When is a Pope not just a Pope?

I recently came across this bit on the Wikipedia entry on Pope John Paul II.

"His title was: Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of Saint Peter, Head of the College of Bishops, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Patriarch of the West (this title was recently removed from the papal list of titles by the reigning pope, Benedict XVI), Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God, Pope John Paul II."

Some of those titles do look familiar to me, but I never realized that was all one, full, official title (as Wikipedia makes it look like.) I always thought each title was a seperate entity, used depending on the situation.

On a sidenote, does the Pope get a paycheck, or does he just have "it taken care of." The Wikipedia article mentions that the Papal Apartments are quite simple, almost monastic in style, so I wouldn't expect a palace, but it would be fun to be Pope for a month. (I don't think I could be Pope Peter II though. -- Something tells me that the name "Pope Peter" is probably retired.)

I just thought i'd pass that interesting tidbit along.

Also:
Be sure to talk to Pam if you want (or anyone you know wants) to go to New Orleans to help the area recover from hurricane damage. Would we need any funding? If so, I wonder if we could set something up to raise funds one day after church. Myself, I do not see going, but I would not be opposed to giving a donation to help fund a good cause.

Matt (Limmer??), I hope you picked up your water bottle. You left it behind on Thursday, the 17th.

Free breakfast food in church on Sundays, starting about 9:30 AM until 10:30, and then again after the service. Free food, what else would you possibly want?

Merry Christmas to All!

When Tiny Tim says "God bless us, everyone," I sometimes wonder why people seem to forget the "everyone" part so often. While I do think the true meaning of Christmas gets mired in our materialistic culture, I also believe that the true meaning of Christmas is a message of hope for everyone, not just any one particular group.

I hope everyone at St. Stephen's has a blessed holiday. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Extropianism

This is a terrible idea. Extropianism is the belief that human beings, through new technology, can achieve immortality someday. This is the pinnacle of selfishness and egotism. I'm not the type to cry afoul with fire and brimstone, but I think this defies the direct will of God and God's own example here on Earth. Christ accepted an unjust death without saying a single word in objection. He did it so we could be free to delight in the splendor of his everlasting love. Living forever on Earth seems to be a preferred alternative to a few people. It's unsustainable. We should make our planet tolerable for our children, and that can't happen if we live forever.

I'm not saying extropanists are going to hell or anything like that. First, I'm fairly agnostic when it comes to the afterlife -- I think talk of heaven and hell gets in the way of Christ's purpose. Second, maybe there is a virtue known only to God in their intentions. However, if there is a heaven, when they get there I'm sure they'll be given a valuable yet loving lesson about life and death. And, hey, that might not be so bad, I'm sure I'll be given many, many valuable yet loving lessons about my particular sins as well, assuming there is a heaven and that I get there someday. What concerns me is the temptation humanity might experience if these ideas become increasingly well-known. We should keep this in mind the next time we say the Lord's prayer, whether it's the version that says "and lead us not into temptation" or the version that says "save us from the time of trial."

Anywho, I won't be at St. Stephen's tomorrow night as I am attending an open house at OSU's law school. I wish everyone well, and God bless.

An idea and an offer...

1) I have the technology available to provide background music during our Thursday night services. I was thinking about the whole idea of evening worship and "slowing down" and thought that maybe some New Age-style music might be a welcome addition to Thursday night.

Any thoughts on this?

2) Here is the OSU hockey schedule for the upcoming season. I am in possession of two full sets of season tickets. If you'd be interested in attending with me (and they're quite fun), i'd need to know early enough to finalize the arrangement, but there really is no deadline. I will say this, though: The earlier you tell me if you can attend, the quicker I can tell other friends that the ticket is spoken for.

Technical details: These tickets do not include the games at Nationwide Arena in late December (not that it matters since the majority of you will be in your various hometowns celebrating the holidays at that time.) These tickets do not also include any potential playoff games.

A tormenting paradox

In today's Columbus Dispatch, there were two articles on the Franklin County Animal Shelter. I found them both to be eye-opening, moving, and even a bit disturbing.

Article from front page.

More in-depth (and serious) article on the front page of the Insight section.

A few pieces from the second article:

"I'm a spiritual person," she said, "and there are times that I wonder if I'm going to be forgiven for this."

"By taking responsibility for ending and preventing suffering," she said, "they in turn will suffer."

Several admit to nightmares and increased use of alcohol and tobacco.

Finally, this last link is potentially the most disturbing. The Dispatch website includes several warnings that what you will see here is not for the faint of heart.

My summary: How should these employees be treated? Some people have called them murderers. Are they right? They're taking innocent animals, many times healthy innocent animals and putting them to "sleep", even though death is a more accurate, yet blunt, word. I'm not sure I like the use of the "s word" here, because that implies waking up.

Now, I can understand vicious animals. If it's been deemed too vicious to live a peaceful life, and can't be rehabilitated, what else can be done?

The part I found the most disturbing was what is done with the deceased animals. Are they buried? No. Are they used for medical science? No.

It'll be interesting to see the after effects of the article. What sort of letters will be written to the editor?

Finally, on a somewhat related note, someone should have caught the Sports headline of 'Cats Go Splat, before the paper was printed, but that's neither here nor there.

TBDBITL and Navy Hymn

I just had another one of my random thoughts.

If you haven't been to a Skull Session (held two hours before every OSU home football game), the Marching Band always preforms two "warm-up" songs before their run-through of that day's halftime and pregame shows. One of the songs they always do as a "warm-up" includes these lyrics:

Eternal Father, Strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bid'st the mighty Ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
O hear us when we cry to thee,
for those in peril on the sea.


That's right, the Hymn of the United States Navy. It's also a Protestant hymn entitled "Eternal Father, Strong to Save," and is found also in some Episcopal Hymnals.

Here's my question. The Ohio State University is a state school. With all the bruhaha going around about seperation of Church and State, how can TBDBITL preform the song and sing the above verse? I know it's obviously the Navy Hymn and you can't say "United States Navy" without "United States", but in this day and age, doesn't this seem a bit risky? Personally, I don't mind the hymn, but it wouldn't shock me if someone (or someones) tried to organize an opposition to it. If they have Christian (such as this, or a manger on government property), isn't there something about equal time to other religons?

Do the band directors allow optional singing for members who may find personal issues with the above verse? Should they? I suppose you could always not join band if you didn't feel like singing that song, but would it seem fair to deny entrance into OSUMB because someone doesn't feel comfortable singing a religious hymn?

It IS an interesting subject, I think. Seperation of Church and State does seem like it should be an "all or nothing" business, but it's not. How many times have we seen our government leaders offer prayers? And here's another example of where you may think the two wouldn't be friendly with each other, but apparently they are.

And before I go, here's a link to more than I knew about the song 15 minutes ago.

Volunteering to be an usher and otherwise...

Welcome back to everyone!

It was good seeing everyone tonight, and to those who haven't come by yet, come see us on Sunday morning or next Thursday evening at 7! We are also looking for a few students who would be willing to come to either the 8:30 am or 10:30 am service once a month to help usher in the service. Remember, the more people that volunteer, the less frequently you would have to serve. We need ushers for both services as well, so if anyone is a morning person, let me or Pam know.
One other note: to anyone with ideas about what they would like to see in the upcoming year at St. Stephen's, feel free to post your idea here, or to contact George, Pam, or myself with any suggestion or idea.
Thanks to everyone, and here's to a great year back (at) Ohio State!

Welcome back to 10:30 and a look around...

Just a quick note to let you all know that this Sunday, September 9th, marks the resumption of the 10:30 service at St. Stephen's. If you're in town, come on by. If not, we'll be thinking of you.

And here's a bit of news I found interesting:

Hey, filthy rich Hamptonites: The Southampton Full Gospel Church has a message for you. The big billboard at the entrance to the church has a new Bible passage up, reading: "Let not the rich man glory in his riches."

Passers-by heading to their summer homes can see the sign on the right side of County Road 39. When asked if it was meant to be ironic, a church employee laughed and said, "Maybe."

"But it could be for anybody," the employee said. "We all have different kinds of riches."

Church workers put up new material weekly.

From the NY Post.

Conservatives in the news again...

Here's a few random links I found that were interesting:

NEW YORK (FORTUNE) -- Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, has decided to curb its support of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) organizations after conservative Christian groups threatened a boycott, and after some of its own employees expressed disapproval.

The move comes a year after Wal-Mart (Charts, Fortune 500) had put on a gay-friendly smile. The company joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. It sponsored the annual convention of Out & Equal, a group that promotes gay rights in the workplace, and sold gay-themed jewelry in stores.

Link to CNN.com


--------

Some Franklin County Republicans aren't too happy with their party leaders' latest recommendation for the GOP City Council slate in Columbus.

It's not that he's gay, they say.

But Bill Brownson was national chairman of the Log Cabin Republicans in 2004 when the gay GOP group voted to withhold its endorsement from President Bush.

That, critics say, makes him disloyal to the party.

Dispatch Article

And here's a Dispatch article from the same day (Friday, June 22nd) about an anti-porn church

Augustine and Sacraments

Our discussion in the last post got me thinking about the definition of sacraments we always talk about, that they are "outward visible signs of inward spiritual grace." I've been trying to track down exactly where that definition came from to little avail.

The closest sourcing I could find was the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for sacraments, the "outward visible sign" definition is attributed to the catechism from the Council of Trent (1545-1563) and was derived from Augustine of Hippo's work De Catechizandis Rudibus, "On how the unlearned should be catechized" (like the Catholic Encyclopedia, available--in translation--on NewAdvent.org). How such a definition from Trent became a part of Anglican tradition is beyond me, so I'm reserving judgment as to whether this is actually the source of the definition. But, Augustine's tract is a fine place to start to get at what it means for sacraments to be "an outward and visible sign of inward, spiritual grace."

As it turns out, De Catechizandis Rudibus is less about defining the doctrine a Christian must know than about how not to bore people when you are explaining the Christian faith to them (just as his De Doctrina Christiana is less about defining the faith than how to preach it). A deacon from Carthage (where Augustine, BTW, started his career as a teacher of rhetoric) named Deogratias asked Augustine for advice on catechizing, because he was worried that he had been boring potential converts to tears. So, Augustine spends some time reassuring the deacon that it probably isn't him--that (as I have learned many times reading student evaluations after a quarter ends) you can never judge how your audience feels about a talk just from how they look or act during the talk itself. They may be outwardly yawning and trying hard to stay awake, but they could inwardly be absolutely fascinated and engaged.

His main bit of advice, though (and I think this is relevant to our discussion of the open table--I'll reflect on this in another post), is that catechizers need to adapt their explanation of Christianity to their audience. Someone from the country is going to need to hear something different than someone from the city, and someone with a lot of book learning is going to need something different who hasn't had schooling of any kind. Furthermore, one speaks much differently to a large group than to a single person.

Moreover, the catechizer needs to pay very careful attention to how his hearer is receiving the message--what questions he/she might have, what difficulties he/she might have with catholic doctrine, and generally how receptive she/he is to joining the community. This, he admits, is difficult, since it is impossible to judge a person's will merely by outward signs. In fact, it is inadvisable to make a hard and fast judgment, since we do not have access to someone's interior life. Nevertheless, we should be sensitive as best we can to where our hearers are coming from spiritually:

And inasmuch as, although the same charity is due to all, yet the same medicine is not to be administered to all, in like manner charity itself travails with some, is made weak together with others; is at pains to edify some, tremblingly apprehends being an offense to others; bends to some, lifts itself erect to others; is gentle to some, severe to others; to none an enemy, to all a mother (De Cat. Rud. 15.23) [Dear Lord, that's a clunky translation! But, I love that last bit.].

What is most important is that our explanation of Christianity gets at the heart of God's love for man in Christ. Everything else must be read through that love. This is something that Augustine always comes back to--we must "read" everything (the Bible, history, our lives) through the all-encompassing Love of God in Christ. The example he often gives (and he comes to it in De Cat. Rud.) is the Israelites' flight from Egypt--the Israelites crossed the parted Red Sea, and when the Egyptians followed them, they were overwhelmed by the waves closing in. According to Augustine, Christians can see this text as about the saving grace of baptism--that by water we are cleansed of our sin and freed as children of God.

Whether the reading of this text was known by the original writer is not as relevant as how Christians are to interpret the text and make it work in their lives. So, he tells Deogratias, don't worry about covering absolutely everything--just give enough to help your listener understand the most important point: the redemption of humanity through the saving Love of God in Jesus Christ. He then gives an example of a speech he might give to a particular catechant, which details his approach to explaining Christianity to someone unfamiliar with the faith. He protests that this is the longest and most detailed a speech should be, and shouldn't be any longer. Again--the speech should be adapted to the audience.

Augustine mentions sacraments as "outward visible signs of inward grace" toward the end of the tract, when he explains how the catechizer should bring the listener into the community of the church through the sacrament (he's not explicit about whether this is Baptism or the Eucharist, but in any case, I think what he says applies to both):

On the subject of the sacrament, indeed, which he receives, it is first to be well impressed upon his notice that the signs of divine things are, it is true, things visible, but that the invisible things themselves are also honored in them, and that that species, which is then sanctified by the blessing, is therefore not to be regarded merely in the way in which it is regarded in any common use. And thereafter he ought to be told what is also signified by the form of words to which he has listened, and what in him is seasoned by that (spiritual grace) of which this material substance presents the emblem (De Cat. Rud. 26.50).

A couple of things to point out from this passage and from the tract at large that I will come back to when I relate all of this to the open table:

• First, Augustine defines sacraments as signs--and thus what he says about them relates to his theories about language and symbols.
  
• Second, Augustine distinguishes between outward and inward components of sacraments. Both are important, and are linked spiritually--but they are distinct.
• Thirdly, he relates these outward and inward components in a particular way and explains how this relationship should be articulated to a communicant.
  
• Fourthly, Augustine describes the role the sacrament plays in catechesis, which for him is necessarily flexible and social.
• Lastly, earlier in the tract Augustine warns against discerning too readily the inward intent of a listener's will.

I'm going to go back and read a few things before I make my argument about the open table, but in the meantime, let the above serve as what I hope is an accurate picture of Augustine's points in De Catechizandis Rudibus. What I want to argue is that how we view the open table at St. Stephen's is not at all incompatible with Augustine's view of sacraments, and though it might not be traditionally "orthodox" per se, it most certainly isn't heretical.