The Story of Fr Neville (eCrozier #265)

On May 29, 2015, in Anglicanism, discipleship, Rule of Life, Spiritual Disciplines, by bishopbenhase

Our Anglican tradition provides us with tried and tested practices that, if lived into, profoundly shape our discipleship. These spiritual practices, or disciplines, are specifically enumerated in what’s often called a Rule of Life. Such a Rule provides coherence and shape to our daily lives. The consistency created by a Rule creates space for us to rest in God, to listen in obedience to God’s word for us, and thus to be open to the continual conversion of our life so it may be lived, as St Paul says, “not for ourselves, but for Christ Jesus.” So variety, novelty, and surprise aren’t helpful in a Rule. They’re the last things we need. When such things don’t distract us, we have the capacity and space to listen to God, which is a needful thing if we’re to live as disciples of Jesus.

My friend, Fr Ken Leech, loved to tell the story of Fr Neville who was a long-serving chaplain at a theological college in England. Fr Neville was quite committed to his Rule of Life and its spiritual discipline. His Rule shaped the whole of his life and ministry. He was much loved by the college’s students and faculty for his gentle demeanor and good humor. While they found him to be a bit of an “odd duck,” they cherished and valued his witness to them of a life given over to God. Every afternoon, part of Fr Neville’s daily spiritual practice was to take a nap from 2 pm to 4 pm. Regardless of what was going on in his life, in the life of the college, or in the life of the world, at 2 pm he’d stop whatever he was doing, retire to his quarters, and take that nap.

One morning, the dean of the college received an urgent message that the bishop of the diocese needed to see him that very afternoon. This presented the dean with a dilemma. He was hosting a visiting bishop from Africa and this bishop was scheduled to speak and then to lead a symposium for the entire student body and faculty that afternoon. The dean couldn’t stand up the bishop (hear, hear!), so he went to Fr Neville and asked him to host the visiting bishop for the rest of the day, introduce him at the symposium, and close the gathering with prayer. This visiting bishop was scheduled to speak at 2 pm.

Fr Neville readily agreed to stand in for the dean. The dean, much relieved, made plans for his trip to the bishop’s office. That day after lunch, Fr Neville met with the visiting bishop, and after a good visit during which they became acquainted, he escorted him to the auditorium for the symposium. Fr Neville welcomed the students and faculty, gave a warm and thoughtful introduction of the esteemed visiting bishop, and as the bishop came to the podium, Fr Neville quietly excused himself and went to his quarters to take his nap. He arose, as was his custom, at 4 pm and returned to the auditorium just in time for the symposium to conclude. He stepped to podium, thanked the visiting bishop for an outstanding presentation, and closed the symposium with a prayer.

While I’ve always found this story “laugh out loud funny,” I’ve also appreciated what it’s taught me about my own spiritual practice. As Jesus helped Martha see in Luke 10: 40-42: We are “worried and distracted by many things; there is need of only one thing.” Jesus knows us better than we know ourselves, doesn’t he? A Rule of Life helps us all to create the capacity to choose what Jesus clearly called “the better part.”

+Scott

 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

Reclaiming our Anglican Ethos for a New Thriving Church (eCrozier #233)

On September 26, 2014, in Anglicanism, culture, Episcopal Church, by bishopbenhase

As you may have read, our Presiding Bishop, the Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts-Schori, has announced that she’s discerned she won’t stand for election to another nine-year term as Presiding Bishop. At our most recent meeting of the House of Bishops in Taiwan, she shared with us her discernment process. Her own letter to the Church described well that discernment. I think her decision is a wise one. She’s led our Church in a remarkable time of transition. We’re still in that transition. Indeed, our Church along with every other religious institution in our culture is going through significant transition. In such a time, no leader will find universal approval or support. While I haven’t always agreed with her decisions, I believe she’s shown remarkable and courageous leadership in this very tenuous time. I also believe she wisely discerned it was time for another bishop to lead the Church in the next decade.

A challenge of our present time is to recognize that we don’t need complete agreement in order to remain in fellowship with one another to support God’s mission through the Church. In our culture, where tribalism has taken hold, one instance of disagreement seems to mean one must condemn the other side for their perceived lack of purity (just look at our national political culture). This relatively new notion is disastrous to any group, especially the Church. We ought to be able to disagree on particular decisions or positions and still rest on our unity in Christ.

One point of disagreement I’ve had with our Presiding Bishop is the focus on the internationalism of our Church. We have 16 nationalities represented in The Episcopal Church. While this does provide a rich diversity to the Church, it runs counter to the Anglican ethos we’ve received over the centuries. At our Church’s core is the belief that our catholic heritage is best lived out locally. That’s why the Church in England became the Church of England. No Bishop in Rome could define particularly how the catholic faith would be lived out in England. As Anglicanism spread, we were faithful and effective when we deliberately indigenized the church. Throughout the world Anglicanism is most faithfully led by indigenous leaders who follow the local expression of the catholic faith. The strength (and some might say, genius) of our Church has been Anglicans who come together around the authority of a bishop and other chosen leaders to lead a local diocese in God’s mission. That bishop and other leaders then maintain communion with other Anglicans. An example of this is in the Episcopal Church of the Philippines. As long as the American Church directed and funded it, it didn’t grow significantly. But once it gained indigenous leadership and autonomy in the 1990s, it flourished. Prime Bishop Edward Malecdan of the Philippine Church presented their remarkable witness and story to us this week at the House of Bishops meeting.

Our next Presiding Bishop, I believe, needs to lead us to a more diocesan-based focus for God’s mission. That means we need a smaller national church with fewer resources leaving local dioceses to support the national church structure. My hope is that our efforts at re-imagining our Church’s structure for mission will lead us in this “back to the future” direction reclaiming our Anglican ethos for a new thriving Church.

+Scott

 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

The First Anglican Pope (eCrozier #197)

On November 8, 2013, in Anglicanism, by bishopbenhase

Pope Francis may be the first Anglican pope. Ok, that’s admittedly a bit hyperbolic, but hear me out. I know the new Bishop of Rome, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, is Roman Catholic and Jesuit-trained. His parents were Italian immigrants to Argentina where he was born and raised and is a citizen. With all that said, he seems to me to be approaching his vocation as the Bishop of Rome like an Anglican. Let me try to explain what I mean.

Anglicanism was forged out of the creative tension of the catholic faith and the reforming zeal of protestant thinkers and theologians. In the middle of the 16th Century after thirty or so years of struggle (and three different Books of Common Prayer!), Queen Elizabeth I officially ended the struggle with the Elizabethan Settlement (1559). Of course, this “official settlement” didn’t end theological differences. She simply declared by royal decree it was over (ah, the good old days). After Queen Elizabeth, Anglicanism evolved through a commitment of living hopefully with one another even as differences remained. We recognized we could learn and benefit from our sisters and brothers who approached the Christian faith with different perspectives or emphases. We call this Anglican Comprehensiveness or simply, “The Big Tent.”

This comprehensiveness has shaped our attitude and ethos as a church. It helps us tend toward humility when it comes to our own positions recognizing that others in our church have diverse viewpoints and yet a common faith in the Gospel of Jesus. We avoid prescribing one way of discipleship. We’re relatively comfortable in this humility knowing that sometimes the answers we have are in conflict with one another. By staying in community, however, we’re able to listen respectfully to one another while humbly waiting on God’s Spirit to move. Our unity then isn’t in uniformity, but rather in a shared trust in God’s sovereignty and providence. This stance helps us maintain a comprehensive “big tent” of a church with space for many people.

As I listen to and learn about Pope Francis it seems to me that’s the humble attitude and ethos he’s exhibiting in both his formal and informal teaching. Whether in washing the feet of a young Muslim girl on Maundy Thursday or in responding to a question about homosexuality and rhetorically asking: “Who am I to judge them if they’re seeking the Lord in good faith?” Pope Francis is exuding an Anglican ethos in his Christian faith. But like with Anglicans, no one should confuse such humility and openness with weakness or a lack of conviction. It actually takes a strong, deep faith in God’s grace and mercy in Jesus to extend such grace and mercy to others, especially when dealing with moral or religious disagreements. Only the weak in faith need exact “black and white” rules (See St Paul’s words to the Corinthians about eating food sacrificed to idols).

No, this Pope is a man who has a deep and abiding faith in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen. His strong faith gives him the freedom to be gracious and compassionate and to approach life with humility, openness, and curiosity.  Maybe that’s why he’s so confounding to so many people, both in the Roman Church and outside it? Or maybe people just don’t know what to make of the first Anglican Pope?

+Scott

 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

Death, Resurrection, and the Church’s Future (eCrozier #161)

On January 11, 2013, in Anglicanism, discipleship, Resurrection, young adults, by bishopbenhase

Christianity has died many times and risen again, for it had a God who knew the way out of the grave. – G. K. Chesterton

The Anglican Communion News Service reports that West Africa’s new Anglican archbishop, the Most Reverend Solomon Tilewa Johnson, has identified “the threat posed by new churches” as one of the top priorities for the Anglican Church there. He expressed a concern that the Anglican bishops of West Africa share about losing young people to other churches or losing them from church altogether.

Archbishop Johnson stressed: “We need to be relevant in the first place. I would want to work with my fellow bishops to see what strategies we could come up with to make our message understandable enough for people to respond.”

The above should sound at all too familiar to us in the American context. Reports out of Africa for the last generation have informed us of the significant growth of the church on that continent. And that growth continues. Still, as Archbishop Johnson states, the Anglican Church is facing a struggle now for how to respond to the new challenge of the loss of young people from the church.

Parts of Africa are now going through what we in our context have been going through for a generation and what Europe has gone through since the middle part of the 20th Century: the church losing its influence and relevancy in people’s lives. This should concern us, but I do not see this as a problem to be solved as much as I see it as an opportunity God is giving us to, as the Chesterton quote above suggests, to die and rise again.

So, let me provoke here: What in our church needs to die so that we might rise again? Another way of framing that question might be: What do we need to give up, or give over, or let go of in order to receive the new life of resurrection as a church? Going forward, what is essential for us to take with us and what can we declare to be adiaphora (look it up, if that will help)? A classic Anglican answer might be: we take with us the Scriptures, Creeds, Sacraments, and Holy Orders, the so-called four pillars. My hunch is we unconsciously pile a lot of other things on top of those four pillars that don’t need to be included. That is what we need to wrestle with as a church right now.

But let’s bring this to an individual level. What are each of us willing to let go of or give over that we might participate in this resurrection? This is called repentance; the act of turning around, changing our way of thinking and acting, and letting go of our past practices so that we might receive the new gift of resurrection. It is easy to suggest to the church, or even to criticize the church about what changes it should make so it can live into this resurrection. It is a far more difficult task to confront ourselves with a fearless spiritual inventory. So, what are you willing to give up, give over, or let go of in order to participate with your fellow disciples in the resurrection of the Church?

+Scott

 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

The Feast of the Ascension and Anglican Comprehensiveness (eCrozier # 136)

On May 25, 2012, in Anglicanism, Ascensiontide, incarnational, Piety, by bishopbenhase

In our church year we are in Ascensiontide, that time between the Feasts of the Ascension (this year on May 17) and Pentecost (this year on May 27). Our theological understanding of the Ascension, made manifest in the two collects the Church has for that feast day, exposes some of the historic breadth and comprehensiveness of Anglicanism.

The first of two collects from which we can choose in the Book of Common Prayer is this: Almighty God, whose blessed Son our Savior Jesus Christ ascended far above all heavens that he might fill all things: Mercifully give us faith to perceive that, according to his promise, he abides with his Church on earth, even to the end of the ages; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, in glory everlasting. Amen.

The second collect is this: Grant, we pray, Almighty God, that as we believe your only-begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ to have ascended into heaven, so we may also in heart and mind there ascend, and with him continually dwell; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

How we pray shapes how we believe, as the old saying goes. These two collects reflect two distinctive, historic parts of our Anglican Tradition. It should not surprise anyone who knows our Anglican history that each is somewhat at odds with the other. The first collect asks God to give us faith so that we might perceive Jesus abiding with his Church on earth even to the end of the ages. This is classic Anglican incarnational theology. Jesus does not ascend into heaven as an escape from earth. He ascends that the Holy Spirit will infuse the Church with his eternal presence on earth. The Church then becomes the ongoing Body of Christ in the world continuing the Lord’s incarnation until he comes again at the close of the age.

The second collect asks that, through our belief in Jesus as our Lord, Jesus will take our heart and mind with him into heaven so that we might dwell there with him eternally. This is classic Anglican pietistic theology. It reflects that, while we are in the world, we must never be of the world; that our true home is heaven, where our hearts and minds truly dwell.

Both collects are true and are needed to keep us honest in our theology. Incarnational theology, taken to its extreme, can shape us in all too worldly ways where we get far too comfortable with the world as it is. Likewise, pietistic theology, in its extreme, becomes escapist where we ignore the importance of the Gospel’s declaration that “God so loved the world.” In our comprehensiveness, our theology places us in tension with one another and this example from the Feast of the Ascension exemplifies that. If we find ourselves naturally gravitating to one of these two collects, I hope we honestly name that, and then open ourselves up to listen to what important truth the other collect is saying to us.

+Scott

 

 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

Go To Top »