Author Archives: Elizaphanian

About Elizaphanian

Rector of West Mersea

Captain America, remembering to be righteous

Posted on by

Took my eldest to watch Cap the other day, I thought it was rather good.

As is often the case, I feel that popular culture is often more revealing than high culture of the moods and currents currently flowing in our civilisation.Captain America represents old values, things that we have forgotten.

This is the struggle that we face. An attempt to restore forgotten virtues in a culture that has become corrupted. From the ‘ur-text’ of “After Virtue”:

…if the tradition of the virtues was able to survive the horrors of the last dark ages, we are not entirely without grounds for hope. This time however the barbarians are not waiting beyond the frontiers; they have already been governing us for quite some time. And it is our lack of consciousness that constitutes part of our predicament. 

The reason why I like popular culture such as this is because here they are at least conscious of the problem, and seem able to explore it freely. (See here for an article about the riots, see here for a bit more on the mythology of Cap)

Models of the church (after Dulles)

Posted on by

One of the surprises and delights of having a blog is making contact with people around the world. In particular, one very kind person in the United States sent me – some two years ago!! – a copy of Avery Dulles’ “Models of the Church”. To my shame I haven’t finished reading it yet (about 1/4 left – which is how it has been for a while; now is clearly the time to finish it off) but I have grasped the main models. I thought it would be worth sharing them, as I want to pursue the discussion generated by yesterday’s post in some detail.

Dulles outlines five ways of understanding what church is:

1 – the institution, which in practice means the officers and legal apparatus. This form identifies the actions of the Holy Spirit with the actions of the visible institution.
2 – mystical communion, an invisible but recognisable presence of the Holy Spirit, which unites the true church across denominational boundaries (and beyond).
3 – a sacrament, the outward sign of the inward grace, a principal means by which God’s grace is made manifest in the world.
4 – a herald, the place where the gospel is proclaimed and the world is called to repentance, and a community is formed in response.
5 – a servant community, found wherever sacrificial love is acted out in places of need.

Each one of these ways of understanding the church contains important elements of what church needs to be; the issue is which one is given primacy in order to integrate the different elements. For me (and I think this is the way Dulles is going) the important element is the third – the sacramental model. I think this provides a proper balance between the first two, is dependent on the fourth in order to be valid (ie the gospel is rightly preached) and necessarily has the fifth as an outcome.

If the first is given priority you get sterile legalism, if the second is given priority you get lukewarm sentimentalism, if the fourth is given priority you get ‘the ten thousand things’ and if the fifth is given priority you get a renamed social services. If the generating impetus for the church is the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus then the nature of the church that he established has to reflect those realities. To my mind, this means that the sacramental understanding of the church – which is the only model which takes the incarnation seriously – has to have primacy.

This will underlie my other posts, forthcoming.

Do you need to attend church to be a Christian?

Posted on by

Yes.

Unless, of course, you are more holy than Jesus. Jesus attended synagogue and the Temple rituals ‘customarily’ (Luke 4.16), so if it was worth it for him, then it’s worth it for us.

This is not to say that we are forced to attend a church that spiritually murders us, it is to say that we need to be a little stricter about discriminating between spiritual murder and spiritual inconvenience. It is not possible to get to heaven by giving in to our own desires so often especially when such desires are, frankly, incredibly shallow.

What is church? Church is where the gospel is rightly preached and the sacraments duly administered. And yes, in order to be a Christian, you need to have a regular sacramental life. You need to be baptised, you need to share the bread and wine with your brothers and sisters in the name of Jesus.

Church is the gathering of believers for the particular purpose of renewing and refreshing their faith, which is accomplished by centreing our attention upon God and offering up to him the very best of ourselves, acknowledging that we are merely returning his original investment in us.

Christianity is not a solitary and private act. It is public and corporate. Fellowship is not an optional extra, it is constitutive. You cannot learn to love your enemies unless you take time to get to know them first.

Jesus had synagogue and the Temple. I’m coming to see house-groups (or equivalent) as the former, and Sunday morning as the latter. So many of the arguments and controversies we struggle with would be eased if we didn’t try to make the Temple into the synagogue, or vice versa.

Being a Christian is not the same as being saved. It is not for us to put boundaries around the grace of God. But joining in with other people on the pilgrimage and path of faith, this is not an optional extra, this is of the very essence of the faith.

Football predictions

Posted on by

Time for my annual speculation, in the form of a table with added notes

1. ManU [1]
2. Chelsea [2]
3. Man C
4. Liverpool [3]
5. Arsenal
6. Spurs
7. Everton [4]
8. Fulham
9. Sunderland
10. Villa
11. WBA
12. Newcastle
13. Bolton
14. Stoke
15. Naarwich [5]
16. Wolves
17. Wigan
18. Blackburn [6]
19. Swansea
20. QPR

Didn’t do too badly last year – I thought that Hodgson would be more successful at Liverpool, and I didn’t expect WHam to be such a disaster, but reasonable. Anyhow:

[1] They are the team to beat – by some distance. I hope SAF retires soon.
[2] Blind optimism.
[3] Highly dependent on Andy Carroll being injury-free.
[4] Not much to choose, as always, between the next several teams.
[5] Paul Lambert is obviously an excellent manager, simple as that.
[6] More blind optimism.

A different place

Posted on by

Back from holiday, and feeling that, having been in one place, I have very much now travelled to a different one. Which is good. A handful of self-referential links:

My satnav and my God – this morning’s sermon, which was more joyfully received than usual 🙂

Honi Soit qui Mal y Pense – me on phone-hacking, and the triumph of prurience.

How do we fight for what we believe in? – a slightly more considered reflection on Breivik.

There might be something long and ruminative later this week. On holiday I was completely without screens, I couldn’t read books, I was with people that I loved and who loved me, and I had time to think and dream. It has done me the very world of good.

Anders Breivik’s "Christianity"

Posted on by

In his own words:

If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian.

European Christendom isn’t just about having a personal relationship with Jesus or God. It is so much more. Christendom is identity, moral, laws and codexes which has produced the greatest civilisation the world has ever witnessed.

I’m not going to pretend I’m a very religious person as that would be a lie. I’ve always been very pragmatic and influenced by my secular surroundings and environment.

As a cultural Christian, I believe Christendom is essential for cultural reasons. After all, Christianity is the ONLY cultural platform that can unite all Europeans, which will be needed in the coming period during the third expulsion of the Muslims.

As this is a cultural war, our definition of being a Christian does not necessarily constitute that you are required to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus. Being a Christian can mean many things: – That you believe in and want to protect Europe’s Christian cultural heritage. The European cultural heritage, our norms (moral codes and social structures included), our traditions and our modern political systems are based on Christianity – Protestantism, Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity and the legacy of the European enlightenment (reason is the primary source and legitimacy for authority). It is not required that you have a personal relationship with God or Jesus in order to fight for our Christian cultural heritage and the European way. In many ways, our modern societies and European secularism is a result of European Christendom and the enlightenment. It is therefore essential to understand the difference between a “Christian fundamentalist theocracy” (everything we do not want) and a secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage (what we do want). So no, you don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian atheist (an atheist who wants to preserve at least the basics of the European Christian cultural legacy (Christian holidays, Christmas and Easter)). The PCCTS, Knights Templar is therefore not a religious organisation but rather a Christian “culturalist” military order.

There’s lots more in the same vein.

I’m about to go away on holiday. I might have more to say about all this when I return, but it will be on my other more political blog – Gandalf’s Hope.

Motive

Posted on by

If it turns out that he’s “a right-wing Christian fundamentalist” and those doctrines provided a motive for his behaviour then such doctrines need to be denounced and combatted. In just the same way that the doctrines that give rise to terrorists shouting ‘Allahu Ackbar’ also need to be denounced and combatted. Of course, that would expose a contradiction at the heart of our society – or, perhaps more accurately, a self-hatred. Muslims etc are victims of the oppressive West, therefore they are on the side of the angels. This Norwegian nutter is an expression of the oppressive West, therefore he is on the side of the devils.

Perhaps there are all sorts of mitigating circumstances and doubtless we will come up with all sorts of explanations but in the end evil is as evil does and he is responsible to the Almighty for what he has done.

Why, O LORD, do you stand far off?
Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?
In his arrogance the wicked man hunts down the weak,
who are caught in the schemes he devises.
He boasts of the cravings of his heart;
he blesses the greedy and reviles the LORD.
In his pride the wicked does not seek him;
in all his thoughts there is no room for God.
His ways are always prosperous;
he is haughty and your laws are far from him;
he sneers at all his enemies.
He says to himself, Nothing will shake me;
I’ll always be happy and never have trouble.
His mouth is full of curses and lies and threats;
trouble and evil are under his tongue.
He lies in wait near the villages;
from ambush he murders the innocent, watching in secret for his victims.
He lies in wait like a lion in cover;
he lies in wait to catch the helpless;
he catches the helpless and drags them off in his net.
His victims are crushed, they collapse;
they fall under his strength.
He says to himself, God has forgotten;
he covers his face and never sees.
Arise, LORD! Lift up your hand, O God.
Do not forget the helpless.
Why does the wicked man revile God?
Why does he say to himself, He won’t call me to account?
But you, O God, do see trouble and grief; you consider it to take it in hand.
The victim commits himself to you; you are the helper of the fatherless.
Break the arm of the wicked and evil man;
call him to account for his wickedness that would not be found out.
The LORD is King for ever and ever; the nations will perish from his land.
You hear, O LORD, the desire of the afflicted;
you encourage them, and you listen to their cry,
defending the fatherless and the oppressed,
in order that man, who is of the earth, may terrify no more.

Psalm 10, NIV

(NB for a flavour of what I’m guessing is part of his motivation, do some research on Fjordman and read his writings. They are very interesting and have been very influential.)

A dinner party meme

Posted on by

Haven’t seen any memes for a while, so I thought I’d start one: have a dinner party!

Rules: you have to have 12 people, including yourself. Of those there need to be at least four men, at least four women, at least four known to you personally and at least four who are “famous”. You’re not allowed anyone who has passed on to the great hereafter – that would be a rather different sort of party. It needs to be one that might plausibly ‘work’ (ie don’t just pile people together). You also need to choose a place/ style of food.

Here’s my starter (in a manner of speaking)

Me
My wife
My best man
His wife

Liz Burrows

Rowan Williams
Jane Williams
Jonathan Ross
Jane Goldman
Neil Gaiman
Catherine Tate

And we’d eat at Rules, and we’d have some stonkingly wonderful Burgundy.

And I tag – anyone who wants to join in. Which, given the state of the blogosphere at the moment, is likely to be a very small number….