Overview of the Seven "Ecumenical" Councils

Ecumenical derives from the Greek word "oikumene", which roughly translates to "whole inhabited world". A Church Council is an official gathering of representatives to settle Church business, often dealing with doctrine (belief), behavior (morality), and questions of Church polity (canon law). Worldwide Councils are called rarely and are not the same as the regular regional gatherings of church leaders (synods, conventions, etc). An "Ecumenical Council" is one at which the whole Church is represented from throughout the world. 

Noah's Flood and God's Justice

Lots of people have lots of questions about the flood of Noah in Genesis 6-9. Why did it happen? How did it happen? And who were those pesky Nephilim? I have answered many of these questions in another article. But another perennial question is how does the God of Wrath displayed in the Flood story relate to the God of Love seen in Jesus Christ. How can the evil of the Flood be justified in the light of the Goodness of God? Although I have touched on this in other articles on Divine Violence and Divine Sorrow, I would like to write more here on how the Flood connects with the larger problem of God and Evil.

On Paul's "I have fought the good fight"

Recently a colleague asked me about what Paul meant in 2Timothy 4.7. He said: "I want to use this passage in something I’m doing, but I lack a greater context for it, and I don’t want to get into a “Road Not Taken” misinterpretation situation. To me the lines of the passage are direct and reassuring, but I want to make sure I’m not missing anything. So... If you have time, I’d love to hear your views on it." So, if this helps anyone, here's my response:

Bart Ehrman, Theodicy, and Leaving Evangelicalism

Recently I posted a chart about various models of dealing with "Theodicy" (the problem of how evil and God can co-exist in the same reality). Someone asked me if I had read the 2009 book by New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman on Theodicy entitled "God's Problem". Now I have read a couple of Ehrman books on Biblical studies, and heave seen several of his debates, lectures, and interviews (including him talking about his deconversion and the problem of suffering). But I have never read this book, although I have heard him sum it up several times in his videos on YouTube.

Ehrman's book and his talks strike me as having very similar themes to other books I have read, particularly by Evangelicals who have lost their faith. As a former Evangelical, I have experienced much of what Ehrman (and others like him) have experienced, except that it turned me to a broader and deeper faith in Christ rather than abandoning Christ. While I disagree with Ehrman on several core ideas, from the Divinity of Christ to the basic reliability of Scripture, I do find him to be a rational, honest, and well-intentioned thinker who is pursuing the truth as best he can. Erman’s story, as I understand it, points out several gaping holes (or persistent heresies) in American Evangelicalism:

Only 23 years left for the Episcopal Church?

I recently saw a WaPo article claiming that, based on the statistical free fall of membership in Mainline churches, we only have 23 Easters left before we cease to exist. On one hand, I would put this in the category of "the sky is falling" news reports we read about every few months, which are inevitably followed by a series of articles on signs of growth in "organized religion". This seasonal yin-yang of religion news fuels the constant back and forth of "told you so" posts on social media, as those for and against religion make competing claims. Yet on the other hand, there is something to listen to here. While I think we have many more than 23 Easters left, I do think things will change, and need to change, a great deal. By the year 2117 I would imagine that all American Mainline Protestants will have merged into 2-3 fairly small denominations. If I had to guess, probably one that styles itself a multi-faith fusion Religion, along the lines of Unitarian Universalism; One that is a Liberal Trinitarian Sacramental tradition, including many Lutherans, the Episcopal Church, and some Methodists; And one that is Liberal Trinitarian non-sacramental, and includes folks like Liberal Baptists and those who currently identify as Progressive Evangelicals. 

The Fallacy of the One True Church™

Recently a sincere and well intentioned person approached me on social media with a raft of questions about the Anglican Church, the Episcopal Church, and Christianity in general. This questioner is seeking to convert, and one question above all dominated his concerns: Which is the One True Church™ that he should convert to? After all, as he put it, the Church was “united” for the first millennium, so one of those churches that split off must be the One True Church™. Which one is it?

Mary Magdalene versus the Patriarchy

So the controversy over who Mary Magdalene was has jumped out of the pulpit and lecture hall, and into the Washington Post. For some on the "Right", Mary is a lowly prostitute who Jesus cast demons out of and saved to be one of the "little women" in the Gospel story. For others on the "Left", Mary is one of the leading Apostles, the patron saint of feminine empowerment, who was unjustly and unfortunately silenced by the growing patriarchy of the early Church. Both sides of the debate paint this as an either-or. Either Mary is a barely redeemable ex-whore, or she is an unjustly maligned Apostle. But perhaps the battle lines have been drawn based upon the logical fallacy of the excluded middle.

It's Fundamental

A rap song designed to teach the early history of Christian Theology. Originally written in 2010.

Explaining Anglicans: A Guidebook for Exploring a Tradition-rich, Christ-centered, Spirit-filled, Balanced Faith.

This is a short booklet (or a long essay, depending on how you look at it) written from 2005-2010 designed to introduce you the history of the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church. This history is messy yet magnificent, wacky yet wonderful, sometimes heartbreaking, sometimes hilarious, and sometimes holy. But it is always a love Story about how a particular God has reached out to a peculiar people to knit them into His plan of salvation for the whole world. As such, this is my take on the Story. It isn't objective. It is often biased. But I hope I have used the facts accurately to give anyone who reads this a short overview of an immensely complex and winding history. As such I know there will be things I have left out, and judgments I make, that others will find unfair. For that I am sorry, and I offer a bibliography at the end for anyone who wishes to read a more "reputable" version of the Story I am re-telling.

This book is intended to be used for seekers, or those going through confirmation, in the Anglican or Episcopal Church. It is specifically made for those who may be looking at the Episcopal Church from another Church background, especially from non-liturgical Protestant Churches. I make no claim that this book is a comprehensive history or theology of Anglicanism, it is merely a short introduction. This book is designed for group studies in confirmation class, used with older teens and adults. If you are doing confirmation with young teenagers or below, this book is probably not for you.

Christianity in Two Hours or less

I have spent the last five years working with students from all kinds of Christian traditions, and from non-Christian religions and secular families as well. Multiple times each year, I have the opportunity to introduce them to Christianity, in all its various versions and sects and denominations. Whether it is talking in chapel, teaching New Testament, or discussing world religions, I often have to help students find a "road map" to understand the diversity and variety of spiritual viewpoints and practices we call "Christian".

As a result of this experience, I have developed a curriculum of key ideas, charts, and videos designed to introduce teens and adults to the vast family of Christian traditions in around two hours. This assumes that the audience already is introduced to the basics of what the Bible is all about, and what basic ideas are shared across Christian traditions (such as Trinity, Incarnation, Revelation, Salvation, etc.).

On Sharing Faith with "Mormons"

In 2013 a friend of mine wrote me and asked for some advice on "witnessing" with some Mormon missionaries who had come to his home several times. I want to share what I shared with him, because it represents what I find to be some core agreements with classical Christianity, as well as central flaws in Latter Day Saint theology. 

Let me begin with how to address members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. As of 2016, there has been a movement within their Church to distance themselves from the title "Mormons", and simply be known as Latter Day Saints or Christians. This is because they do not want to be known primarily by reference to a word most people are unfamiliar with (e.g. Mormon). Instead they prefer to be addressed in terms of their commonalities with other Christians. They accept the Biblical data about Jesus Christ, his teachings, his death on the cross, and his resurrection. They are also Baptized into the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit. Thus, by the classical definition of Christian as someone who is baptized into Christ and who accepts Christ's teachings, death, and resurrection as the source of salvation, they are Christians. Latter Day Saints maybe Christians who have some beliefs that are at odds with classical Christian beliefs (which we will talk about below). But they are part of the Christian family. Every family has that one uncle who is a bit "different". The Latter Day Saint Church is that uncle.

With that said, I must preface this by saying that I have the utmost respect for many Latter Day Saints I have known and worked with for their commitment to their faith, to Jesus, to their families, and to moral integrity. They set a lifestyle example that other Christians should learn from. In terms of many moral issues, you would find me in total agreement with Latter Day Saints. Yes, I differ with them when I drink coffee and have beer with dinner. And yes, I would expand the definition of family beyond what they would, to include families with two dads or two moms. But as far as core moral values of integrity, love, compassion, justice, and commitment to sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ: I would be in full agreement.

Where we differ is in the explanation of WHY these moral values are core to life. We may agree on the practice of moral integrity. And we may agree on many details of Old Testament and New Testament history. But we differ as to the theory of history and view of God that upholds this moral practice and this Biblical narrative.

1559, Elizabeth, and Parker: The Beginnings of a Middle Way

A colleague of mine recently sent me a very nice summary article from the New Yorker on the abiding impact of the Book of Common prayer on our culture. If you have no idea who Thomas Cranmer is, and why he is one of the most formative influences of the English language, you should read it. Right now. Before you read the rest of this essay!

NATE'S CORE BELIEFS AFTER A DECADE

Every now and then it is fun to look at how you have changed, and how you have stayed the same, over time. In fall of 1999 I created a statement of my Core Beliefs to prepare my resume for my first applications to become a full-time youth minister. It is called "The Disciples Creed" (in retrospect that was probably a presumptuous name for it!). This week, fall of 2009, I have completed a statement of "Core Ministry Values" to prepare my curricula vitae (CV) for my final interviews for (hopeful) ordination to the Sacred order of Priests in the Episcopal Church.

In ten years I have gone from being an evangelical, charismatic social worker who is proficient in Biblical Greek, to a college and young adult minister who has made it through a mainline seminary, with experience in "high", "low", and "broad" Episcopal traditions (and limited ability in Hebrew to boot!). When it dawned on me that it has been a decade between each of my "creeds", I thought it would be fun to compare them. The one commonality between the two is that they were both designed to fit on a single page in 12 point font (so they are not exhaustive doctrinal statements of belief). Funny how an 8.5 x 11" page can fit more after a decade…

ROWAN RESPONDS TO GAFCON

As usual, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, has responded to GAFCON in a way that is more concise, more thoughtful, and more irenic than anything I could write. His statement brings up nearly every problem I noted in my blog about GAFCON, and then some (my meager article is posted below this one).

He is a brilliant, godly leader (but of course not without flaws, and huge eyebrows!). I hope all sides will listen to him, and work with him, before it is too late and this whole thing comes unhinged. You can read his entire statement below, or go to the communion website.

GAFCON: Saving the Church one Acronym at a time?

For those of you who may not know, or may not care, what GAFCON is: It is an acronym for "Global Anglican Futures CONference". It is another in a long line of acronym-agencies (such as the AMiA, the AAC, CANA, and others) which were put together to separate "orthodox" Anglicans from the "apostate" Episcopal Church of the USA.

It was a conference consisting of over 1000 Anglicans, with 250+ bishops, from around the Anglican Communion, which was held in Jerusalem. Its purpose was to put together a plan for the Re-formation of the Anglican Communion, centering around Anglican bishops from the Global South, and their unique Anglo-Protestant brand of Christian "orthodoxy".

I put "orthodoxy" in quotes, not because I doubt that GAFCON is Biblical or Christian, but because their version of "orthodox" differs in significant ways from older Christian communions which have a better claim to "orthodoxy" (notably the Roman Catholic and/or Eastern Orthodox churches). It would be an interesting theological project for the members of GAFCON to provide a theological justification for how they can significantly revise older versions of Christian Orthodoxy, while at the same time claiming to be more "orthodox" than those who would seek to revise the Anglo-Protestant "orthodoxy" represented by GAFCON.

Oh, for another Athanasius!

In light of the constant whining and nay-saying and power-politicking in the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church right now, I just wanted to say:

May we be blessed with a horde of modern day Athanasiuses (Athanasius', Athanasii, what IS the plural of Athanasius anyway???).

When good ol' Ath was confronted with a Christendom "that woke up one day to find itself Arian", he did not create a new denomination... Or spout self-fulfilling prophesies about how it was inevitable that the Arians were going to take over the Church... Or say the Church as we know it is bankrupt and must be abandoned... blah, blah, blah.

Christian history in a nutshell?

Recently on a discussion board I came across this quote which is both inaccurate and annoying:

"Christianity began as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. When it went to Athens, it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome, it became an organization. When it went to Europe, it became a culture. When it came to America, it became a business."

I know this quote is posted up all over the internet. It is an attempt to sum up Christian history in a very convenient, very protestant, very individualistic nutshell. Hopefully this blog will be read by someone to put this lie to rest:

Anglican versus Andersonian Ecclesiology

Alright. I am just as tired of "conservative" schismatics, as I am of "revisionist" heretics. I need a little ranting room, if you don't mind. I do not know what to post first here, so I will let you (the reader) decide. This article is about an email I received from David Anderson of the American Anglican Council (one of the soon-to-be schismatic groups vying for American conservative Anglicans and their money).

I have pasted the email at the end, with my own paragraph markings [] for easy reference. Anytime you see a number inside [ ], that is a reference to Anderson's letter. The people referred to in the article are Rowan++ (the archbishop of Canterbury) and John Howe+ (the bishop of Central Florida).

Anderson writes an odd, and somewhat unconnected letter about what is wrong with the way Rowan++ perceives the Church, and underlying his critique, there seems to be a radical revision of Anglican ecclesiology going on in Anderson's mind. Ecclesiology, if you do not know, is the doctrine of the Church (ekklesia), what the Church is, how She is led, and what She does. This article is an attempt to tease out this new, revisionist "Andersonian" ecclesiology (and why it is neither Biblical nor Anglican).

T.E.C. TAC TOE: Who will win in "The Episcopal Church"?

2018 UPDATE: I disagree with much of the content in this blog now, and am keeping it online only as evidence of how I have evolved and grown in Christ.  

I want to start out with a bit of honesty. I have hesitated finishing this article because I did not want to say anything negative about Christ Church leaving the Diocese of Dallas. But, I cannot help it. I feel shocked, saddened, and betrayed by the actions of Christ Church. I feel hurt, like a man whose friend flees when the fight gets too tough. I feel more hurt by them than anything New Hampshire or the national church has ever done, because what they did is more personal. CS Lewis says that the devil sends error into the world in twos, so that by avoiding one you fall into the other. Well, Christ Church has answered the heresy of the national church with schism, and last I checked neither is pleasing to Christ. May God have mercy on us all.

Before Christ Church went into schism; many people asked me what my take is on the crisis in the national church, and what I think our response should be. The words I emailed them then are even more appropriate now in light of recent events. And I want to begin by saying that I have real problems with many people on the "extremes" in the debate. In this debate, there are really four sides, not just two. Here are the key players:

On the Difference Between the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Church

2021 Disclaimer: This post is now 15 years old, and a great deal has happened with Anglican separatist groups splitting and merging in the United States over the last decade and a half. My understanding is that this has shifted the theology and practice of the Reformed Episcopal Church away from their reformed roots (outlined below), and toward traditional Anglo-Catholicism, which is very interesting considering the founding principles of the REC. Understanding the basics of this shift can be helped by understanding the overall history and theology of Anglicanism.

In 2007, one of my college students asked me the following question:

I went to a reformed Episcopal church on Sunday. The church was beautiful but the service was so different. I noticed that the BCP 1928 seemed to be a lot different than what I was used to. whats up with that? Just wondering.

My answer is as follows: