My New Hero - 81 Year Old Man Building a Cathedral

There is very little that I read in the news that takes me by surprise, and that I think about for days and days after I've read it. Like most Americans I suppose I have been desensitized to all of the violence and disaster that most news programs focus on, so I read a news story and forget it the next day. This story is different, though. When I read it I thought, "This guy is my new hero."

The man, an ex-Trappist monk in Spain (who is 81), is building his own cathedral. He's been working on it with friends, family, and other helpers for around 45 years. He has no architect, no construction experience, no money for such a huge undertaking, no building permits, no permission from the Church (but also no prohibitions). He just started building a cathedral. It is made out of whatever he can find and get - old tires, bicycle parts, leftover construction material, etc. He didn't have enough money to rent a crane to lift the frame for the dome into place, so he and his six nephews hoisted it up using pulleys made from old bicycles. It looks pretty good so far... actually it looks amazing considering all of this.

Visionaries like this blow my mind. It shows just how amazing the human spirit is, and what a man devoted to God can do, or will try to do. This man is a saint, and a true artist. Maybe someday I too will build a cathedral.

Good Scripture Scholarship

I am almost finished reading The New Testament and the People of God by N.T. Wright. I can't wait to read the next two books in the series, and then see where he takes the the whole project (it is supposed to be a total of five volumes). This book, and his whole method, is so refreshing after spending years at the "brainwash center" (i.e. the "tepid and centrist" Roman Catholic seminary that I attended) being force fed warmed-over Bultmann with a big greasy slab of J.P. Meier of "A Marginal Jew" fame, thrown in on the side.

One of the reasons that I like N.T. Wright so much is that he really seems to take the texts themselves seriously and as essentially reliable historical documents. And even though he does this, he also pays attention to the fact that they are biased "interpretations", so it is a very balanced approach overall. He sets the NT in its historical context - where it came from, and what it lead to - instead of spending page after page going over the intricacies of "Markan priority", or some other obscure feature of NT studies. In other words, he gives the reader a big picture of the worldview of an ancient Jew and Christian, and so brings the sacred texts to life in a new way. He also corrects some faulty notions along the way, such as Bultmann and others' understanding of "apocalypse", seeing it as something that is very this-worldy rather than as a cataclysmic destruction of the universe (alien to Jewish thought). Needless to say he backs up everything he says with immense erudition and scholarship.

It seems to me that other NT scholars focus on the wrong things in their work a lot of the time (Meier, for example). While they purport to believe in the texts as "powerful theological stories" they never seem to get around to talking about the stories themselves and what the stories are trying to teach. They spend too much time deciding what "did and didn't actually happen", and rehashing and rexplaining old theories like the "messianic secret" for the millionenth time. That stuff does have its place, and should be studied by students and scholars, but all too often that becomes the end goal in biblical studies rather than the story that is being told.

So if you are tired of how biblical studies have been done for so long, do not despair. Read N.T. Wright. You will be plesantly surprised.

I'm not a web designer, but....

Here is the website for my new parish:

www.stmarksvero.org

Alphabet Soup

I am reading Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell, which is the story of his involvement in the Spanish Civil War. It is a great little book. Last night I read a passage that reminded me of continuing Anglicanism. He wrote:

"The revolutionary atmosphere of Barcelona had attracted me deeply, but I made no attempt to understand it. As for the kaleidoscope of political parties and trade unions, with their tiresome names - PSUC, POUM, FAI, CNT, UGT, JCI, JSU, AIT, - they merely exasperated me. It looked at first site as though Spain were suffering from a plague of initials. I knew that I was serving in something called the POUM (I had only joined the POUM militia rather than any others because I happened to arrive in Barcelona with ILP papers), but I did not realize that there were serious differences between the political parties. At Monte Pocero, when they pointed to the position on our left and said: 'Those are the Socialists' (meaning the PSUC), I was puzzled and said: 'Aren't we all Socialists?' I thought it idiotic that people fighting for their lives should have seperate parties; my attitude always was, 'Why can't we drop this political nonsense and get on with the war?'"

He goes on in the same vein. This passage instantly reminded me not only of the alphabet soup of traditional Anglican groups, but also how distracting it all is from our mission to fulfill the Great Commission of Our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.

Our Plans vs. God's Plans

Many people going into full time Christian service present God with a little list explaining to Him exactly what kind of ministry they will be doing at the various points in their lives. They tell God that they are going to serve as a missionary for three years, and then pastor a parish for five years, then go to grad school and do a research degree in something, etc. They have it all figured out and are "informing God" of the way things are "going to be."

It can be rather comical, then, when we realize that God will have His way with us no matter what we have planned. One might think that he is going to go into a full time teaching ministry, for example, when all of sudden God calls him to go and serve a parish... even if he is scared to death of parish work. Or one might think that she is called to be a homemaker and administrative assistant, when all of a sudden God calls her to the mission field. God will have His way with us no matter what, as the stories of the bible - from Joseph to Saul of Tarsus - teach us.

The point is to always be open to where and how God is calling us to serve. Just because we may not have opportunities in the area of ministry that we have imagined we'd serve in doesn't mean that God cannot or will not use us in some other way. He may intend for us to doing something very different than we've imagined. Just as He called Moses, who had speech impediment or something like that, to be His spokesman before pharoah, so He may be calling each of us to serve Him in some previously unimagined way.

Buildings

It is a great joy to serve as curate in as beautiful a parish church as St. Mark's APA. Many, but by no means all, continuing church buildings are rather modest to say the least, and I have worshipped in a lot of these "modest" buildings. But honestly, it never bothered me that much. Worshipping the Lord in a small, rented building, basement, etc. is as wonderful and as valid as worshipping the Lord in a cathedral. As long as there is a valid sacrament, and the word of God is truly preached, I am fine. Everyone has to start somewhere. St. Mark's once met in a metal shed-like structure out by the Vero Beach airport!

I truly believe that many (not all) people do not consider joining "continuing" churches because the buildings are often very modest. Yes, people today are that shallow. They are more concerned with externals, and are not willing to go help start a new church with their time, presence, or money. One wonders if people of this mindset would have become Christians in ancient times, when there were no fancy buildings, organs, vestments, and you could possibly be killed for being a believer. Probably not.

Picasso in the Vatican?

Here is an article from Zenit on how a curator is trying to find a suitable to Picasso to add to the Vatican art collection. The rub is this: why would the Vatican want art by someone who painted hardly any religious art, and basically completely objected to the moral dictates of the Christian faith? If you ask me, though, that should not be an issue. The collection should hold great art that has Christian themes as its subject matter.

I suspect, though, that many people would object to a Picasso being placed in the collection because of his abstract style of painting, which they wrongly assume is contrary to Christianity in some way. But really they should not think this way, as it was Aristotle who thought that the best art was that which imitated nature perfectly. Abstract art is not anti-Christian in any way in and of itself. In fact, some of the best Christian art is abstract (e.g. icons), that is to say it is an abstraction of something in nature (abstraction in art is different from non-objectivity in art). Medieval art is also very abstract and out of proportion. So the idea that the best Christian art is that which best represents the natural world simply doesn't fly. In fact, we have no way of knowing how well men such as Leonardo, Strozzi, Poussin, and others really represented what they were painting, as we do not possess photos of those who sat for them.

The Vatican collection (which I have been to) has wonderful examples of art by artists such as Bernard Buffet and Ben Shahn (not even a Christian) who painted in a very abstract manner. So why not add a Picasso to this collection, if a good one can found?

Reappraisal of the AMiA's Policy of Ordaining Women to the Deaconate

Here is a link to an article written by the Rev'd J.S.S. Patterson regarding this important issue. The article is on the side bar of his parish's website in .pdf format.

(Biretta tip: Fr. Chandler Holder Jones, SSC)