12/22/2006
'Twas the Blog Before Christmas
'Twas the blog before Christmas, and all through the nation,
No eye was left untouched by holiday commercialization.
The ads multiplied on the TV without care,
Except to sell products and show holiday flare.
I could've complained with the rest of the sots
About "how will they know--that next generation of tots--
Of the 'true meaning of Christmas;' 'the reason for the season;'"
And other cliches of sappiness without reason.
But what to my wondering eyes should appear,
Another stack of Christmas cards, some with cute reindeer!
Is this all about Jesus? Is this all about money?
Is this simply a break for some wintertime honey?
I considered the blessings and curses that abound
Every place in space-time where Christmas is found.
There never was a wall between the wheat and the tares,
Christ was proclaimed throughout human affairs.
'Tis impossible to avoid the pagan revelry,
Likewise one cannot ignore the tolling of the belfry;
There is no escape, no matter how far or near,
Of both heathen and holy, of creches and other cheer.
I concluded that Christmas is fully human and fully divine,
A whole cast of heavenly hosts and a whole cask of earthy wine.
So I type full-resigned to the season's unthreshed plight,
"Merry Christmas to all--hope it turns out alright!"
12/20/2006
The Secret Theology of Anglicanism
For decades, the 39 Articles of Religion, the basic statement of Anglican doctrine (you can never convince me Anglicans are NOT confessional!), has been relegated to a little noticed section called Historical Documents in the back of the Book of Common Prayer.
Article 35 (XXXV) states, "The Second Book of Homilies, the several titles whereof we have joined under this Article, doth contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine, and necessary for these times, as doth the former Book of Homilies, which were set forth in the time of Edward the Sixth; and therefore we judge them to be read in Churches by the Ministers, diligently and distinctly, that they may be understanded of the people. Of the Names of the Homilies." It then proceeds to list them, 21 in all.
Then an odd caveat in brackets is inserted. It states as follows, "[This Article is received in this Church, so far as it declares the Book of Homilies to be an explication of Christian doctrine, and instructive in piety and morals. But all references to the constitution and laws of England are considered as inapplicable to the circumstances of this Church; which also suspends the order for the reading of said Homilies in churches, until a revision of them may be conveniently made, for the clearing of them, as well from obsolete words and phrases, as from the local references.]"
This got my antennae up in true DaVinci Code style to hunt down the "secret theology" of Anglicanism. Here must be what only the inner sanctum of Anglicans knows and believes. It has to be, seeing all the trouble the Episcopal Church has gone to to dissuade people from discovering it. Behold, the Homilies!
Article 35 (XXXV) states, "The Second Book of Homilies, the several titles whereof we have joined under this Article, doth contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine, and necessary for these times, as doth the former Book of Homilies, which were set forth in the time of Edward the Sixth; and therefore we judge them to be read in Churches by the Ministers, diligently and distinctly, that they may be understanded of the people. Of the Names of the Homilies." It then proceeds to list them, 21 in all.
Then an odd caveat in brackets is inserted. It states as follows, "[This Article is received in this Church, so far as it declares the Book of Homilies to be an explication of Christian doctrine, and instructive in piety and morals. But all references to the constitution and laws of England are considered as inapplicable to the circumstances of this Church; which also suspends the order for the reading of said Homilies in churches, until a revision of them may be conveniently made, for the clearing of them, as well from obsolete words and phrases, as from the local references.]"
This got my antennae up in true DaVinci Code style to hunt down the "secret theology" of Anglicanism. Here must be what only the inner sanctum of Anglicans knows and believes. It has to be, seeing all the trouble the Episcopal Church has gone to to dissuade people from discovering it. Behold, the Homilies!
3/15/2006
Freedom of Religion and Cardinal Mahoney
On Fox News today, I heard a report concerning Cardinal Mahoney's direction that priests should ignore any law intended requiring church entities to establish immigration status before offering a person assistance. (Please note: the link is not to the story I heard broadcast, but to the story as discussed on the O'Reilly Factor.) On the broadcast, there was a comment made that churches which would do such a thing would be dangerously close to losing their non-profit status. Here is the question, however. Does the IRS's non-profit policy infirnge upon freedom of religion?
The policy expressly prohibits churches from promoting certain political aims or else they would become a taxable entity. Certainly this is important to help make a clear distinction between political action groups and religious groups. It's to help clarify what is a church and what might be a lobbying group. This can be used to protect churches that are very active in promoting community development, thus working very closely with government agencies, by clarifying their intentions are not expressly political. This allows donations to stretch farther since no tax is levied on them.
However, Christian ethics has always touched on matters that are political. Whether talking about the debate on the divine right of kings, the rights of individuals to refuse military service as a consciencious objector, or the Civil Rights Movement that brought about the demise of legislated discrimination according to race--all of these have roots in Christian ethics. The cherished practice of civil disobedience has a theological origin.
Likewise, what if there were a religion that set itself up as the worship of the Constitution as the words of a divine being and treverenced he constituent elected leaders as a pantheon. Would their support support of their beloved god in a political election be deemed worthy of the IRS to refuse it non-profit status?
I think the IRS is on shaky constitutional grounds, because many religious groups are active in politics, not based on party but based on genuine ethical and theological grounds. The slow march to isolate religion from society is responsible for such threats against the Catholic church. There is no such thing as freedom from religion. Even believing in the non-existence of God is a religious belief, because it pertains to what a person thinks about God. The moment our culture understands this, they'll know why the founding fathers approached the first amendment as freedom of religion.
The policy expressly prohibits churches from promoting certain political aims or else they would become a taxable entity. Certainly this is important to help make a clear distinction between political action groups and religious groups. It's to help clarify what is a church and what might be a lobbying group. This can be used to protect churches that are very active in promoting community development, thus working very closely with government agencies, by clarifying their intentions are not expressly political. This allows donations to stretch farther since no tax is levied on them.
However, Christian ethics has always touched on matters that are political. Whether talking about the debate on the divine right of kings, the rights of individuals to refuse military service as a consciencious objector, or the Civil Rights Movement that brought about the demise of legislated discrimination according to race--all of these have roots in Christian ethics. The cherished practice of civil disobedience has a theological origin.
Likewise, what if there were a religion that set itself up as the worship of the Constitution as the words of a divine being and treverenced he constituent elected leaders as a pantheon. Would their support support of their beloved god in a political election be deemed worthy of the IRS to refuse it non-profit status?
I think the IRS is on shaky constitutional grounds, because many religious groups are active in politics, not based on party but based on genuine ethical and theological grounds. The slow march to isolate religion from society is responsible for such threats against the Catholic church. There is no such thing as freedom from religion. Even believing in the non-existence of God is a religious belief, because it pertains to what a person thinks about God. The moment our culture understands this, they'll know why the founding fathers approached the first amendment as freedom of religion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)