" and bring our own worldview and presuppositions to it. It does not allow for "brute facts", nor does it feign complete objectivity (a common error made in the realm of science). This is a sound principle to keep in mind, not only when reading theology, but when looking at art, listening to music, etc. We do not always interpret various things in exactly the same way, but there are a lot of similarities. Critical realism does allow one to speak truly of reality, but affirms the challenges wrought by reflection and contemplation, as well as the interplay of our presuppositions. Central to Wright's critical realist approach is the idea of the "story". Verification does not happen as a result of observing sense data to see if they fit a hypothesis, but by devising means based on a larger "story", which includes the hypothesis itself. I realize that is confusing, but I don't have room to go into it more. You can read about on pp.38-46 of his book. But suffice it to say, "story" is used in the same way as "worldview". I think that his use of story in this sense is similar to David Tracy's idea of the "classic" (i.e. a classic book), but I will not go into that now.
John Macquarrie, in my opinion, grants far too much neutrality and objectivity to the field of science and biblical studies. He assumes that the movers and shakers in those fields have no bias in their work, which is quite a faulty assumption. And while it doesn't undermine his whole existentialist philosophical theology, I think that it does weaken it at various points. Despite that, Macquarrie still shines - albeit in other ways. I think that his approach, once understood and mastered, is a very creative way to describe and discuss the Christian faith. It is quite useful to be able to explain the tenants of our faith in a variety of ways to reach as many people as possible, so long, of course, as you arrive at the same place. I can see how his model would be more attractive to people of a certain mindset than, say, reciting "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma" to them, or talking about how an angel came and visited me one afternoon.
It is good to read a few books at once, especially in related fields, as it can help in understanding them better, and help one get more out of them. I highly suggest both of these books and authors.
I think that the crisis in biblical studies and interpretation, in addition to the question of authority, are the most pressing issues facing the church today. They are, in my judgement, the direct cause of all of the heresy that the church has infected the church over the last 35 years or so. It is more than a question of authority (e.g. magesterium/papacy) alone, as some Christians seem to think.
The central problem is knowledge and interpretation. Wright advocates a critical realist epistemology and approach to the scriptures over and above a positivistic or completely subjectivist/reader-response type of approach. This reading is a nice contrast to John MacQuarrie's existentialist-Bultmannian approach in Principles of Christian Theology, which I am in the process of finishing up. Briefly, critical realism in the theory of knowledge still allows for something of a Kantian subject-object distinction typically associated with positivism, but also affirms that we genuinely interact with the "object" and bring our own worldview and presuppositions to it. It does not allow for "brute facts", nor does it feign complete objectivity (a common error made in the realm of science). This is a sound principle to keep in mind, not only when reading theology, but when looking at art, listening to music, etc. We do not always interpret various things in exactly the same way, but there are a lot of similarities. Critical realism does allow one to speak truly of reality, but affirms the challenges wrought by reflection and contemplation, as well as the interplay of our presuppositions. Central to Wright's critical realist approach is the idea of the "story". Verification does not happen as a result of observing sense data to see if they fit a hypothesis, but by devising means based on a larger "story", which includes the hypothesis itself. I realize that is confusing, but I don't have room to go into it more. You can read about on pp.38-46 of his book. But suffice it to say, "story" is used in the same way as "worldview". I think that his use of story in this sense is similar to David Tracy's idea of the "classic" (i.e. a classic book), but I will not go into that now.
John Macquarrie, in my opinion, grants far too much neutrality and objectivity to the field of science and biblical studies. He assumes that the movers and shakers in those fields have no bias in their work, which is quite a faulty assumption. And while it doesn't undermine his whole existentialist philosophical theology, I think that it does weaken it at various points. Despite that, Macquarrie still shines - albeit in other ways. I think that his approach, once understood and mastered, is a very creative way to describe and discuss the Christian faith. It is quite useful to be able to explain the tenants of our faith in a variety of ways to reach as many people as possible, so long, of course, as you arrive at the same place. I can see how his model would be more attractive to people of a certain mindset than, say, reciting "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma" to them, or talking about how an angel came and visited me one afternoon.
It is good to read a few books at once, especially in related fields, as it can help in understanding them better, and help one get more out of them. I highly suggest both of these books and authors.
Altar Girls in Arlington, VA
News from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Arlington... they have finally permitted altar girls to serve during mass at parishes. Previously they allowed girls to be servers in some instances. This just makes their policy more consistent. Though the article doesn't say it, I have been told that the diocese requires male and female altar servers to dress differently so as to make sure people understand the physical distinction between them. Apparently the bishop thinks that allowing females to serve at the altar will increase the number of vocations to the religious life. Maybe it will, but it sure hasn't done that here in the Archdiocese of Baltimore, or anywhere else that I can think of for that matter. One thing it does seem to have increased is the desire among certain RCs to ordain women.
Personally, I maintain my general opposition to female altar servers, but believe that women can and should serve in important leadership positions in the local and national church (e.g. vestry, teaching and preaching, diocesan committees, professorships, etc.) if they so desire.
Personally, I maintain my general opposition to female altar servers, but believe that women can and should serve in important leadership positions in the local and national church (e.g. vestry, teaching and preaching, diocesan committees, professorships, etc.) if they so desire.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Thomas Cranmer, R.I.P.
Today marks the death of Thomas Cranmer, who, as we all know, was burned at the stake under Mary Tudor. I found out from the MacCulloch biography that his last meal consisted of spice cakes and bread; fruit and nuts; and a dish of stewed prunes (p. 599). Talk about adding insult to injury!
In Need of Immediate Feedback!
I am having five sets of vestments made for me by Renzetti & Magnarelli in Philadelphia. They are going to be white, red, green, violet, and black chasubles (eventually I hope to get rose and gold as well), with the old "spade-style" maniples and stoles, and also some matching burses and veils. Of course the chasubles will be lined and done in the "fiddleback" style. As R & M only does custom work, they will each have varying brocades, bandings, fringes, along with some embroidered crosses, etc. The banding pattern that they use in the front is absolutely exquisite, so there is no need for an orphrey on that side. But now I am wondering about the back: should I have an orphrey put on it? Otherwise, the back will just be plain with the banding going around the edge, and maybe some banding on top. Part of me thinks that having the back plain will give the chasuble a nice, modest look to it. But then again, I do not want it to be too stark. Any opinions? Oh, and the other thing is that I generally have not liked a lot of the orphrey designs that I have seen on the backs of fiddleback chasubles.
Friday, March 17, 2006
Spanish Deacon's Mass
I have been asked to do a deacon's mass ("Sunday Mass in Absence of a Priest", for all of you Roman Catholics out there) at a latino parish of ours. This involves learning to read the various parts of the liturgy decently, and having my sermon translated. Luckily, my wife speaks Spanish fluently, so she can help me out with my pronunciation, and also with translating my sermon for me as I give it. Tip of the biretta, by the way, to Fr. Erich Zwingert, SSC, for suggesting me. This will be my first, and probably last, deacon's mass, as my ordination to the sacred preisthood is fast approaching.
A continuing church bishop once told me that latino Anglicans were the strangest thing he had ever heard of in his life. But he was a rather cynical fellow. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with there being latino Anglicans. It would be like saying there is something wrong with being white, American, and Antiochian Orthodox. Sure, it might be a bit unusual, but it's not like the "church police" are going to come out and arrest you if you happen to be latino and Anglican. It will be interesting to see how they worship. Apparently, they do not use the 1940 Hymnal, and they have a worship band complete with an accordian. Now that sounds pretty cool! Maybe I should bring my banjo along.
A continuing church bishop once told me that latino Anglicans were the strangest thing he had ever heard of in his life. But he was a rather cynical fellow. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with there being latino Anglicans. It would be like saying there is something wrong with being white, American, and Antiochian Orthodox. Sure, it might be a bit unusual, but it's not like the "church police" are going to come out and arrest you if you happen to be latino and Anglican. It will be interesting to see how they worship. Apparently, they do not use the 1940 Hymnal, and they have a worship band complete with an accordian. Now that sounds pretty cool! Maybe I should bring my banjo along.
Monday, March 13, 2006
The Psychology of Religion
I am becoming more and more interested lately in the role our personal psychological composition (e.g. personality type, and so on) plays in the religious choices that we make. We make it seem at times that we are what we are - Roman, Anglican, Presbyterian, etc. - based entirely on reason alone. But I think that if we were honest with ourselves we'd realize that so much more goes into making the religious choices that we do. I once jokingly remarked to a vehemently anti-catholic friend when we were arguing about Catholicism (I was Roman Catholic at the time), "What... did you get beat up by a neighbor who was Roman Catholic when you were a kid, or something? Is that why you hate RCism so much?" My point being that he seemed to have more of an affective aversion to RCism rather than intellectual one; it was something deeper, something more primitive within him. Not something less valuable or important, but just different.
Some people, in my experience, seem to prefer subscribing to theological systems that purport to have answers for everything, or they are looking for a particular unshakeable and infallible authority to ease their troubled soul (pope, sola scriptura, etc.), while others are drawn to and convinced by systems that are very amorphous and ambiguous. Either preference, though, seems to be driven more by an individual's psychology and personality rather than being a purely disinterested pursuit of "truth", though the quest for truth certainly does come into the equation. And as we are constantly developing and growing as individuals, our psychology is influenced more and more by the various life experiences that we grow through, and we bring all of that to the table as well.
We all do this. I think about this in relation to my own life as an artist-deacon. As an artist, I am fine with seeing things from multiple perspectives, and am not necessarily worried about how it all ties together. My "looser" mindset even trickles into the country/bluegrass band me and some friends have: I always joke with them that I am not very concerned with staying in strict time, people coming in singing all at once, and so on, and how that is analogous to the dripping paint, multiple perspective, and criss-crossing lines in my art. I think it is that inherent ambiguity that I live with as an artist that has helped me remain faithful to Jesus Christ in times of darkness over the years. Other people though, could not stand having dripping paint, and "gray" areas to deal with. To them, everything is black and white, and very often they think that anyone who accepts some level of ambiguity is a complete wacko. I accept that there are people like that out there... who have to have neat answers for everything; that is their personality type, and that's fine. That's how God made them, and allowed them to grow as people. But I do find it frustrating to read of people who write about their religious life, or conversion to another denomination, as though it were entirely an intellectual matter, when, no doubt, personal and psychological reasons were also at play. It just seems dishonest.
People make decisions for personal reasons as well as for intellectual ones. It is not just a bare examination of the 'cold, hard facts'. I think that when people begin to acknowledge this more it will bear fruit ecumenically, as well as in other ways.
Some people, in my experience, seem to prefer subscribing to theological systems that purport to have answers for everything, or they are looking for a particular unshakeable and infallible authority to ease their troubled soul (pope, sola scriptura, etc.), while others are drawn to and convinced by systems that are very amorphous and ambiguous. Either preference, though, seems to be driven more by an individual's psychology and personality rather than being a purely disinterested pursuit of "truth", though the quest for truth certainly does come into the equation. And as we are constantly developing and growing as individuals, our psychology is influenced more and more by the various life experiences that we grow through, and we bring all of that to the table as well.
We all do this. I think about this in relation to my own life as an artist-deacon. As an artist, I am fine with seeing things from multiple perspectives, and am not necessarily worried about how it all ties together. My "looser" mindset even trickles into the country/bluegrass band me and some friends have: I always joke with them that I am not very concerned with staying in strict time, people coming in singing all at once, and so on, and how that is analogous to the dripping paint, multiple perspective, and criss-crossing lines in my art. I think it is that inherent ambiguity that I live with as an artist that has helped me remain faithful to Jesus Christ in times of darkness over the years. Other people though, could not stand having dripping paint, and "gray" areas to deal with. To them, everything is black and white, and very often they think that anyone who accepts some level of ambiguity is a complete wacko. I accept that there are people like that out there... who have to have neat answers for everything; that is their personality type, and that's fine. That's how God made them, and allowed them to grow as people. But I do find it frustrating to read of people who write about their religious life, or conversion to another denomination, as though it were entirely an intellectual matter, when, no doubt, personal and psychological reasons were also at play. It just seems dishonest.
People make decisions for personal reasons as well as for intellectual ones. It is not just a bare examination of the 'cold, hard facts'. I think that when people begin to acknowledge this more it will bear fruit ecumenically, as well as in other ways.
Friday, March 03, 2006
All Saints' Convent
Here are some pictures of the All Saints' Convent in Catonsville, MD. Sorry they are kind of dark (especially the chapel one). Despite it's low church reputation, Maryland actually has some important anglo-catholic churches and institutions. This place is one of them. The Cowley Father, Fr. Maddux, compiler of the famous Priest's Handbook and American Missal, was chaplain here for many years. The current chaplain is Fr. Warren Tanghe. This place houses the All Saints' Sisters of the Poor, an Anglican religious order that was brought over to America by Mt. Calvary Church (Baltimore) to minister to the poor. The sisters use the Anglican Breviary for their offices, and everything is chanted in beautiful Gregorian Chant. They still wear the full, traditional habit, unlike their sisters in England who are completely modernistic. It is a wonderful place of spiritual refreshment and rest. I think there are about 15 sisters there now.The Maryland APA/REC clergy, postulants, and aspirants are having a quiet day here this month. We'll have mattins, mass, confession, two reflections by our "retreat master", and time for contemplation, reflection, and spiritual direction. It is very nice, speaking as an APAer, to be able to do things like this with our REC brethren. Many people ask how the "merger" process is going. Well, it is going slowly and carefully, but definitely going. Events like this, where the focus is on Jesus Christ, prayer, and the worship of God in Word and Sacrament, are what brings unity about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)