Moving

No, not physically, just moving electronic presence.

As a part of my Lenten Discipline I am working on a new site:  theologicalhumidor.com

This site will stay fallow for a month, before being deleted.

Visual Heresy

A little intellectual stimulation for a dull grey Tuesday afternoon in Advent:


<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/JdaBe0dFsTI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

C. B. Moss on General Councils

The following is from Fr. Claude Beaufort Moss' short tract The Church of England and the Seventh Council (1957).

But who is to decide whether the definition of a particular Council is a necessary conclusion from Scripture rightly interpreted?  The English Church has no doubt at all about this. 'The Church hat authority in controversies of faith' (Article 20). The Church has no right to enforce what cannot be proved by Scripture, but it has the right ot give judgment on the interpretation of Scripture, and to require its membesr to accept its judgment. 'No prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation' (2 Peter 1.20). For the Church is not an academic society for theological research; it is an army marching to win the human race for Christ.  There are some questions which, once they have been asked, must be answered, and answered finally. Is Jesus Christ, the Son of God, a created being as Arius taught?  If He is, we out not to worship Him as God. Was His Manhood swalowed up in His Godhead 'like a drop of vinegar in the ocean,' as Eutyches taught? Then it is not true that a man like us is on the throne of God, and knows what our sufferings are because he has felt them.  Such questions must be setted, and only the Church can settle them.  If local councils cannot, a General Council must be held.  But its decisions require to be accepted by the Universal Church, which is the final judge.  Councils can be misled: no assembly of men is immune from the possibility of error, as history abundantly shows.  When the decrees of a Council have been accepted by the whole Church, or practically the whole Church, the question is settled.  It ought not to be opened again unless new knowledge turns up, which in the nature of the case, if the subject is the revealed truth of the Incarnation, is unlikely. (Emphasis added)

Back in the Saddle Again

It's more than a great song sung by one of America's finest cowboy singers, it means I plan on going live here at "triple b".



Yes, I still have a bit of old-timey nostalgia in my veins.

Does this mean anything?

I used the collect for Proper 28 at the Prayers of the People today, since my sermon focused on having an encounter with the Word of the Lord (Jesus) in the word of the Lord (Scripture).  As I set my BCP for the Rite II Mass, I found that the same collect is significantly different in terms of its content.

The bold portion of the Rite I collect is not contained in the Rite II collect.  Does this lack change the meaning?

First Rite I:
Blessed Lord, who hast caused all holy Scriptures to be 
written for our learning: Grant that we may in such wise
hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that,
by patience and comfort of thy holy Word, we may embrace 
and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which 
thou hast given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who liveth and 
reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and 
ever. Amen

Rite II:
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for
our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn,
and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever
hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have
given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with
you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

I doubt the change is accidental, yet I wonder why the language was changed?  Is something being communicated here?

Can anyone enlighten me?

Hitting Pause

or otherwise known as a hiatus.

I am going dark on these pages for a significant period of time.  How long, I do not know, but I have way too many other projects in the hopper that must take priority.  The largest of these is a proposal for my Doctor of Ministry program.

I ask that you keep me, my family, and the parish of St. Matthew's in prayer.

Dave

I Wonder

in light of the much publicized sermon (see here, here, and here), delivered by our Presiding Bishop last month in Curacao, how last Sunday's Gospel passage would be interpreted following the same hermeneutical  (interpretive) principles.  I expect that consistency in interpreting similar texts is to be desired.

Since the texts are indeed similar, I think we should compare them.  First the text from Acts 16:16-34 on which the Presiding Bishop's sermon in Curacao was based:

One day, as we were going to the place of prayer, we met a slave-girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners a great deal of money by fortune-telling. While she followed Paul and us, she would cry out, ‘These men are slaves of the Most High God, who proclaim to you a way of salvation.’ She kept doing this for many days. But Paul, very much annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, ‘I order you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.’ And it came out that very hour.
But when her owners saw that their hope of making money was gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the market-place before the authorities. When they had brought them before the magistrates, they said, ‘These men are disturbing our city; they are Jews and are advocating customs that are not lawful for us as Romans to adopt or observe.’ The crowd joined in attacking them, and the magistrates had them stripped of their clothing and ordered them to be beaten with rods. After they had given them a severe flogging, they threw them into prison and ordered the jailer to keep them securely. Following these instructions, he put them in the innermost cell and fastened their feet in the stocks.
About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them. Suddenly there was an earthquake, so violent that the foundations of the prison were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were unfastened. When the jailer woke up and saw the prison doors wide open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, since he supposed that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul shouted in a loud voice, ‘Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.’ The jailer called for lights, and rushing in, he fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them outside and said, ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ They answered, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.’ They spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. At the same hour of the night he took them and washed their wounds; then he and his entire family were baptized without delay. He brought them up into the house and set food before them; and he and his entire household rejoiced that he had become a believer in God. (Emphasis added)

In the aforementioned sermon's take on this passage, Paul is the unenlightened one for having the temerity to cast out a demon, in the name of Jesus Christ, from a demon possessed slave girl.  Paul's error, under this interpretation (which is without precedent in the tradition of interpretion), is that he did not recognize "her gift of spiritual awareness" and thus cast out what he could not understand, quod est interpretatum not adequately embracing diversity.  This latter is apparently the actual hermeneutical principle at play in the preparation of the homily delivered.

So using the prior sermon as a guide, or as a principal for interpretation, I wonder how this reading from Sunday's service (Luke 8:26-39) could be preached:

Then they arrived at the country of the Gerasenes, which is opposite Galilee. As he stepped out on land, a man of the city who had demons met him. For a long time he had worn no clothes, and he did not live in a house but in the tombs. When he saw Jesus, he fell down before him and shouted at the top of his voice, ‘What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me’— for Jesus had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. (For many times it had seized him; he was kept under guard and bound with chains and shackles, but he would break the bonds and be driven by the demon into the wilds.) Jesus then asked him, ‘What is your name?’ He said, ‘Legion’; for many demons had entered him. They begged him not to order them to go back into the abyss.
Now there on the hillside a large herd of swine was feeding; and the demons begged Jesus to let them enter these. So he gave them permission. Then the demons came out of the man and entered the swine, and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and was drowned.
When the swineherds saw what had happened, they ran off and told it in the city and in the country. Then people came out to see what had happened, and when they came to Jesus, they found the man from whom the demons had gone sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind. And they were afraid. Those who had seen it told them how the one who had been possessed by demons had been healed. Then all the people of the surrounding country of the Gerasenes asked Jesus to leave them; for they were seized with great fear. So he got into the boat and returned. The man from whom the demons had gone begged that he might be with him; but Jesus sent him away, saying, ‘Return to your home, and declare how much God has done for you.’ So he went away, proclaiming throughout the city how much Jesus had done for him. (Emphasis added)

I believe it would be fair to say that, according to the new interpretive tradition, the slave girl was only saying what Paul was saying in referencing God, and here the demon also only states the truth about Jesus.  Why did Jesus not embrace the spiritual understanding of the Gerasene?  The Geresene "demoniac" did not ask Jesus to cast out the demon, and in fact under the control of the demon specifically asked Jesus not to torment him.

So, is Jesus to be accused of not embracing the divine and spiritual self-understanding of the Gerasene?  Is Jesus intolerant of what he could not understand?  Does Jesus stand accused of a failure to embrace diversity here?  Would this not make Jesus a sinner, like Paul was above, and in need of God's corrective? I am not saying that the Presiding Bishop would preach this, but it is the logical conclusion to the hermeneutic embraced in the first passage, and we would be incredibly dismissive if we argued that the laity would never put these two together.

Please note that Luke, the author of this Gospel and Acts, has the demon possessed utter almost the same exact title for God.  Also note that the result of the exorcism, in both cases, is a move to have the "troublemaker(s)" removed from the area. This is not accidental, and frankly should guide our exegesis by using scripture to interpret scripture.  This, it seems to me, would be in line with the tradition.

Do you see the danger of using an idiosyncratic hermeneutic to develop a one time homily?  In the tradition this idiosyncratic hermeneutic is also known as eisegesis, or reading into the text what we want to say/see, and it is a temptation for all of us who are called to deliver homilies.  I am certain that I have fallen prey to this temptation more than once, and wish I could have those homilies back, but it is a temptation that we who preach must strive to conquer.  One of the tools at our disposal, particularly as Anglicans, is our emphasis on Tradition as a guide for interpreting the Scripture.  When we are out on a creative limb, we must constantly ask whether we are supported by the tradition, and whether the branch will bear our interpretive weight.  If we choose to go forward, without support, on a thin limb, we should not be surprised if we fall.  We clergy are under authority, and do not have the right to "make it up as we go along".

This is not a critique of the Presiding Bishop, per se, but a call to solid preparatory work for all who are called to deliver the Word of the Lord.  It is a tremendous responsibility, and we need reminding, as  Dr. Alan Ross, a former instructor of mine, says: "God has promised to bless his word, not yours".

A Truly Impressive Christian

I am not given to flights of praise, nor am I an overly emotional person, but I found the story below to be incredibly moving.  This particularly so, in that last night our Vestry approved the construction of a small addition containing an elevator and two special needs accessible restrooms.  It was a good, and no pun intended, constructive discussion, especially around money and stewardship.  To wake up and read about this man, this Holy Fool in the Eastern tradition, and his sacrificing for the Church is serving to convict me about my struggles in faithful stewardship.  As we discuss money, and what we will, or will not, give to the work of the Church, may Elder Dobry's witness guide and challenge us.  May his witness convict us in our discipleship.

May God bless the Holy Fools!

 Please follow the links.

98 year old dobri dobrev, a man who lost most of his hearing in the second world war, has traveled 25 kilometers every day for decades from his village in his homemade clothes and leather shoes to the city of sofia - a trip he made by foot until recently - where he spends the day begging for money.
though a well recognized fixture around several of the city’s chruches, known for his prostrations of thanks to all donors, it was only recently discovered that he has donated every penny he has collected — over 40,000 euros — towards the restoration of decaying bulgarian monasteries and churches and the utility bills of orphanages, living entirely off his monthly state pension of 80 euros and the kindness of others.  (From here).

Comments?

The one and only comment to the previously linked article deserves a post of its own.  So, thank you Fr. Bill.

Well said. I've always wished more people would bring the kids to church, rather than to nursery or stay home. So many times, I've seen parishes and parents isolate the kids in a nursery or not come until "they are old enough" and then wonder why they didn't stay in a liturgical tradition, or even in a Christian tradition when they are old enough to decide for themselves. There is plenty of blame to go around here, parents who feel it is not worth it, parishioners who glare or frown, and well-intentioned people who isolate kids and entertain them while teaching them to worship in some one else's tradition. I too hope that we all will persevere and keep the little ones in church. If they can crawl around for a year and a half smashing cheerios, kneel for the Lord's Prayer and elevation by age two, and walk forward kind of respectfully with Momma and Papa by the time they are three, we stand a lot better chance of retaining them as acolytes in fifth grade, and seeing them go to church on their own at 18 or 20. It worked for mine, and it is now working for my Grandchildren. Keep the faith and pass it on, and we will be blessed by heaven. "Raise up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it."

This is something to which I need to dedicate more thought.

A Must Read (For Parents and Everyone Else that Sees Children in Church)

http://iamtotallythatmom.blogspot.com/2013/05/dear-parents-with-young-children-in.html?m=1

Memorial Day

Two of my favorites for Memorial Day.  The first is Eric Bogle's rendition of The Green Fields of France, the second is the Flowers of the Forest played by Pipe Major Tom Coulson a World War II Veteran and Combat Piper.

This day let us remember those who have given "the last full measure of devotion" in the wars of the nations, and especially of our nation.  Let us also not forget the families of those we have lost.






O Judge of the nations, we remember before you with grateful hearts the men and women of our country who in the day of decision ventured much for the liberties we now enjoy. Grant that we may not rest until all the people of this land share the benefits of true freedom and gladly accept its disciplines. This we ask in the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.  BCP 839

An Oldie for Trinity Sunday

From the Historical Documents section of the Book of Common Prayer 1979 (pg. 864).

Quicunque Vult

commonly calledThe Creed of Saint Athanasius

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith.
Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish
     everlastingly.
And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity,
     neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.
For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost.
But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one, the Glory
     equal, the Majesty co-eternal.
Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.
The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate.
The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost
     incomprehensible.
The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal.
And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal.
As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and
     one incomprehensible.
So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty.
And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God.And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord.
And yet not three Lords, but one Lord.
For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by
      himself to be both God and Lord,
So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.
The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten.
The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten,
      but proceeding.
So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three
      Holy Ghosts.
And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or less than another;
But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal.
So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be
      worshipped.
He therefore that will be saved is must think thus of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the
      Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of
      God, is God and Man;
God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance
      of his Mother, born in the world;
Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father, as touching his
      manhood;
Who, although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ;
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh but by taking of the Manhood into God;
One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.
For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ;
Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead.
He ascended into heaven, he sitteth at the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from
      whence he will come to judge the quick and the dead.
At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their
      own works.
And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil into
      everlasting fire.
This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.

Twenty Years On

No, the previous post was not a cryptic lead into this one. (Did you see what I did there, cryptic,get it?  It was punny!  I know puns are the lowest form of humor, but  they are all I have).

Seriously, I was not making a point about today's great commemoration.  No, it is not a commemoration of death.  Although, the death of Constantine the Great on this date in 337 AD would make a good one.  As an aside, does anyone know why he doesn't show up in our Kalendar yet?  He was the first Christian Roman Emperor, so that should count for something, shouldn't it?

All kidding aside, today marks the 20 year point of my marriage to Amy.  And speaking of death, that's exactly what she said after the ceremony, "Now I am either married or a widow."  I stay on my best behavior because I think she meant it.  (Really, if I show up missing in the future, she should be the number one suspect, after all the life insurance is paid up).

Following St. Paul's advice, we were married young, and today marks the moment when I have been married longer than I was single.  Do the math, I will be 40 in October.  And to think my  in-laws told her that when I turned 20, I would know what I wanted out of life, and it was intimated that being married to her would not be it.  Funny, our marriage turns 20 today, and I still want to be married to Amy.  Does this mean I win the bet?

I love you, Amy, more today than yesterday, and though I know we are nowhere near where we thought we would be at this point in our lives on that day we married, every day has been a blessing.

Thank you for 15 great years (smile), two of the best children anyone could have, and all of your support.  Here's to the next 20!

In the midst of life...

The Coffinmaker from Dan McComb on Vimeo.

Happy Birthday

Today is the yearly celebration of the birth of the youngest.  I cannot believe how quickly ten years have gone by.

I vividly remember the circumstances of his birth.  I was in the last year of seminary at Bexley Hall, and in the midst of finals, when he decided it was time.  He was a bit early then, but has not lived up to that standard consistently over the past several years.  After several hours of labor, my beloved's blood pressure dropped precipitously and I can taste the fear I felt when they announced that they had "lost" the heartbeat.  Organized chaos ensued as they rushed my beloved from the room for an emergency C-Section.  All I could think of was losing this little boy that I was awaiting so eagerly.  Having followed as closely as I could, I was left alone for several minutes, minutes of anxious prayer, until an orderly came out with scrubs for me.

I asked the orderly if the baby was ok, his response was that my beloved was fine.  This did not calm my nerves, as I knew that she would be fine, so I asked again, and he motioned me to follow.  When I entered the OR, I was greeted with the best sound I have ever heard, the squawking of a newborn baby boy.  He was a bit blue, but healthy.  Mom, of course, was fine as well.  It was at this point that I broke into tears.  Tears of joy.

It turns out that the drop in BP that forced the C-Section was a blessing.  As they removed him from the womb, the discovered that he had twisted himself in such a way as to wrap the cord around his neck.  This was not seen on any of the ultra-sounds.  A traditional delivery would have been a dangerous option, with this condition not observed.

As I remember this day, I give thanks to God for the birth of the youngest, and pray that he may have many years!

Lectionary Fun

Prepping for this weekend's homily, I discovered that the appointed passage from Revelation has been highly edited.  I am not really surprised, as the editors often  leave out verses that might be "controversial" or upset the sensitivities of modernists, however, when I read the passage in the lectionary book, then compared the original, I almost fell out of my chair laughing.

The passage as it appears in the lectionary:

 Revelation 22:12-14, 16-17, 20-21

At the end of the visions I, John, heard these words:
"See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone's work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."
Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates.
"It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star."
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come."
And let everyone who hears say, "Come."
And let everyone who is thirsty come.
Let anyone who wishes take the water of life as a gift.
The one who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon."
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen.

The passage in context (verses missing in lectionary are in bold):

Revelation 22:12-21

“See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone’s work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. “It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” The Spirit and the bride say, “Come.” And let everyone who hears say, “Come.” And let everyone who is thirsty come. Let anyone who wishes take the water of life as a gift. I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book; if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.The one who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen.

Ironic, isn't it?  

St. Athanasius

A little reading from his On the Incarnation:

What we have so far said, then, is no small proof that death has been brought to naught, and that the Cross of the Lord is a sign of victory over him. But of the Resurrection of the body to immortality thereupon accomplished by Christ, the common Saviour and true Life of all, the demonstration by facts is clearer than arguments to those whose mental vision is sound. 2. For if, as our argument shewed, death has been brought to nought, and because of Christ all tread him under foot, much more did He Himself first tread him down with His own body, and bring him to nought. But supposing death slain by Him, what could have happened save the rising again of His body, and its being displayed as a monument of victory against death? or how could death have been shewn to be brought to nought unless the Lord’s body had risen? But if this demonstration of the Resurrection seem to any one insufficient, let him be assured of what is said even from what takes place before his eyes. 3. For whereas on a man’s decease he can put forth no power, but his influence lasts to the grave and thenceforth ceases; and actions, and power over men, belong to the living only; let him who will, see and be judge, confessing the truth from what appears to sight. 4. For now that the Saviour works so great things among men, and day by day is invisibly persuading so great a multitude from every side, both from them that dwell in Greece and in foreign lands, to come over to His faith, and all to obey His teaching, will any one still hold his mind in doubt whether a Resurrection has been accomplished by the Saviour, and whether Christ is alive, or rather is Himself the Life? 5. Or is it like a dead man to be pricking the consciences of men, so that they deny their hereditary laws and bow before the teaching of Christ? Or how, if he is no longer active (for this is proper to one dead), does he stay from their activity those who are active and alive, so that the adulterer no longer commits adultery, and the murderer murders no more, nor is the inflicter of wrong any longer grasping, and the profane is henceforth religious? Or how, if He be not risen but is dead, does He drive away, and pursue, and cast down those false gods said by the unbelievers to be alive, and the demons they worship? 6. For where Christ is named, and His faith, there all idolatry is deposed and all imposture of evil spirits is exposed, and any spirit is unable to endure even the name, nay even on barely hearing it flies and disappears. But this work is not that of one dead, but of one that lives—and especially of God. 7. In particular, it would be ridiculous to say that while the spirits cast out by Him and the idols brought to nought are alive, He who chases them away, and by His power prevents their even appearing, yea, and is being confessed by them all to be Son of God, is dead.

Athanasius was also an opponent of Gnosticism.  I heard a quote just today that "Gnostics believed that the material world and the immaterial world must be kept inviolably separate."   Does this sound familiar to anyone?

Christian Hip-Hop?

Yes, indeedy.  Though not my normal genre, I can be a bit eclectic, I like this man's message:

St. Mark

This morning I was able to celebrate Mass to commemorate the feast day of St. Mark the Evangelist.  He is quickly becoming one of my favorite saints of the Ante-Nicene period. I think it is important to remember that the title "Evangelist" holds more weight than just being the author of a Gospel bearing his name.

Mark was an evangelist in the deepest sense, as he began as a friend of Jesus.  We can credit the founding of the Church in North Africa to Mark's missionary and evangelistic efforts.  He was the first Bishop of Alexandria, and the current Coptic Pope Tawadros II is his spiritual successor.  He was martyred for the faith in the city that he evangelized, and before they were stolen by the Venetians, his relics were venerated in Alexandria.

The Church (Western, Eastern, and African) owes much to St. Mark, and so we rejoice in the witness of this Evangelist.  It is a shame that so much of the history of St. Mark and the Church in Africa have been forgotten by the West.

For more information on St. Mark, please check out the Center for Early African Christianity (linked on the side bar) and especially Dr. Oden's The African Memory of Mark.  Dr. Oden's book has been formative for my understanding of St. Mark.  Also, check out his lectures on the need to recover the history of Early Libyan Christianity.

Please pray, as well, for our brothers and sisters who currently are suffering persecution in Egypt for bearing the Name of Christ, remembering His Holiness Tawadros II, Pope of the Coptic Orthodox Church; The Most Rev. Mouneer Anis, President Bishop of the The Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East, and the congregations committed to their care.

Collect for St. Mark:

Almighty God, by the hand of Mark the evangelist you have given to your Church the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God: We thank you for this witness, and pray that we may be firmly grounded in its truth; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.  (BCP 240)

Bible Reading

This past weekend the Diocese hosted an event at the Chiara Center in Springfield.  The center is run by the Hospital Sisters of St. Francis, and is a wonderful location.

The presenter was The Rt. Rev. Dan Herzog retired from the Diocese of Albany, and he was quite the live wire.  His comments were prescient and inspiring, and I understand that many of us, including yours truly, came away renewed and re-energized.

Bishop Herzog gave one of the best, concise, Bible reading suggestions that I have heard.  He called is Spiritual CPR.

So here it is:

• Pray that God open's the Scripture to you.
• Read for the following:
• C--Command to be obeyed
• P--Promise to be received
• R--Sin of which to repent.

That is it.  

He also gave an introductory plan for beginning (or renewing) a daily reading plan.  Start with Luke and read one chapter a day.  After completing Luke read Acts.  That should take two months.  Then move on to other material as you are led.

For additional reading plans I recommend the St. James Daily Devotional Guide or the Daily Office Lectionary (BCP Page 934).