God is Not Your Boyfriend

I'm in my friend's house one Sunday afternoon, when I hear some cheering, followed by ecstatic giggling, coming from one of the rooms. The room belongs to my friend's roommate.

What? I wonder, then think it might be better not to know. However, curiosity gets the better of me, as it always does, and I decide to ask.

"Hey," I call out his name. "What the heck are you giggling like some little girl for?" (I'm blunt like that.)

"Oh, the Passion Conference is livestreaming right now, and I'm watching it."

"Oh, um...okay. Did you go to church this morning?" I knew the answer.

"No, but I'm watching the Passion Conference, so it's basically the same thing."

Seeing that he goes to a non-denominational church, one that I've been to, I could not disagree much with his logic.

For those of you so (un)fortunate (take your pick) to not know what the Passion Conference is, it's a conference (duh) that happens once a year in Atlanta, Georgia. Here's the promotional for this year's event, which happened just a few days ago:

Now, I've never been to Passion Conference, and I never plan on going to it. At all. Ever. I'm too old now, anyway.

I'm sure it's got good preaching; in fact, I know it's got some great preachers. Francis Chan is one of my favorite preachers, despite my disagreements with him on parts of theology, and he's preached at this conference.

While I've not been to the conference, I've seen enough clips from the sermons and music to get what it's about. I've also been to Passion City Church, which was...less than thrilling for me. Call me a cranky Anglo-Catholic, but I kinda got ticked when a bunch of teens and college students started "Christian mosh-pitting" in front of the stage for the Sunday night church service; that's what I called it, anyway. It's sort of like a mosh pit, without the actual moshing. It's like when people want to go crazy at a party, but not REALLY, so they kinda just waddle around.

Anyways, I'm getting off-point.

My reason for writing this article is not so much to critique Passion Conference itself, although I might do that for a variety of reasons, but to point out the problem that that friend's roommate has demonstrated and continues to demonstrate, along with a great many others in cultural Christianity: the infatuating of the love we are to have towards God.

I am NOT saying that our love for God should be without emotion; far from it. I've cried at services, both contemporary and liturgical. Nor am I saying that the people I am talking about are somehow not Christians. NOR am I saying that modern musical instruments or even modern genres of music are bad. I am saying that there is a real problem in how we, as Christians in the United States, often find ourselves whittling down the Faith to a feeling. A strong feeling, perhaps, but one with no substance.

I don't say this as a person who was never caught up in that mentality. I went through my own "relationship not a religion" "Jesus is my homeboy" stage not five years ago. I went to one of the big mega-churches in my town, and got caught up in the whole emotional-manipulation scheme, which is all it really was. For the moment it "feels right"...but it doesn't ever actually lead to repentance and a deeper faith.

Taken from http://terryivy.com/ 

That being said, this is what I have to say:

Stop it.

God is not your girlfriend.

God is the creator of the universe.

You should not have a feeling towards God that is pretty much the same feeling you had when you went to your Hannah Montana concert in 5th grade.

You should not ignore the intellectual part of Christianity, because you've confused the Holy Spirit with emotional manipulation.

You should not confuse an emotional high with spirituality.

Stop getting high on an entertainment atmosphere, thinking you're somehow closer to Jesus because of it. 

Jesus Christ had something to say about such things...

The hyper-emotionalism of modern American Christianity has no roots. It creates Matthew 13:20 Christians, nothing more.

God doesn't deserve infatuation.

God doesn't deserve a one-night stand.

God deserves your devotion in its entirety, not just in momentary emotional highs, but in your intellect and spirit and body as well. And if you're a pragmatist who "doesn't have time for that theological mumbo-jumbo", I have news for you: theology is INCREDIBLY practical, and affects your beliefs far more than you realize.

You don't have to be a theologian contemplating the mysteries of the Divine in ways that would make St. Thomas Aquinas' (for my Reformed friends, insert "John Calvin"; for my "Jesus Hippie Movement" friends, put...I don't know, John Piper or Joel Osteen or whoever) head spin.

But you do have to be a theologian.

Just as you would chastise me--and rightly!--if I were to say we should worship without emotion, you should consider yourself a theologian and worship God in THAT respect as well.

I will close this article with a very good quote I recently came across; it's attributed to Warren and David Wiersbe:

"When ministry becomes performance, then sanctuary becomes a theater, the congregation becomes an audience, worship becomes entertainment, and man's applause and approval become the measure of success. But when ministry is for the glory of God, His presence moves into the sanctuary."

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well! 

Fare Thee Well, 2015!

Wow, this year has been something for me!!! So many things have happened in 2015, both personal and public. I want to reflect on a few of them:

Two new nephews!

Okay, one of them was born late last December, but I didn't get to see either of them until this Thanksgiving. Both are adorable, and I love them to death. Now I have five nephews and one niece!!! They all live in Florida, and I live about fourteen hours away in Tennessee, so I don't get to see them nearly as often as I wish.

I became a Benedictine Monk!

This August I made my vows of Obedience, Stability, and Conversatio Morum ("conversion of manners" or "conversion of life"). I and my brothers at my parish pray and help our church with whatever is necessary for the advancement of the Kingdom of God.

I'm...almost done with my undergrad degree!

Okay, I was supposed to graduate this past spring, but work wouldn't allow me to. Unless there are any unforseen problems, I'm graduating the summer of 2016, finishing my degree by taking two classes overseas in the U.K.; of course, I'm VERY excited about that! I just hope I have the finances for it. Prayers would be appreciated!

I launched a new Facebook page!

Yes, this year I decided that I should have a Facebook page dedicated to theology from an Anglo-Catholic perspective, so I started the "Barely Protestant" page. I've made new friends with it, and have had interesting conversations. The page keeps track of how many people view my articles, memes, posts, etc., and I am humbled by just how many people have read what I have to say. My articles have been read in the thousands, now, and my posts have on more than a few occasions reached in the tens of thousands of viewing per week.

There have been some setbacks, as well. I had to quit my job because of how much it impeded my ability to do school, opting instead for another job that is more willing to work with my schedule, but at a significant wage cut. That's not been easy, but God has provided time after time for me, bringing in money at the very last second. He is faithful.

I also had some relationship problems, specifically with three people in my life. Thank God that one of them reached out to me this Christmas Eve to make amends. That relationship may take time to restore, but I am confident that he and I will work it out. Another relationship, related to that situation, is still on shaky ground; pray for that one, that we both do what is right. The third one I see not being resolved, as the other person involved refuses to reconcile.

These three hurdles have retaught me the importance of forgiveness, letting go of bitterness, and admitting my own faults. Do not let pride get in the way of your relationships.

I also had to deal, most importantly, with three close friends who attempted suicide.  Thankfully, all three are alive today, but for one I thought he was dead for two or three days. Those days were horrific.  It's taught me that I need to be there for my friends even more, and not brush aside any concerns I have about their well-being. Two of the three are doing better now; I've not heard from one of them for about three or four months, unfortunately.

I'm continuing my journey through the Christian life, making progress each day. Thanks to my Benedictine Vows, I'm becoming more accustomed to daily prayer. My prayer is to still become a priest, but I want to make sure that I finish my undergraduate degree; this has become my priority.

I plan on blogging a lot more, and possibly starting a Youtube channel (I technically already have: check it out). All in all, I plan on doing a lot more with this, as I find time to; thankfully, I only have two classes this spring, and the two classes overseas this summer. Some of the ideas I have are:

Reviews of books

Critiques of horrible viral videos ("Why Jesus is totes legit okay with, like, just having sex with whoever you want or whatevs"-type videos; or any Buzzfeed videos that even mention Christianity, for that matter.)

Explanations of certain points of theology (Sacramental theology, soteriology, eschatology, etc.)

Answering your questions!!!

I've done a horrible job of that this year; my apologies. I was supposed to do a few articles, one specifically on the belief of Annihilation (as opposed to eternal conscious torment). I plan on making a series of that one, as it will take a while to explain and a few angles from which to do. Anyways, that's what I'm planning on for the coming year.

Thanks for helping make my 2015 memorable!

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well! 

Why Christianity is Better than Islam

There are a great many reasons Christianity is better than Islam; a great many, indeed. From Jesus being a MUCH better example than Mohammed, to the Sacramental theology, to being more historically accurate, to being allowed to have beer-battered bacon, Christianity is simply better.

Do you know what I like best about Christianity right now? Verses like these:

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God."--Leviticus 19:33-34

Or Jesus' words about those in need:

"“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”--Matthew 25:41-46

Compare that to what the Qu'ran says: 

"And an announcement from God and his messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the great pilgrimage--that God and his messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the pagans. If, then, you repent, it were best for you (pagans); but if you turn away, you (should) know that you cannot frustrate God. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject faith.

(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those pagans with whom you have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in anything, nor aided any one against you. So fulfill your engagements with them to the end of their term: for God loves the righteous. 

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is oft-forgiving, most merciful.

If one amongst the pagans ask you for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of God; and then escort him to where he can be secure. This is because they are men without knowledge."--Surah 9:3-6

Also, verses 7-8 basically say you can't trust "pagans," and that "their hearts are averse from you; most of them are rebellious and wicked." 

I mean, well, at least if you are willing to convert you can be granted asylum.

Anyways, I'm so glad I live in a country where Christians sound more like they are following the passages in the Bible than they are following passages in the Qur'an.

Because I'll bet that if a bunch of Muslim refugees were fleeing the Middle East, we as Christians would welcome them the way the Levitical Law and Jesus told us to.

Right?

Of course, it would be reasonable to intern them, with food and shelter, simply to make sure that there are no criminals and terrorists and Bernie Sanders-supporters amongst the refugees. But we'd bring them in, because that's what the Old Testament and Jesus Himself commands. Doesn't mean we'd simply let them loose once they get here; that'd be cruel, anyway. 

But yes; I'm just glad that I live in a country that loves Jesus so much that we don't outright reject 10,000 refugees (to pick a random number) without a second thought.

Because if we did, I'd be concerned that we were becoming more like that second religion, not that first one.

I'd be concerned that our view is we only help others of our own Faith...like the Qur'an commands, not like Jesus commands.

Praise God that's not a problem now for us in the U.S. Praise God we'd take refugees of war in, keep an eye on them, but also care for them, and show them the Love of Christ. 

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well! 

Response to Baldie the Limey's Open Letter to Me: on the Eucharist

Baldie the Limey is a friend I have acquainted myself with over social media. He is Roman Catholic, and is looking at becoming a priest. I am Anglican, and also looking at becoming a priest. He recently published an open letter to me on his blog, asking me about my position concerning the Eucharist.

He's also into anime, which is totes legit. I don't think I've asked him yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's a fan of Blue Exorcist.

HE NEEDS TO SEE SUCH AMAZING ANIME AS THIS.

Now, on to the response...

Just to be clear, I am NOT a Sacramentarian. I do not believe that Christ is only "spiritually" (in the modern sense where "spiritual" means "non-physical") present in the Eucharist.

The bread and wine used in Communion, at the moment of Consecration, become the Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

It is really, truly the Body and Blood of Jesus.

It is not a mere memorial.

It is not merely a symbol of the Body and Blood.

I am a cannibal because at Mass I am truly eating the Flesh of my Saviour, Jesus Christ.

I say that because it seemed almost as if you thought I held a Sacramentarian view, although you never do actually claim that of me.

Now that that is cleared up, let us move on to my problems with Rome concerning the subject:

Unfortunately, as much as I love the Council of Trent, it did anathematize almost every position outside of Transubstantiation, including the closest one to my own:

"If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema."
--Council of Trent Session XIII, Canon 2

Now, this one is often called "Consubstantiation", Do I hold to Consubstantiation? No, because I don't commit myself to Aristotelian metaphysics. However, I do hold to the fact that the Consecrated bread and wine are the Body and Blood of Christ every bit as much as they are the bread and wine. Think of the Hypostatic Union: 100% God and 100% man. 100% bread/wine and 100% Body/Blood.

I wonder: am I anathematized for not holding to Aristotelian metaphysics, according to Trent?

Am I anathematized for not holding to Transubstantiation, according to Trent?

Now, as I understand it, according to Aristotelian metaphysics, the accidents of an object are not the object itself; only the substance of an object is (please correct me if I am wrong, Baldie). If the Consecrated Bread and Wine are only in accidents still such, how does this not commit the heresy of Monophysitism?

If I held to Aristotelian metaphysics, I would likely be a proponent of Consubstantiation. Not being committed to it, I am an advocate of merely Real Presence. It is truly both Body and Blood and bread and wine. One of my favorite Anglicans, both a priest and a poet, once said:

"He was the Word that spake it:
He took the bread and break it;
And what that Word did make it,
I do believe and take it."
--John Donne

Another problem I have is that Trent is not an Ecumenical Council. How could it be, when the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, as well as the Anglican Communion, did not weigh in on the matter? At the very most, we've only had seven Ecumenical Councils (all Ecumenical Councils pre-1054 Schism), but more realistically, we do need to understand that the Schism with the Oriental Orthodox needs to be reconciled as well. But let's just focus on the Great Schism for now at least.

Can an Ecumenical Council be had without the whole Church?

Does Rome decide if a Church Council is ecumenical?

Is Rome the decider of who is in and not in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?

If Rome considers these branches to be without valid Apostolic Succession, why? Hopefully, Rome does not commit the Donatist heresy in its reasoning.

Either way, I think we can both agree with this quote from the Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Hooker, on the subject of the Eucharist:

"This bread hath in it more than the substance which our eyes behold, this cup hallowed with solemn benediction availeth to the endless life and welfare both of soul and body; in that it serveth as well for a medicine to heal our infirmities and purge our sins, as for a sacrifice of thanksgiving; with touching it sanctifieth, it enlighteneth with belief, it truly conformeth us into the image of Jesus Christ. What these elements are in themselves it skilleth not; it is enough, that to me which take them they are the Body and Blood of Christ; His promise in witness hereof sufficeth; His Word He knoweth which way to accomplish; why should any cogitation possess the mind of a faithful communicant but this, 'O my God, Thou art true; O my soul, thou art happy!'".

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well! 

A Few Thoughts on the Gay Marriage Thing

"Yay! All of you bigoted Christians just lost!!!! Screw you guys, love is always gonna win over hate and bigotry!"

"What's happened to my America? This country was founded by Christians, and now it's become a pagan nation!!!!"

Yeah...that's basically been my Facebook newsfeed the past few days, and I'm sure it's been yours as well. Between profile pics of rainbows raging against profile pics of crosses, I'm watching bombardments from both sides as the culture wars continue with a major victory for the pro-LGBT side.

First off, I want to lay some necessary points of fact down first, just so you know where I am coming from in writing this article, as well as this article's purpose:

1) This is not an article about whether or not the Supreme Court has the right to do what it did. I lean libertarian, so my position is a bit more nuanced than your average conservative Christian's.

2) I am a person who has actually studied the question of gay marriage and Christianity, and extensively. I have a number of books sitting on my shelf and lying within my Kindle on the subject, from multiple angles.

3) I am a person who actually tries to avoid this and related topics, for multiple reasons. It's too emotional for many people (and I'm not using that term in a derogatory way), and parts of it are incredibly complicated. I'm only writing an article now because I see such vitriol and hatred on many sides with this issue.

4) I'm not a person who enjoys doing some watered down, "I won't take sides on an issue, I just think we should love everyone" crap. Of course love, but for God's-sake state your position if you are going to talk or write about it! It's one of the most annoying things about this generation; how unwilling we are to actually say things of substance when we discuss these serious matters. I have a position, and if I'm going to write an article on it, I won't shy away from that position.

5) While marriage is something that has existed before the Church, in our Western context it is something that has historically been done by the Church, and the State has slowly overseen it in a more active way.

6) I am committed to searching for truth, no matter where it leads.

Now that that's all cleared up...

Calm Freakin' Down

First off, both sides need to stop with the absolutely horrendous hatred thrown at the others. Let's deal with that. And yes, I genuinely do mean both sides. I've disagreed with my LGBT friends and my conservative Christian friends on this issue, and have been attacked by both parties.

On the conservative Christian side, I've been accused of going to Hell for my position on the subject. I've seen conservative Christians treat gay people horribly, acting as though they were sub-human. Whether you consider homosexuality a sin or not, you should never consider that person sub-human. I know Christian friends who are and were so afraid to come out, because of how hateful many people have been towards this issue. It needs to stop. Seriously.

One person in particular comes to my mind who, rather than thinking he could approach his parents about this complicated issue, was so scared that he decided to hide it from them instead, supposing he could change himself. Whenever you hide something, that something only grows. He ended up going into activities that any responsible person, whether LGBT or straight, would find sexually dangerous and degrading to oneself and others. Is that what his parents and church community wanted? I doubt it.

Think that's bad, LGBT friends? I've had a gay man argue, rather viciously, against me for holding to my position, later friend me on Facebook, then in the middle of the night start posting claims that I was hitting on him and trying to seduce him and was a closet gay. All because I respectfully disagreed with him. I've seen people like Tony Campolo--Tony freakin' Campolo!!!!--accused of being a bigot. Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

Recently, Campolo came out in favor of gay marriage within the Church. Prior to that, he was fine with gay marriage, just not within the Church.

He was fine with gay marriage, he just didn't think the Church should perform gay marriages.

...that is a position that requires vitriolic hatred and screams of bigotry? Seriously?  This is the guy I'm talking about (and this is a video from years before he decided to approve of gay marriages within the Church):

Yes, ladies and gentlemen: that guy apparently deserves to be given the same derogatory names as the Westboro Baptists.

Congratulations: you've made the term "bigot" utterly useless. And ironically, your claims of bigotry only reveal that you yourself are one and have no idea what that word even means.

So both sides need to seriously calm down. There are rational voices on both sides, certainly.

And if you can't see rational, thoughtful people on the opposing side, the above paragraphs are about you.

Now, onto my position:

Concerning the State

I couldn't care less what the State does.

We Christians have a fundamental problem within the Church today, and that problem is this:

We think the secular government of the United States is our friend, our ally, our tool.

I'm sorry, but no. The federal government is not our ally. Take this very issue, for instance: why is marriage something to be licenced by the State? It's a Sacrament; our Sacrament. Yet we thought that we could get the approval of Caesar, and our greed for tax and other benefits pushed us to slowly allow marriage to be considered first and foremost a State-sanctioned institution, rather than a Sacrament of the Church.

You have no idea how many times I've spoken with Christians who treat marriage first and foremost as though the State is the one that decides how it works. I've even had family members joke after a wedding that the couple couldn't go to their honeymoon yet because they hadn't signed the certificate. Yes, it was a joke, but the joke is based upon the idea that the most fundamental fact concerning the marriage is that they have signed a piece of paper given to them by the State.

A marriage certified by the State should make as much sense to us as a Baptism certified by the State.

And thank God we've not tried to do with Baptism or the Eucharist what we've done with marriage. Can you imagine the State forcing the Church to recognize pagan baptisms? Or forcing the Roman Catholic Church to allow the Eucharist for everyone?

Let's treat this as a lesson in what happens when we go to bed with the State.

So bottom line: I literally couldn't care less what the State does. If they want to enact gay marriage, let them. Oh, it will reinforce bad culture within Christianity? Rome had worse. Rome had killing people for sport legalized. Somehow the Church magically survived. My bet is that the Spirit will protect and lead His Church.

Now for the Religious Part:

I have studied the subject with an open mind, reading books like Matthew Vines' "God and the Gay Christian" and Michael Brown's , "Can you Be Gay and Christian?". I've listened to lectures and debates and talks about the issues at hand, here.

I don't do so merely out of abstract boredom. I have a LOT of LGBT friends, many (but certainly not all) of whom are of the opinion that Christianity either is or should be in support of gay marriage. 

After my studies on this issue, I can't as a Christian support the Faith blessing same-sex unions. 

Why? Oh, I might write a detailed article on that in the future. But suffice it to say that no amount of "shellfish!" or "two cloths woven together!" exclamations are going to refute my position.

Because those are really, REALLY poor "arguments".

(Yes, yes; the necessary "Lutheran Satire" video. Sue me.)

For now, just read Matthew 19:1-12.

Understand that Jesus is saying this. 

Is Jesus God in the Flesh? 

Could Jesus see into the hearts and minds of men and women? 

Then how could Jesus say something like this, knowing that there are people who are only attracted to the same sex hearing these words (whether at the moment they were spoken or later in the writings), if Jesus is fine with blessing same-sex unions with the Sacrament of marriage? 

Whatever your position on the matter, understand that the Levitical Code or even St. Paul's words on the subject are not the chief reasons for it being a union the Church cannot bless.

Because Jesus did speak on the nature of marriage, and He defined it as only a man and a woman for life. 

Now, whatever the State wants to do, I don't care. 

My concern is not the State. 

My concern is the Church. 

And so I couldn't care less that marriages are now blessed by the State. The State is not my religion. The State is not my Kingdom. The State is not my God. 

Same sex blessings done by the State? Sure. That's fine. 

Same sex blessings done by the Church? That is something that I cannot support Scripturally, theologically, or historically. 

And I've read and listened to the best arguments for the claim that Scripture supports same-sex marriage. They don't work, the arguments. They require such forced ambiguity of the text that I am amazed how some of the advocates can make such statements with confidence.

If you think that makes me a bigot, understand that what you are saying is that you cannot tolerate a position on this issue that is any different from your own.

Realize that, then look up the definition of "bigot". 

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well! 

I'm Not Religious, I Just Love (My Version of) Jesus

"It's not a religion; it's a relationship!" 

"Religion destroys!" 

"If only we'd get rid of all of these doctrines and learn to just love Jesus, we Christians could impact the world for Him!" 

"I just need me and my Bible, not any man-made (always said with a superior attitude) traditions!!!!"

Sigh...

...okay, I have a confession to make...

...

...I don't want to confess this, it's tough; give me a minute...

...I used to be one of those people.

Surprised? It gets worse: when Jefferson Bethke's  video, "Why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus" came out, I ate it all up and loved it.

(Yes, I know that's not his video: I linked a better one.)

I was a Baptist/non-denominational (they're basically the same exact thing) back then.

Even one of my favorite theologians, Greg Boyd (although he and I are completely opposed in some very important points of doctrine, this being one of them), got in on the act:

For those of you who can't read his shirt, it says, "It's against my relationship to have a religion."

Sigh...yeah, this is not a good mindset. Pitting religion against Jesus, as if they are inherently opposed to each other, is just stupid.

"But wait! I like Jefferson Bethke's video! It's so hippity-hop happenin'! Why don't you like it? Isn't religion just evil? Shouldn't we all just love Jesus?" 

Oh yes, because it's either love Jesus or love His religion. You certainly can't do both. It's gotta be one or the other.

Or not.

Listen, if you want to redefine the word "religion" as, "stuff that is related to Jesus but is bad", then I'm sorry, but we can't dialogue here. As long as you insist upon using a definition  that was pulled out of some hippie-Christian's weed stash, you won't be able to read me saying anything other than, "Hypocrisy and scaring people into being good is a good thing."

So that brings up the question: what is religion? It's a good question, and to be honest, it's kind of tough. There are a bunch of academic definitions of religion, but I want to focus on a few things that even religion-haters would agree with me are part (though not always essential) of what we mean when we say the word "religion":

1) Institution--organized religion, as in, there is at least some of the following: a hierarchy, sacred writings, creeds, confessions, etc.

2) Structure--not just institutional structure, but structure in daily life. Rituals and a moral code. Those, ya know, evil lists of "do's and don't's"

3) Doctrine--what one is supposed to believe in order to be part of said religion.

Of course, there is much more we can add. However, these will suffice for the moment. I'm imagining that your average "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual" advocate will agree that these are part of religion. Not only that, she or he might point to these very things as the very problem with religion.

Well, this barely protestant Christian is going to demonstrate why those things are good, not bad. Keep in mind that this is an article that is speaking to the "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual" people who consider themselves followers of Jesus. Here we go:

Institution

Whether you are Roman Catholic, Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Presbyterian, or even Southern Baptist, you have some form of this. You have a hierarchy in Apostolic Succession, in the Great Creeds, in a Confession, and/or in Scripture. Someone or something, in other words, has the right to say "you're wrong" when you spout something like, "I believe that God is a jelly-filled donut and we should baptize people into icing while singing ABBA songs! That's what Jesus would want!"

Of course, it doesn't have to be that silly.

It could be something like, "I believe Jesus totally affirms gay marriage, so we should celebrate it."

It could be something like, "God is going to have everyone eventually be part of new creation; no one is going to be damned".

It could be something like, "I think God hates everyone except for my little inner circle group!"

You see, the Institution is there for a reason. It is meant to guard us from something called "heresy". Without guard rails, you fall into heresy.

"Yeah, but those are so restricting and non-inclusive!"

...that's the point.

You have guard rails because you don't want to fall off the road.

"Are you saying I'm gonna go to Hell if I don't have all of the right beliefs?"

Why is that always the first concern? The only concern? No, being theologically wrong on something doesn't always constitute a one-way ticket to Hell. I don't know about you, but  I've always wanted to have the right beliefs because, I don't know, they're the right beliefs. What ever happened to making sure that what I believe is actually true? Do we want to believe lies?

"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."

It seems like if what Jesus says here is true, then seeking truth is also seeking Him.

There is a reason for our Institutions: they protect us from heretical beliefs. Heretical beliefs are wrong beliefs. I'm not saying you're going to Hell for wrong beliefs; I am saying that you should be concerned about Truth.

What I see here is that many of these anti-religion people have a problem with authority; the desire to be the one who gets to make all of the decisions is what seems to be the heart of the issue.


Structure

Structure, dreaded structure. Yes, we hate structure sometimes, don't we? 

Except for those times where we like it. And you know what? Even when we don't like it, we need it. 

I put within structure the ideas of rituals and moral codes, because they both fit into it so well. Rituals such as Prayer, Baptism, and the Eucharist are essential to the Christian--dare I say "spiritual"?--life. Jesus kinda makes a big deal of them: of Prayer, Baptism, and the Eucharist. 

And if we are just "following Jesus", then that means we need to hold to what He taught about these things, too. 

As for that moral code, this is one of the things that many within the "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual" group get, well, not entirely right, but they are hitting something. 

Our two great commandments that sum up the Law are these: Love the Lord your God, and love your neighbor as yourself. 

When the "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual" people talk about the importance of love, they are certainly on to something. Those of us who are religious have many times in the past forgotten about the importance of love. It is a fault of ours, a major one.

I know I've forgotten about love, in conversations with friends, in actions I take, in thoughts I think.

And it scares me how little I've loved in comparison to what Jesus has done. It nearly brings me to tears, even as I type this. What a hateful, unloving person I've been in my life. For those who have been hurt by me, I ask for forgiveness. In all sincerity. 

But that's the beautiful thing about religion; I know I've been forgiven. Without religion, when I was just "spiritual", I...well, I had no idea.

Was I forgiven?

Could I be forgiven? 

I mean, look what I did. What I said. God forgave me? Am I sure? It doesn't feel like it.

God, it doesn't feel like it. 

And this is the problem with an anti-religious spiritualism. It's focused on how one feels. And to tell you the truth, I have felt incredibly shitty and unforgiven even after asking God for forgiveness. 

I've been on my knees for hours, asking God to forgive me for the horrible things I've done. 

I've cried myself to sleep almost every night in my bed for days and even weeks at a time, because I had asked for forgiveness but did not feel like I was forgiven. 

You see, in my religion I do not merely rely upon my feelings for truth. I know I have been forgiven because of what my Church teaches. I know I am forgiven every Sunday at the least, by the absolution given by my priest. If I were to base it upon feelings, I would be in trouble. 

Praise God I don't base it in feelings. Praise God His Institutes protect me.

Doctrine

Everyone has doctrine. From Bill Nye the Science Guy to Lady Gaga to Barack Obama, we all have doctrinal beliefs. 

Yes, even Jefferson Bethke. 

First, the quintessential Lutheran Satire video on this.

Oh, and this one just for fun.

(Geez, you'd think that the Misouri-Synod is paying me for all of these or something. Sorry, I just really love these two Youtube channels. This Anglican loves Lutheranism. Well, most of it. Some of it's a little cray.)

Beliefs are what drive us. Take the anti-religious spiritual people: they believe that religion is destroying--or at the very least, in the way of--people's relationship with Christ. That belief is what drives them to hate religion.

Doctrine matters. What we believe matters.

If you believe that a child in the womb deserves full-human rights, you will have a specific view of abortion.

If you believe that the state and not the Church is the one that establishes marriage and grants the allowance to perform them, that will affect your views on the whole gay marriage issue.

Beliefs make a difference in our actions. It is unavoidable.

Now, can some doctrinal differences have no affect on us when it comes to actions?

I don't think so. I think that, at least on some level, every belief that we truly hold affects our actions.

Our actions flow from our thoughts and our hearts. Our hearts and our thoughts are shaped by our theology.

This is why the correct doctrine, the correct theology, is so important. Because we are creatures prone to both rejecting authority and creating God in our own image, we tend to abhor the idea that another person can tell us that we are doctrinally in error.

Every chink of theology that is wrong is a chink of our understanding of God that is wrong.

The God that we love and adore. The God that we worship.

There's a reason most of the New Atheists, those insufferable atheists who worship Richard Dawkins and are complete jerks, like this (the video is made by an atheist who hates New Atheists; it's got some naughty words in it, fyi),  mostly come from a theologically shallow background. I've met literally no New Atheist who has a deep knowledge of the Faith, whether former Presbyterian, Anglican, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, Methodist, etc.

The ones who do reject the Faith, who know about it, have in my experience always been the atheists or agnostics who are much more tempered and reasonable. And I know very few of those.


My whole point is this: religion helps us by guarding us against the age-old desire of being God and telling Him what's up.

I'm sorry, but there are too many temptations for us when we internalize the Faith as something only experienced between us and...well, what we call "Jesus".

Because it's cute and all that we (and don't believe for a second I am not including myself in this) claim that our understanding of Jesus is accurate...but is it?

The same One Who fed the five thousand miraculously...also allows the five million to starve today.

The same One Who says we should not repay evil for evil...is coming back as a warrior on a horse, with a sword shooting out of His Mouth.

The same One Who died for us...also has many of us die for Him.

Those things don't make sense.

Do not delude yourself into thinking that you all by your lonesome can figure out the One Who formed the galaxies with His very Words. We need to try to understand Him together, with the wisdom of His people throughout the centuries. It is nothing but arrogance that makes us think we can do this all on our own.

Am I religious? Yes.

Am I spiritual? Not by a long shot. Lord, I have so much growing to do. I am a horrible person when I think about it.

I'm religious, and am trying to be spiritual. My religion has helped me so much in that.

I take it that if you're spiritual, but not religious, you've apparently arrived?

If so, congratulations on being perfect. If not, get in line with me and take the Eucharist. We both need God's Grace.

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well! 

Yes, I'm (Anglo) Catholic (Part 3: Liturgy and the Book of Common Prayer)

Whew! We've reached Part Three in my Super-Special-Awesome (bonus points if you caught the reference there...in America!) series on the beliefs that led me to the Anglo-Catholic tradition! Up now: the Liturgy and the Book of Common Prayer!!!

Now, I want you to first take note of something, because this is very, very important: out of the (now) three articles I've done (or in one case, am still doing) concerning the Anglo-Catholic Tradition, how many of them are utterly abstract beliefs that do not have any Real Presence (pardon the pun) in the physical world? The first was on the Eucharist, which has a physical manifestation; the second was concerning Baptism, which also has a physical manifestation; this third one is about our physical tool for prayer and worship (the Book of Common Prayer), and the Liturgy we practice from it, which is also very much a physical involvement. Not to say that purely abstract dogmas are unimportant--they most certainly are--but the focus here is on the physicality of the Christian Faith, as understood by historic Christianity.

Why?

Because the modern Western Church has almost entirely forgotten it.

Think about it: what does your average modern day American church believe?

Baptism? It doesn't actually do anything supernatural, but instead is merely a "profession of Faith" (funny how Scripture never calls it that). Oh, and NO BABIES. Because babies can't be Christians. And Jesus doesn't want us to bring babies to Him...or something...(Matthew 19:14...)...

The Eucharist? Meh, merely a memorial. It's not actually the Body and Blood of Jesus; we only take it once every 3-4 months because...it helps us remember Jesus' death or something. Mind you, not "remember" in the Scriptural way, where we are united with Christ through the Eucharist, but "remember" purely in the epistemological way. As in, "Oh, now I remember that Jesus died for me. Thanks, crackers and grape juice, for reminding me of that."

Prayer? Well, we kinda do this whole, "think nice things in our minds and that's our morning prayer" thing, often, don't we? C'mon, admit it: you do the whole, "Ugh, I don't want to get out of bed, so let me just think nice Jesus thoughts in my warm, cozy bed and that'll count." I mean, sure; it counts as prayer..ish. But this brings me to my point: a minimalist, anti-physical, Jefferson Bethke-type religion that tries like Hell to pretend it's not a religion but is "just about Jesus" permeates our modern understanding of Christianity in the West. When does the modern American church ever advocate for spoken prayer in private time? for literally getting on one's knees? for--Heaven forbid--reciting or even--Lord have mercy--singing our prayers? Why do we only embrace the types of prayers that involve the smallest amount of physical participation?

Why do we insist upon acting as though the only important part is the non-material part?

In other words, why does our spiritual journey almost never involve our body?

But that question is, perhaps, for another time.

For now, I wish to focus on the third (and maybe last for this series? not sure; we shall see!) thing that drew me to the Anglo-Catholic tradition: the importance of the Prayer Book and the Liturgy.


We All Practice a Liturgy


It's true.

Some of us practice this type of liturgy:





Some prefer this type of liturgy:

(Is there a difference between those two? Just kidding...ish.)

Some prefer this (can you tell I just discovered how to post videos on this blog?): 

Others prefer that: 

(...well, let's hope there are VERY few who prefer that abortion of a church service.)

...and finally, some REALLY prefer this: 

...for some God-forsaken reason.


Every single one of these services (or in a few cases, "services") uses a liturgy. Which makes us ask, "What is a liturgy?"


A liturgy is defined as the way in which a service is conducted for public worship. Merriam-Webster is a great go-to for definitions, in my estimation. A liturgy, in other words, is how we worship corporately.

If running around with snakes in your hands is what you do on Sundays, that's your liturgical practice.

If jamming to really bad pop-sounding music that may either be about Jesus or your girlfriend is what you do on Sundays, that's your liturgical practice.

If simply singing a bunch of old-boring hymns with all the enthusiasm of reading a list of an accountant's responsibilities at his job is your worship practice, it's your liturgical practice.

Simply put: we all practice liturgy.


Okay...and?

Well, the way we worship is the way we believe.

There's a great and ancient line about this: "Lex orandi lex credendi".

"The rule of prayer (worship) is the rule of belief."

What does that mean, exactly?

It means that our worship, the way we worship, affects our beliefs. Big time.

If you are part of a church that holds to the emotional part of worship as most important, if there's rarely a moment that music isn't being played outside of the actual sermon, if there is a lot of emotion expressed by not only the worship music performers but also the minister and even the crowd, then you are likely going to emphasize emotion or feelings over intellect in your Christian life.

If you are part of a church that may or may not have modern worship, but the sermon is the all-important part of the entire service, and the minister gives sermons that are intellectually deep and heavily into the Greek and Hebrew, then you likely are going to emphasize the intellect over emotion in your Christian life.

If you are part of a church that focuses on experience: the experience of the Sacraments, or the experience of healings or speaking in tongues, the use of prayer books to pray as a community, ministers with vestments and incense, recited responses, genuflections, or the veneration of icons and other such mystical things, then you are likely going to emphasize the experience over the intellect in your Christian life.

I want you to know that none of these is wrong: emotion, intellect, and experience are all three essential to the Christian Faith. We do a disservice to not only ourselves but to God when we lack one of these in worship. Our entire being should be involved in worship, not limited parts of ourselves.


 I would never, ever claim that the Anglican Communion is the only place where a balance of these can be found; however, the best place I have found such balance is in the Anglican Communion.



All Three in the Prayer Book

In the Liturgy found within the Book of Common Prayer, we have all three emphasized. We have the emotion. We have the intellect. We certainly have the experience.

1) Within the Book of Common Prayer, our emotion breaks out into communally confessing our sins, and lifting up our hearts at the fact of being forgiven. Our emotion is found in the Doxology, and throughout the entire service. Is it as pronounced as your average modern worship service? I don't know; while I'm not shouting out modern worship song lyrics, lifting my hands and closing my eyes while swaying, I am certainly emotionally impacted. I mean, I've never cried at a modern worship service. I have multiple times at my own Anglican Church. Try saying this prayer with fellow believers, and not getting emotional:

"We do not presume to come to this Thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in Thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under Thy Table. But Thou art the same Lord, Whose property is always to have mercy. Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the Flesh of Thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink His Blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by His Body, and our souls washed through His most precious Blood, and that we may evermore dwell in Him, and He in us. Amen." 

2) The intellect is certainly there. We recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday service. In fact, it is because of that practice that I now have the Nicene Creed committed to memory. I didn't try to memorize it, it just happened that way. The Liturgy of the Book of Common Prayer is filled with intellectual depth; each section has meaning. A high church liturgy is one of the best ways to bring a child up in the Faith, because it's responsive and allows the child to fully participate in it.

3) Finally, the experience. Oh yes, it's definitely there. The use of icons, the genuflection, the communal prayer, the incense, the candles, all of it is experiential and has reason for being there. Of course, the most important part of the experience by far is the partaking of the Eucharist. Eucharistic theology is sadly missing from the modern American church.

Actually, most of number three is missing from the modern American church almost entirely. We have conflated "experience" with "emotion", and think that because we have a lot of emotion, we therefore have a lot of experience. They aren't the same.

Sadly, what is by far most lacking in the modern American church is Sacramental theology. We in the United States are too "rational" and "modern" to believe that, say, Baptism actually kills us (Romans 6) or that the Eucharist is really Jesus' Body and Blood (1 Corinthians 10:16-17). We like the phrase "it's only symbolic". It's comfortable.

Unfortunately, recall that idea of "lex orandi lex credendi"; it works both ways. Because we don't like "superstition", we get rid of (as much as possible) those icky beliefs and just have them as mere "symbols" that don't really do anything.

In effect, we try to strip them of their power.

I found plenty of emotion in some of the churches I have been a part of.

I found plenty of intellectual depth in some of the churches I have been a part of.

The Anglican Communion is one of the few places I've found a healthy balance of emotion, intellect, and experience.

Does your church have that healthy balance?

Thanks for reading all of the way through; I hope you like my blog! If so, I'd love for you to check out my Patreon page and support me as I go through seminary. Oh? You don't know I'm in seminary? Well, I am! Yeah, if you wish you can check out my article on that, here. Be sure to check out my Facebook page, too! 

Oh! And I also run a podcast with my atheist friend, Xrys! It's called The Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner Podcast, and we have a fun time discussing all sorts of topics: religion, politics, science, philosophy, movies, etc. Check out our Facebook page on that, as well!