The Confusion of Calling

This is a reflection and place for dialogue on my sermon and related themes from the second Sunday of Advent, on the Gospel text from Mark 1:1-8. 

“I feel called to become a priest.” This is not unfamiliar language to Christians. For many, it is merely churchy code for, “I want to become a priest.” The problem with this gap in understanding is that Biblically, many people who were called by God, wanted to do anything but answer that call. Moses protested God’s call because he wasn’t a good speaker. The prophet Jeremiah said he was too young. Before his conversion, Paul had been persecuting Christians and the last thing he wanted, one could imagine, was becoming one of them.  The idea of a call has embodied within it the idea that God compels you, urges you or invites you to do something. Yes, you have to respond in the affirmative (as Blessed Mary did), though in the case of the prophet Jonah, sometimes saying no to God is difficult.

Traditionally, an individual’s call must be recognized both by the individual and the community. So it isn’t enough for Jane to say “God is calling me to be a priest. Ordain me already!” The community must also, through a careful process of discernment and prayer, affirm that sense of call. In some cultures and situations, it is actually the community that identifies the individual as having a calling. In most Christian Churches, both the individual and the community must recognize that call in order for the person to be ordained. Also, training requirements vary greatly across denominations, with some Churches emphasizing calling and the equipping power of the Holy Spirit well over training (and thus their training requirements are quite minimal or non-existent) and some Churches emphasizing preparation and professional training over a sense of spiritual call. For most denominations, the actual practice is somewhere in the middle.

Confusing and complicating all of this are questions of “what constitutes a sense of call?” Does it mean a man or woman simply enjoys helping other people? Does it mean that having some mysterious spiritual experience of call is necessary? These are all questions that have been debated and defined over the centuries. A more global concern is whether calling is the special province of clergy. It is not. All Christians receive callings. Indeed, people of no faith or other faiths will often express a sense of calling. The language being less churchy, “I felt this is what I should be doing.” “Things kept leading me to this field.” Even in secular literature and the experience of people who live without explicitly religious faith, many experience a sense of “things they should be doing” or “burdens that came to them” or “life missions.” I always encourage people to find a calling, not just job or a career. For many people, this sense is found in marriage and family life, and less so in their job which helps to support their genuine sense of calling to family life or a particular passion.

What did you hear in the sermon, in the text, or this reflection? What would you challenge, what would you add? What are you still wondering about?  

Keep Awake!

This is a reflection and place for dialogue on my sermon and related themes from the first Sunday of Advent, on the Gospel text from Mark 13:24-37.

This passage, is which is known as the little apocalypse, has inspired much speculation, anxiety, and creative interpretation over the centuries. The Bible has several books or sections of books that feature apocalyptic writing, mostly famously, The Book of Revelation. This genre of Biblical literature deals with difficult subject matter like heaven, hell, judgment, and upheaval of the established order. 

Advent is an apocalyptic season of the Church year. This seems entirely strange and alien to the general spirit of “holiday cheer” going on around us. However, if you have ever seen a group of children tearing into their Christmas presents, with the wrappings flying in the air, and much “weeping and gnashing” of teeth over presents received and not received, you can find plenty of apocalyptic moments in the “most wonderful time of year” (never mind holiday traffic!). 

Advent readings, like Mark 13, put the Christian out of step with the pace of the world. We’re invited to “Keep Awake” and be ready for the return of the Savior, while the world is getting ready for Santa Claus, Christmas cookies and lots of holiday parties --- some with inappropriate drama, some with tippy toe family drama. For some, being awake this time of year is painful, because they are all too aware of what other people have and they do not. 

Mark 13 is a reminder to “Keep Awake,” which suggests, that perhaps many of us are, for all intents and purposes, sleep walking our lives away. It might also suggest that we need spiritual lasik surgery in order to truly see what matters in life. Jesus’ return or our return to Jesus will put everything in our lives in perspective. One woman facing breast cancer put it this way:

“You take a long look at your life and realize that many things that you thought were important before are totally insignificant. That’s probably been the major change in my life. What you do is put things in perspective. You find out that’s like relationships are really the impost things you have -=-- the people you know and your family – everything else is just way down the line. It’s strange that it takes something so serious to make you realize that.”

In a sense, cancer is an unwanted apocalyptic event. It upheaves a life. It brings fear of death and whether from God or a person’s own conscience, brings judgment. This comparison can be pushed too far, but certainly, the idea of Christ’s return or our own return to Christ should carry with it a force that rouses us to reflection and not merely morbid anxiety.

What did you hear in the sermon, in the text, or this reflection? What would you challenge, what would you add? What are you still wondering about? 

Politician for Christ: William Wilberforce

A politician for Christ? Surely, I must be joking. Such is the collective state of our culture that even believers, much less our good-willed friends of other faiths and none, roll their eyes at the very idea. The idea in question, a politician who takes her or his faith seriously, usually stirs images of suit and tie prayer breakfasts and perhaps most of all: of specific voting records on a handful of controversial topics (and maybe, also, some hypocrisy). 

The slave trade in the 1780s was becoming a controversial issue. For a large majority of the population is was part of the status quo of society. It was accepted as a fact of life. This “fact” was being challenged. William Wilberforce at this time was a young man of independent wealth and growing power. He was elected to his first seat in the British Parliament at the age of twenty one when he was still a student at St. John’s, Cambridge. 

Wilberforce was the son, nephew, and grandson of prosperous freemen, who had made their fortunes in business. As a boy he had been influenced by his aunt who was a committed Anglican Christian of the evangelical sort. However, this influence faded and he grew to be a popular boy: partying, drinking, and gambling in high society. He was known for his wit, his cheerful manner, and his singing voice. 

He was also known as a man endowed with impressive gifts of persuasion and oratory. Wilberforce was a slight man, not physically impressive, and plagued by a variety of health problems for his entire life. Yet, one contemporary, observing him in the House of Commons said, “I saw what seemed a mere shrimp mount upon the table; but as I listened, he grew, and grew, until the shrimp became a whale."

Near the beginning of his political career he had a conversion experience. He seriously considered dropping out of politics all together in order to dedicate himself to a life of prayer and reflection. His former pastor, John Newton, and his friend, William Pitt, urged him to remain in politics. Newton in particular urged him to bring his faith to his work. For the next forty years that is what Wilberforce did.

This striving is most famously known and celebrated in his tireless work to end the slave trade in the British Empire as portrayed in the inspiring 2006 movie, Amazing Grace. However, Wilberforce’s reforming interests were many. He manifested the daily challenge of every Christian who works in the world: discernment. Whether politician, farmer, scientist, plumber, actress, or accountant, every Christian has to practice and exercise discernment.

How can I with my particular gifts, resources, and limitations best live out Jesus’ Great Command to “Love God and neighbor?” What can I generously allow? What must I speak out against? What can I say or do that will make a difference? What can I refuse to say or do that will make a difference? If I feel called to make a stand or challenge the status quo am I doing it out of love or out of self-righteousness? Is this about me or the common good?

William Wilberforce’s life, celebrated on July 29 in the Episcopal Church, powerfully illustrates that to be a Christian is not a Sunday only activity and that real Christian impact is not limited to Church circles. Christian witness is not only about inviting the world to Christ, but about bringing Christ to the world’s problems, global and local. What are you doing with your influence? Who are you helping? Start with something small. In small things faithfulness is grown and shown. 

Poet-Priest With 12 Kids: John Donne

John Donne is remembered as many things: lawyer, priest, and poet. The last designation is probably the one he is most well-known by. In his earlier days, he wrote erotic poetry, and then and later, religious, and is perhaps most famous for penning the phrases, “no man is an island” and “any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.” Among students of literature he is hailed among the metaphysical poets for his wit, depth, and vernacular use of language in poetry. 

He lived in the 17^th century which was known for its terrible religious debates and persecutions (of Roman Catholic Christians in England and of Protestant Christians in France). He was destined for a career as an ambassador, but because his family was Roman Catholic and he was initially unwilling to join the Anglican Church (which was required in England at the time to be a diplomat) he and his wife Anne lived in a constant state of poverty and destitution. Anne gave birth to 12 children (as was common place then, not all of them survived). 

Eventually, he was persuaded by the King to seek Anglican ordination and eventually was appointed Dean of St. Paul’s, Cathedral, London, which was and is (click here) a church of considerable influence. His eloquent preaching drew many to St. Paul’s and resulted in his wielding a considerable influence near and far. Donne had experienced an array of life’s experience from being a courtier on the rise, a romantic lover and traveler, a father trying to provide for a large family, and a devoted husband who deeply grieved his wife’s death.

Donne is not the poster-boy for the stereotypes that people often have of priests and more generally speaking, Christians. His life reflected very human interests and very human troubles. These served him well in the task of preaching the Gospel which he did ably in the pulpit but also ably with the pen. It is a shame that poetry is not cultivated, shared, and published more widely in our local churches. Both the poetry of the greats, Christian and otherwise, and the poetry of the people of our congregations and local communities. 

John Donne’s commemoration in the Episcopal Church, falls on March 31, which makes for a nice prelude to April’s National Poetry month in the United States and Canada. Regardless of where we live, the remembrance of John Donne the priest-poet should stir us to remember that words can express the heart of the human experience and that God Himself choose to become The Word and live among us (John 1). In this way, not only are preachers and priests kin to poets in their sacred speech, so are all Christians when they speak a word of faith.

Failed Hermit becomes Best Seller: Walter Hilton

March 24 (in the Church of England) and September 28 (The Episcopal Church) is the feast of Walter Hilton. He lived in 14^th century England. He ended his life as an Augustinian priest in the priory at Thurgarton, which today remains an active parish church. Hilton had studied canon law before exploring his spirituality more dramatically. At the time, a number of individuals had embraced a solitary form of Christian living as a means of attaining holiness and union with Christ. The most famous of these solitaries today is Hilton’s near contemporary, Julian of Norwich. 

After a time, Hilton abandoned the solitary life of a hermit and joined the community life of the Priory in Thurgarton. We aren’t told why he choose community life over solitary life, but one can speculate: loneliness, the blessings of common prayer and Eucharist, opportunities to serve Christ through love of neighbor, better Wi-Fi, and so on. The fact is, we cannot be certain. What we can be certain about, is that Hilton, went on to write about the spiritual life in a way that captured the imagination of the people of his time: clergy, religious (monks, nuns, etc.), and laity alike.

His two most popular and well known works, “The Scale of Perfection” and “The Mixed Life” were best sellers in the 14^th and 15^th centuries. These works drew upon earlier sources from the deep wells of the Christian Spiritual Tradition, but also reflected his own experience of seeking God and in providing direction to others. They reflect theological rigor, but also a gentle and Christ-like common sense, sensitive to the weakness of the human condition even under the restoring and reforming effects of the Holy Spirit. 

On one occasion, a man of some importance, with considerable worldly responsibilities, wrote to Hilton asking whether he should abandon his duties (and presumably his family) in order to enter a monastery. Hilton encouraged him to seek God where he was in the midst of his busy demands and responsibilities. In other words, Hilton acknowledged that a spiritual life of weight, depth, and profundity could be graced to a man in the world; that while desirable for some, entrance into a monastery was not necessary to achieve the way of Jesus. 

This message hit a chord with women and men, priests and monks, the married and the unmarried in Hilton’s time. Hilton’s writings point to a deep immersion in the truth, presence, and love of God, which requires climbing a spiritual ladder from height to height. This tells us that there are higher hills in the Christian faith that we have yet to climb. With Christ’s grace and the advice of good spiritual trail guides, like Walter Hilton, may we carefully hike out from the easy flats to the rugged heights of God’s love.

A Slave before a Saint: Patrick of Ireland

March 17th is Saint Patrick’s Day. A day when people wear green, drink beer (Guinness, please) and engage in some good old fashion mischief (there are also others who use it as an excuse for some old fashion not so good mischief!). Even those with Irish ancestry and/or Christian faith (here I am) often know little about the man whose day inspires celebration; save a story or two, like Patrick using the Shamrock to teach about the Trinity or Patrick running the snakes out of Ireland (in fact, there never were rolling reptiles in the emerald isle). 

There are endless legends about St. Patrick. On one occasion he and his companions were being hunted down by a local ruler. When the ruler with his warriors hustled to where Patrick and his disciples had run off, all he saw was a herd of deer. Of course, they were Patrick and his followers transformed by God’s miraculous intervention. Unfortunately, God never changed them back and they had to hoof about from that day forward (just kidding). There are spiritual lessons in these sorts of stories, but the actual events of his life, inspire tremendously more. 

Patrick was born sometime in late 4^th Century England. He came from a well to do family with a strong Christian heritage; his grandfather was a priest, and his dad was a deacon and a minor official in the declining Roman Empire. For most people in the 4th Century life was rough, but Patrick enjoyed a much easier life because of his family’s reputation and wealth. This all ended for Patrick around the age of sixteen when he was captured by Irish raiders. Upon arrival in Ireland he was sold as a slave, made to tend sheep and live among people he did not know. 

During this time Patrick’s faith came alive. In his Confession, he writes, “And there the Lord opened the consciousness of my unbelief so that…I might turn with a whole heart to the Lord my God, Who turned His gaze round on my lowliness and took pity on my adolescence and ignorance and kept watch over me before I knew Him.” Somehow, many years later, Patrick escaped his enslavement and made his way back to England. He sensed a calling to the priesthood, and while he struggled with the academics, he was eventually ordained. 

This story alone would be a wondrous one, but the power of St. Patrick’s life is that he could not put the Irish people out of his mind. He had a vision where an Irish youth bid him return and preach the Gospel. If you had been kidnapped from your people, enslaved away to a foreign country across the sea and somehow managed to escape, what are the odds you would return at great personal sacrifice to preach a Gospel of love? That is what Patrick did! He convinced the authorities in England to send him as a missionary bishop to the Irish.

Much more could be said about the most well-known of Ireland’s three patron saints (the two others being Saint Columba and Saint Brigid), from his openness to Irish culture and spirituality, which in many cases was woven into the new faith, to his missionary zeal and humility. Patrick’s story is a reminder that whatever your circumstance or mine, God can find us and God can use the blackest moments of our lives to bring light and salvation to others. That by itself, parades and shamrocks aside, is worth celebrating. 

Is the term Non-denominational Misleading?

Let’s start with a dictionary’s definition of the term, “open or acceptable to people of any Christian denomination.” This definition gets at both the usual meaning of the term, but also its difficulties. Before looking at the difficulties, let’s consider some other ways the term is used. One way is to highlight that a particular worship service, church, or even Christian is not formally tied to a particular denomination of the Christian faith (e.g. Southern Baptist, Roman Catholic, or United Methodist). Sometimes, the term means that a particular resource or curriculum or book is meant for all Christians and not just for one particular group of Christians.

Some Christians, who wish to stress their allegiance to Christ first and foremost, and are hesitant about denominations and the divisions they seem to cause, identify as non-denominational. Often, but not always, these individuals are from or have been greatly influenced by Evangelical or Fundamentalist expressions of Christianity. Others still, who identify as Christian, but are not particularly active in their faith or in the life of the Church will also sometimes use this identification. Often these individuals have a general sense of connection to Christ and His teachings, but have no particular connection to any denomination.

All this is understandable and generally works on the surface level, but when you go below the surface, difficulties can emerge. For example, to be a member of a specific Christian denomination situates an individual with a particular framework of the Christian faith with its own approach to worship, congregational life, and distinctive beliefs. Each denomination is also rooted in a particular historical tradition that makes it both similar to and different from other denominations. Every Christian and every Christian church has been influenced by one or more particular frameworks of the Christian faith (whether they know it or not). 

The person who is explicitly a member of or attending a denominational church is aware of this. They know that the Roman Catholic Church has a particular understanding of the Christian faith and they can research that understanding, read about its history, and study its teachings. A person who identifies as non-denominational runs the risk of not knowing the particular framework of Christian faith they influences them. Sometimes non-denominational Christians will claim they are only following the teachings of the Bible. However, the reality is that every understanding of the Bible is influenced by a particular framework or perspective.

Those perspectives may be Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, Anglican, Nazarene, etc. with various ways of nuancing those terms (e.g. a liberal Roman Catholic perspective). To state it another way, a person may claim to be non-denominational, and indeed not hold official membership in a denomination; yet, their understanding of Christianity, how they read the Bible, how they practice their faith in daily life, etc. match up almost entirely with a particular denomination or tradition of Christianity. Again, the danger here is that these persons may not be aware of this and thus blind to what is shaping their faith in Christ.

In the same way, a church may identity itself as being non-denominational, but in almost every other respect (how they conduct worship, how they govern themselves, how they approach the Bible, what they believe about X and Y issues), are like a Baptist Church. Christianity has a rich and venerable history. Whether denominations are good or bad is another question (click here), but to pretend that any Christian or Church stands outside of a wider stream of influence or Church history or differing ways of understanding Christianity is to choose to be blind about the richness of Christianity and one’s personal understanding of it.

So what should a Christian do? 1) Choose a denomination; this should not be done lightly, but after a rigorous period of discernment 2) At least recognize what traditions/denominations are most similar to your own understanding of the faith or which of them have shaped your understanding of Christianity the most. A person might say, “I’ve attended a number of churches. I guess I’m officially non-denominational, but my understanding of Christianity is very Pentecostal (or Lutheran, or Baptist, etc.). 3) You could say, “I’m a Christian, but I’m not really sure where I fall in the Christian spectrum, so right now I identify as non-denominational.”

Are hostile atheists actually helpful to Christianity?

The answer is a fair helping of yes and a fair helping of no.

Before we proceed further it must be said that most atheists are not particularly hostile to Christianity or any other world religion. Most atheists simply do not believe in the claims of religion and go about their lives accordingly. Most are not on a personal campaign to attack, discredit or otherwise give religious people a hard time. Further, there are many atheists whose lives of compassion, service and moral integrity exceed that of many Christians. This should remind us that atheists and Christians (and all people of good will) should partner together for the common good; indeed, for Christians, our faith demands this of us (Matthew 22:35-40).

Let’s start with a fair helping of no.

The attacks on Christianity from hostile atheists like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and others have encouraged an acceptance of a negative view of Christian faith in wider society. Is there plenty of misbehavior among Christians to warrant some criticism; of course! But much of the attacks are directed toward one particular understanding of Christianity and very often a caricature of Christianity and not Christianity at its best or even in its usual expressions. Knocking down straw men is not very difficult and when bringing a critique against a belief system or way of life it’s wise to critique it as its best, not just its worst. 

This applies to Christian disagreement among themselves and with others (atheists included). This encouragement of hostility and misrepresentations of Christianity has discouraged the faith of large numbers of Christians, deterred many truth seekers from seeing Christianity as a worthwhile option to explore, and has, perhaps, contributed to some walking away from faith, which necessarily involves participation in the community of faith. Atheists are free to argue against the faith, just as Christians are free to argue for the faith. Debate and criticism can be intense, but it should be conducted fairly, truthfully, and with the best intentions of good will. 

And now, for a fair helping of yes.

Hostile atheists do an incredible amount of good for Christians and Christianity in general. Some atheists have had terrible and sometimes tragic encounters with Christians in particular (who likely manifested behavior that contradicted Jesus’ teachings) or the Christian Church in general. Christians need to be reminded of the immense weight that our actions carry. We need to apologize for our own sins and failures and those of our sisters and brothers who carry the name Christian. When atheists bring these examples up, it’s an opportunity for us as Christians to own our faith, to grow in our faith, and admit to the wrongs done in Christ’s name.

Not all atheists have had some terrible encounter with a Christian; rather, many atheists object to Christianity on intellectual grounds. This is often true of the hostile atheists who get lots of “screen” time in our society. They object to “blind faith” and to claims that don’t seem to have evidence or logical warrant. These guys do a wonderful service to Christians, because they force us to think more clearly about our faith. Often the beliefs, practices, and conception of god they are attacking are not actually reflective of the mainstream of Christianity. It’s a shame that our fuzzy thinking is not addressed more regularly in the lives of our congregations and families.

God can and does work through whoever God wishes to accomplish the good, the beautiful, and the true; however, beyond the Spirit’s direct intervention, much of the “good” that atheists can do for Christians depends on our response. Sadly, whether talking about religion or politics or anything else, we seem increasingly less able as human beings to disagree agreeably and to maintaining goodwill and even friendship with those whom we passionately disagree. If we are open, the hostility of a small number of atheists can force us to be more humble, to live lives that reflect our stated beliefs, and be clearer about what those beliefs actually are. 

Another Mary: Saint Brigid of Kildare

Today is the feast of Saint Brigid of Kildare, one of the three patron saints of Ireland (the other two being Saint Patrick and Saint Columba). Her day also falls on the ancient (and still observed, especially by neo-pagans and some Celtic leaning Christians) feast of Imbolc, which is one of the four festivals that fall between the four major seasonal feasts (spring and autumn equinoxes and summer and winter solstices). It has many associations, but is seen as the half-way point of winter in the northern hemisphere, a time to anticipate the coming of Spring, even in the midst of dark nights, cold days, and snowy landscapes (Canada, eh?).

Brigid, in the great Tradition of Celtic saints, is reputed to have been a nun, a miracle worker and healer, a teacher to many other male and female saints, as well as an abbess and keeper of the flame at the important monastery in Kildare (which has been re-established, click here.) Many charming and insightful tales surround her life. For example, one Easter Sunday a leper came to Brigid looking for assistance. After some conversation, she offered to heal him but he stated that he received more from people in his leprous condition than he would in a healthy one. The abbess convinced him otherwise and through a blessed mug of water healed him.

There is some controversy and uncertainty about all of the historical details of Saint Brigid’s life. It is often pointed out that Brigid was the name of an important goddess in pre-Christian Ireland and that many of the goddess’ attributes can be found in the saint of the same name. Some see this as clever infiltration by the pre-missionary pagan tradition in Ireland continuing under Christian disguise; others insist on historical argument that Brigid was a real person and in her person embodies the unique elements of what some call: Celtic Christianity; others say her life and or legend was a sign of the failure of the Church to purge itself of a pagan past.

Others still, see her veneration as an example of the Church at her best, taking the God given best of a particular culture and its spirituality and bringing it into conversation and relationship with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Saint Brigid embodies a historical tradition of wise female teachers and healers of the faith, who exercised extraordinary spiritual influence over men and women, sometimes surpassing the influence of their male counterparts. We know such communities of nuns existed in Ireland and still do today. We can thank Saint Brigid, in part for this reality, for her life and legend continue to inspire people to follow Mary’s Son, Jesus Christ.

Speaking of Mary, the mother of Jesus, Brigid herself, is often referred to as the Mary of the Gaels. This makes her a sort of second Mary in traditional Irish spirituality. Whether referring to the Blessed Mother or St. Brigid, it must be said that while Christianity has a rich history of saintly, feisty, and dynamic women of faith, they often receive less of a hearing than their male counterparts. This impoverishes our individual spiritual lives, our congregations and ultimately our witness to the wider world. May the observance of St. Brigid’s day inspire us to change this dynamic, as together, we look and labor for the Spring, which will shortly be, now and forever.

The Comedian-Scholar: Saint Thomas Aquinas

Saint Thomas Aquinas, whose feast day is January 28, is not often thought of as a funny man. After all, his work is dense, lucid, brilliant, and plunges the depths of theology and philosophy, making him one of the most regarded theologians of all time. Whether or not you agree with all aspects of Aquinas’ theology, there is no doubt that this medieval Dominican friar is a testament to the unity of faith and reason in the Christian life. Christianity has a rigorous intellectual tradition, which anchors faith not in some slim, not likely, spaghetti monster hope, but in deep reflection, reasoned faith and a recognition that all disciplines of knowledge, including what we call today the natural sciences, are worthy of Christian commitment and engagement. All truth is God’s truth, whether revealed under the lenses of a microscope, in the drama of the Divine Liturgy or in the embrace of lovers.

            Checking off the scholar box with Aquinas is easy considering the output of his theological writings during his lifetime (1225-1274), which included Biblical commentaries, theological treatises, devotional writings, and most famously, his Summa Theologica. Checking off the comedian box is a bit more difficult. Depictions of Aquinas are usually somewhat severe, owing in part, perhaps, to that old nickname he has born for centuries, “The Dumb Ox.” (While writing this post, I received a letter from the Association of Intelligent Oxen, protesting the Aquinas moniker, because of its derogatory assumptions regarding the mentality of their species.) However, Aquinas is on the record making this statement: “"It is requisite for the relaxation of the mind that we make use, from time to time, of playful deeds and jokes” (Question 168, Summa).

            Maybe this statement doesn’t check the comedian box for Aquinas, but it does open the door to the reality that serious, faithful scholarship and a serious committed Christian life is not at odds with “playful deeds and jokes.” G.K. Chesteron (1874-1936), known for his wit, penetrating essays and a biography on Aquinas wrote, “the test of a good religion is whether or not it can laugh at itself.” Often we are pretty good at laughing at other people’s religions, politics, and foibles while we take ourselves so seriously we dare not utter a chip monk chuckle considering our own mess ups and failures. St. Thomas Aquinas, like many other faithful Christians over the centuries, did not back away from argument, public debate, and controversy, but it seems there was a place in their spirituality to engage with the most serious issues of life while still recognizing the need for a laugh, perhaps, not least, at themselves.

            The need for this sort of ability to take God, issues of justice and society seriously while also being able to enjoy “playful deeds and jokes,” which necessarily involves some ability to take ourselves less seriously and thus perhaps to take others more seriously, I hope, is obvious. If it isn’t, you might want to read Aquinas’ all-time best joke whose punch line is, “all is straw.” Jokes can bite and humor can be used as a weapon. There is no doubt about that. Some jokes are made in bad taste or lack true funny power (listen to my sermons for examples of these). Aquinas is probably endorsing the role of joy and playfulness in life more than the role of stand-up comics; though no doubt, he laughed out loud at the antics of some court jester. It’s to our shame, that in some circles, the idea of Christian people laughing and enjoying life is seen as oxymoronic. So laugh, otherwise, the joke’s on you, so says Saint Thomas.   

What religion…err denomination are you?

Not long ago, I was walking into a hospital and a woman in wheel chair asked me “what religion are you?” Dozens of people have asked me this question over the years, but with a couple of exceptions, none of them were actually asking me which religion I was. They were asking what denomination I belong to. In the vast majority of cases, it was obvious to the questioner that I was a Christian (wearing a penguin suit or a friar’s habit does that, it also gets me great compliments every year around Halloween!), but it wasn’t obvious to them which denomination or tradition of Christianity I belonged to.  

In other words, Roman Catholics and Baptists, Methodists and Lutherans, Anglican and Mennonites, are all members of the same world religion: Christianity; albeit, they are members of different denominations within that one religion. Members of different religions would be Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, and Wiccans, for example. Do you see the difference? Christianity is a very diverse religion, but there are core beliefs and common practices across denominations. Similarly, most other world religions have a variety of denominations or schools within them.

Who cares? One black eye, among many, of the Christian faith, has been the division among Christians. Jesus prayed in John 17:21 (NRSV), referring to his followers, “that they may all be one.” Claiming that our fellow sisters and brothers are members of an entirely different religion does not encourage Christian unity. Also, older generations will remember (and there are still communities where this dynamic is present) when cooperation or marriage between members of different Christian denominations was almost unheard of. Thankfully, that has changed, a bit.

So the next time someone asks you what religion you are, you can answer, in a couple of ways. 1) “I think you mean what denomination I belong to? I’m a Christian and part of a Lutheran Church” or 2) “I’m a Roman Catholic Christian” or “I’m a Baptist Christian.” Etc.  Or the next time someone says “We are different religions. I’m Catholic and you’re Assembly of God” you can reply, “No, we are both Christians, but members of different Christian denominations.” This little practice can help us move us a little closer toward the “oneness” that Jesus prayed for.

Are denominations bad?

The answer to this question is yes and no and maybe.

Yes, denominations are bad. They are a visible sign of division within the body of Christ. They violate the spirit of Jesus’ prayer for his followers in John 17:21 (NRSV), “that they all may be one.” These divisions, infighting, and historical bloodshed between denominations have been a scandal to Christians and an obstacle to some becoming Christian over the centuries.  

No, denominations are not always bad. They reflect a diversity of cultures and historical developments related to the Christian faith in different times and places. While lamentable in many ways, denominations have allowed Christianity to take on particular shapes, sizes, and colors that have contributed to the richness of Christianity overall.

The variety of denominations has also allowed a greater diversity of forms in Christian practice, worship, organization, and custom which likely allows a greater number of persons to become Christian and live out the Christian way of life. Without this diversity it’s possible to imagine that certain groups or types of people would not be reached with the Gospel message.

There is also a maybe component to this question. The maybe depends on how individual Christians and churches and denominations understand themselves in regard to other denominations. To have “team” pride is perfectly acceptable and some gentle ribbing among varied Christians can be a genuine sign of family. However, without respect this turns sour.

Sadly, Christians of different stripes, particularly denominations which differ greatly on social teachings or certain theological convictions can view other Christian Churches as “less than” or “second class” or “not up to par.” This manifests equally (albeit with its own version of smugness) among conservative, liberal, mainline, evangelical, and Roman Catholic groups.

Sometimes, even worse than above, are the infighting within denominations and individual churches, especially regarding social teaching (“!!!!!!!***!!!!!!****”), worship styles (“I refuse to worship with a projection screen!”) or furniture rearrangement (“This rug has been red since my grandfather founded this church!”)

So yes, denominations are bad. No, they aren’t bad in every way. Sometimes, maybe, they can be worse than they have to be when Christians of different denominations fail to recognize their oneness in Christ and are less than charitable toward one another. Respect and cooperation around the Lordship of Jesus doesn’t require uniformity, but it does require love.

Do you have to go to church to be a Christian?

The answer is no and yes.

No. There are lots of people who never darken the door of a church and yet identify themselves as Christian. They may have been raised in the Church or once been active in the Church or have had some minimal exposure to Christianity and for whatever reason choose to identify as Christian. Many, though not all, will say that they have accepted Christ and that they try to follow Jesus’ teachings in their daily lives, which sometimes, but not always, mostly means being a good person and praying on occasion. Lots of people fall into this category and certainly a person can admire and even practice certain aspects of the Christian faith on their own without going to church.

Years ago, a young woman told me that she was not a Christian, but that Christianity, specifically Episcopal Christianity, was her family’s religion. She recognized that she had not personally committed to the Christian faith, but also recognized that her family had a Christian heritage, even if she wasn’t specifically committed to it herself.  Lots of people who would answer the question with a no, are like this young woman; though, instead of saying “Christianity [Episcopalian] is my family religion,” they just say, “I’m a Christian [Episcopalian].” This is not unlike individuals who know and do very little politically, but still identify as XZY party because their family does.   

So that’s the no part of the answer, but here is the yes part of the answer.

Yes. You need to go to church to be a Christian. Christianity is a communal faith. If you are going to acknowledge Christ as the way to God then you also have to hang out with Christ’s people. To say you believe in Christ or follow Christ but ignore His people is like professing to be in love with someone but never giving them or their family or friends the time of day. Christianity, like most of the world’s religions, isn’t just a matter of privately held beliefs, but is about living a certain kind of life, engaging in certain spiritual practices, and being part of specific, spiritual community. Christianity is a team sport (No, watching the Saints doesn’t count!)  

You can’t play basketball by yourself; you need other people to play the game. The same is true with Christianity. Yes, you can do some spiritual dribbling and shooting on your own, but you can’t fully live the Christian life without being part of a Christian team. The question itself is a bit flawed, “going to church.” Attending weekly worship is an important part of the Christian life, but Christianity is about far more than a one hour event once a week. Christianity is a particular way of life designed to help us become fully human, fully alive, as God intended. Christians aren’t called so much to “go to church” as to “be the church” wherever they go. This involves community life in many ways, not just, but certainly including, attending worship.