The God of Jesus Christ and the Tsunami

From OpinionJournal, Orthodox theologian David B. Hart writes:

Perhaps no doctrine is more insufferably fabulous to non-Christians than the claim that we exist in the long melancholy aftermath of a primordial catastrophe, that this is a broken and wounded world, that cosmic time is the shadow of true time, and that the universe languishes in bondage to "powers" and "principalities"--spiritual and terrestrial--alien to God. In the Gospel of John, especially, the incarnate God enters a world at once his own and yet hostile to him--"He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not"--and his appearance within "this cosmos" is both an act of judgment and a rescue of the beauties of creation from the torments of fallen nature.

Whatever one makes of this story, it is no bland cosmic optimism. Yes, at the heart of the gospel is an ineradicable triumphalism, a conviction that the victory over evil and death has been won; but it is also a victory yet to come. As Paul says, all creation groans in anguished anticipation of the day when God's glory will transfigure all things. For now, we live amid a strife of darkness and light.

When confronted by the sheer savage immensity of worldly suffering--when we see the entire littoral rim of the Indian Ocean strewn with tens of thousands of corpses, a third of them children's--no Christian is licensed to utter odious banalities about God's inscrutable counsels or blasphemous suggestions that all this mysteriously serves God's good ends. We are permitted only to hate death and waste and the imbecile forces of chance that shatter living souls, to believe that creation is in agony in its bonds, to see this world as divided between two kingdoms--knowing all the while that it is only charity that can sustain us against "fate," and that must do so until the end of days.

Bonhoeffer book

I just finished a book on Bonhoeffer, titled, interestingly enough, Bonhoeffer. Stephen Plant, of Cambridge. Wonder if Dr Steinke studied with him? Excellent work, focusing on his academic writings, and asking the right questions. Best chapter: the one focusing on the works that influenced him, including the Luther Bible, Kant's philosophical works, Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, and (amazingly enough) Beyond Good and Evilby Friedrich Nietzsche.

Apparently Nietzsche has references in the Ethics, which I plan to buy in the spring when Fortress publishes the new translation of the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works. I also am going to get Creation and Fall.Bonhoeffer's critique: the idea of ethics as how can I do good? and how can I avoid evil? is an after the fall question. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the problem to begin with. Simple obedience to the will of God, a "childlike" state, is a theme in Act and Being, Discipleship, and Life Together, vs. the agonizing over good and evil that ethicists do. For Bonhoeffer, the serpent's question, "Did God really say?" is the pitfall of theological ethics.

The Pentagon's New Map

Watching CSpan online. Thomas P.M. Barnett discussing his book The Pentagon's New Map.

Michael broke the door to the oven today. He slipped going into the kitchen and lost his cup. Shattered the oven door. Now Annette was out at the time having "personal time." She's still out at the movies.

But the kids are now all asleep and the fire is still burning.

Famous Atheist becomes Theist

From Touchstone weblog comes this link to an interview with noted atheist Anthony Flew, who after decades of atheism, has come to the conclusion that the SCIENTIFIC evidence for a creative theistic force is so much stronger that his position is changed. Read the entire interview. It is fascinating not only for his comments on science, but his discussion of the teaching of morality from a secular perspective and his comparison of Islam and Christianity.

-Chip

Society of the Holy Trinity Retreat, Dec 6-7, Part I

Retreat was held at St. Cyril's Academy, Danville, a beautiful abandoned high school that does still host a preschool, the convent of the Sisters of St. Cyril and Methodius, and a retreat center, of which the Society has had the run of past Decembers.

Worship was held in the Basilica, a gorgeous worship space that is as evocative as you can imagine. Starting with Evening Prayer at 5:50, we went through the entire office, with Compline at 10:00, Morning Prayer at 7:50, and Eucharist at 10:30.

I met Matthew Schuster, a first-year seminarian at Gettysburg who is hanging in there.
:) And I hope gaining a lot from the experience, as I did, and I'm sure you did too. I think we come into these places as certain people, and leave still those people. I don't know too many people who change radically as a result of their experiences there. Can you think of some folks who do?

Conversation focused on the Rule of the Society, with special attention given to a section not included on the website. Mainly, we discussed issues pertaining to the call of a pastor in this society, the crisis of authority, and so forth. Something I had not thought about:

The concept of the ministry being an "order" rather than an "office." Argument in favor: the term "ordination" which is still used for the conferring of the "holy orders," as opposed to "installation" of the office in a particular place. The idea is that an individual represents the "order" of ordained ministers, rather than simply being elevated to an "office" which in theory can be occupied by anyone. When a pastor is "just like" anyone else, and in theory does not know more than anyone else, there is no real reason to listen to him/her if he/she says anything that is uncomfortable. However, a member of an "order" can be expected to be bearing an authority that is not his/her own.

I realize that this may not be congenial to Word Alone-attuned ears. The idea itself was a revelation to me, and I don't know that anyone really ever said anything about it at Gettysburg. But the more I think about the atmosphere there: the fact that no one wore clerics there, the idea that non-ordained people were regularly preaching, the neglect of the term "Pastor," points to a ALC pastoral understanding of the office that pretty much was unchallenged.

I mentioned that every time I attended Mass, and prayed the Eucharistic Prayer, which included, "We pray for the Holy Father, His Holiness John Paul II, our bishop, N., and all the bishops, together with the clergy and the whole family of Christians you r Son has won for you," I felt uncomfortable with the hierarchical nature of the whole thing. To which came the response that the Church IS hierarchical. Hmmm. Not sold on the whole thing yet. But this comes from a pastor who is not afraid to say no to Luther.

Finally, (for this post), I have decided that the way I am going to be able to keep the Office is by one office of readings each day, rather than trying to do two. If I can read the Psalms for Morning Prayer when I get up, so be it. But making it a priority to do one office per day hopefully will keep me on track. It was simply mentally exhausting to not have the space at home to do Morning Prayer when I got up, and too tired after 9:00 to do Evening Prayer.

Expecting a Ripple, Non-Compliant Congregation Undergoes "Catastrophe"

"Asked why the ministry would violate church policy to call Mason in the midst of
such an active community ministry, Kalke said: "We called her because we needed an associate pastor. We needed a person who was culturally competent." CCLM asked the synod to provide candidates for the call, but it did not offer anyone, Kalke said, so CCLM hired Mason first as a staff person before it called and installed her as an associate pastor.

" 'We didn't expect a catastrophe,' Kalke said of the synod action in response. 'We expected a ripple.' "

This is what happens when congregations routinely violate Synodical and Church policy with impunity, or at most, with a slap on the wrist, and for whatever reasons, a Synod decides that "in this case" harsh sanctions ought to be imposed.

Can anyone really believe that CCLM had any right to expect that their congregation number would be revoked - after all of the ELCA's and the Pacifica Synod's willingness to flout the stated policies of the Church again and again?

What is at question is why the Pacifica Synod should choose to impose the more "draconian" penalty in this case. Was it a case of not wishing to undercut the position of the revisionist party in the ELCA so close to August 2005? Or, is it another strategy: that old saying that the best way to get a "bad" law off the books is to rigorously enforce it?

Or perhaps it simply is as Bishop Finck states: "What we have said to the [CCLM] board is that [Mason's orientation] may be the central issue for you, but it is not the central issue for us."

Selections from the Classics, as I read them

What, another new blog? I can't keep this one updated!