Double Entendre

First off, I want to say thanks to all of you, especially David Belcher, who have kept this little flicker of a blog from going out altogether. I am encouraged by the interest this blog continues to generate within our little corner of the denomination, and what's more, I keep meeting people who affirm my instincts that there is indeed a move toward, a need for, and certainly room for these kinds of conversations about liturgy and sacrament - the theology of our practice(s), and the practice of our theology.

Second, a quick update on me - Gloria and Andrew (who, good grief, is about to be ONE!) and I moved to the bustling metropolis (sarcasm drips) of Xenia, OH in early December. I joined the staff of Xenia Naz (officially First Church of the Nazarene) as Worship Pastor - although my role and job title has generated some discussion about whether I am or should be simply the "Worship Pastor," or the "Music Pastor," the "Worship and Music Pastor," or the "Worship and Arts Pastor" (the latter seems to be the trend right now, which makes me suspicious of it). I only half-jokingly suggested that I'd prefer "Liturgist" or perhaps "Work of the People Pastor" (a moniker borrowed from Pastor Brian Niece), but (big surprise) that didn't fly. Things are going well. It's a fantastic church, and we have a great pastoral team (sr. pastor and 4 full-time associates - worship, children, youth, and young adult - plus part-time sr. adult pastor and "outreach" pastor) that seems to really share a common vision for our ministry to this small, largely blue-collar/agricultural community 20 miles east of Dayton. We all have very different styles and personalities and approaches, but it's a good kind of diversity that thus far seems to work.

I've come into a situation musically that is a bit interesting: my predecessor, who is a long-time friend and former mentor (he was my TN district Impact director when I was in 10th grade), was here for about 10 years, and really took the church from singing very traditional holiness/campmeeting-style music out of the hymnal to singing mostly contemporary praise and worship music using video screens, a full band and praise team, etc, etc...you know the "progression" (if it indeed should be called that). Although we have 2 services, they have managed to avoid having a traditional vs. contemporary service paradigm - we do what is for the most part the same service twice. I'm getting a crash course in all the trendy songs from the past couple of years, which I missed while I was off singing centuries-old sacred music at St. Mary's Episcopal Cathedral in Glasgow, Scotland. Some are really okay; a few a great, and I love leading them; a few are terrible and should never have been passed off as "worship music" - a phrase that, I realize, more and more sounds like a redundancy to the younger generation..."Worship IS music, isn't it?" (Uh....no.)

But as most of you would know, or at least assume, I'm not willing to give up our hymnody. So what we're doing right now is probably what most folks would label "blended" - a label I'm not crazy about, because in my experience, most churches that call their worship blended aren't doing any of it, contemporary or traditional, very well. It's kind of a lowest-common-denominator approach in some cases - "we'll do some hymns, but we'll do them upbeat, and we'll do contemporary stuff, but nothing TOO rockin'..." which in practice doesn't often do justice to either the traditional or the contemporary. Or else it's a all-things-to-all-people kind of approach in other cases - "well, we have to make sure we have something for everybody..." which often leads to a kind of stylistic incoherence, I've found. I take it as a compliment when people tell me they appreciate the "blend" (although I like it better when they say "variety" or "diversity," but that's just semantics to most people - I, on the other hand, care about the words people use). It's been an adjustment for everybody - those who have been involved in the music program under the previous pastor are having to get used to singing more hymns, and I am continually amazed when I want to do something like "The Love of God" or "O God, Our Help in Ages Past" and about half of my band and praise team confess that they've never heard it. And I am getting used to putting a few ultra-current songs into the mix (anything older than about (c) 2004 is perceived as being a little dated by some of my folks), as well as resigning myself to the fact that we'll probably never sing the Magnificat or the Nunc Dimittis or Adoro Te Devote, at least in our regular Sunday worship services. (I did try to sing the Lenten Prose with my choir at our rehearsal on Ash Wednesday, and they cooperated but I don't think many were eager to do it every week.) But these are not complaints - it's a great church and a great place to serve, and like every church, it simply presents a unique set of circumstances and challenges.

Also, we bought our first house in the area, about 3 miles from the church - cycling distance once the weather's better (we were under 14 inches of snow this past weekend). We're near enough to both Dayton and Cincinnati that we don't feel starved for the kinds of cultural events that larger cities provide, but we're enjoying the small-town vibe for now. We're also about 7 miles from an even smaller community - Dave Chapelle fans might be familiar with it - called Yellow Springs, which in this very conservative area is a weird little haven of artists, free-thinkers, LGBTs, and liberals of all sorts. So whenever we want to attend a poetry reading, or visit a coffee shop with some folkie strumming live music in the corner, or shop for beaded jewelry or new age books, or, I dunno, attend a peace rally or hug a gay person, we go to Yellow Springs. We're glad we bought in Xenia, since that's where we're ministering, but knowing Yellow Springs is right there keeps us sane at times. It's also home to a family-owned dairy that makes amazing ice cream and a great little pizza joint called "Ha-Ha Pizza" which I'm guessing is a hit with the local "herb heads."

Anyway, that's four times more update than I intended to give. I have choir rehearsal in just over an hour - frantic preparations for our Easter musical. It's my first time directing anything this full-scale, with choir, live band, actors, lots of tech and mulit-media, etc. A bit overwhelming, but it's not as "big" as it probably could be, and I think it'll come off fine.

Now, to finally refer to the title of this post ("double entendre"), I was initially inspired to post my first blog in months by an ad I received at the church (you'd be disgusted by how much junk mail and promotional stuff I receive each week) from our denominational music publishing house. Nazarene Publishing House/Lillenas are now pushing a new brand-image called Comsuming Worship. I just wondered if they aware of any hint of irony about this name. Your thoughts?

Grace is a Person

Dr. Noble said something the other day that I found to be profound--simple, and very Protestant (or perhaps Evangelical), but profound nonetheless:

Grace is not something, when properly understood, but someone, the person of Jesus Christ.

Perhaps we could submit that all of the recent focus on the graced nature of creation can only be properly understood when situated in the person of Jesus Christ, who is the very embodiment of grace, and thus within the graced nature of redemption. This would disrupt our modern tendency to think only chronologically--in terms of a kind of gradual "progress." In this sense, all of history--creation itself--can only be understood, can only be known, from out of Jesus Christ's incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and promise to come again. What do you think?

The Doctrine of Christian Holiness

This blog has endured a rather extended period of suspension--a lot has been happenning: we had a new baby girl enter our own family, and I know that Brannon and his family have moved from one continent to another over the last few months (while he has taken up a new job and is finishing his dissertation!)...so I can only offer my own apologies for my absence.

I'm taking a class this semester, however, on the doctrine of holiness (with Nazarene Scottish professor Tom Noble), so I plan on posting some reflections/observations from class every once in a while here (I'll also be taking a class with Paul Bassett on Arminius, so I might be able to offer some gems from that class as well!). I hope some of you will still be interested in participating in discussion of what has become not simply the "central doctrine" for the Church of the Nazarene, but has begun to define our very identity--and thus the beginnings of a potential rift are already forming (since inevitably the necessity to form an identity for ourselves is motivated by some kind of claim, some kind of possession...and I think we all know how possession begets competition, and competition division).

A principle focus of the historical development of the doctrine of Christian holiness--as in Paul Bassett's work in Exploring Christian Holiness: Volume 2--is the early linking of "perfection" with "sanctification" that is later severed, starting with Augustine, and culminating in the medieval period with Gregory the Great.

For now, I just wanted to ask if you thought this a convincing conclusion--that a decline in the understanding of "Christian perfection" or "Christian sanctification" enters when we separate these two--and why might that be? Two things seem to be going on here, for Bassett (who relies heavily on Harnack's history, I should add (even if he doesn't accept everything Harnack says prima facie)--this is not insignificant): 1) Perfection is transformed into an "ideal," an aim, rather than a norm of Christian life (which meaning enters due to the "falling away" of the use of the term "sanctification"...in other words, that "perfection" enters into a state of disrepute without the irrupting transformative notion of sanctification in this life); and 2) the Church's role in one's perfection is increased to the extent of making the grace necessary for such perfection more "optimistic." What do you think?

2008 Wesleyan Theological Society Annual Meeting

I don't know if any of you ever make it over to my other blog, and I know this is already late (the call for paper proposals' deadline is already up), but thought I'd let those of you know about this in case you hadn't yet. This year's Wesleyan Theological Society meeting will be held at Duke University, with guests including Jurgen Moltmann and James K. A. Smith. The title for this year's conference is, "Sighs, Signs, and Significance: Pentecostal and Wesleyan Explorations of Science and Creation." Here's the poster for the event:



Though this year's conference is dealing with "Science and Creation," there should be a fairly large "Nazarene" presence there (I can think of six or seven papers off the top of my head that will be from Nazarenes), so if you're in the area, or at all interested, you should all make it out to what is usually quite a good time. Peace.

"MSD" (Multiple Service Disorder)

Since I know Brannon is busy (!!), I thought I would start a new conversation. Peace to you all in the name of Christ during this Holy Week.

A rapidly growing trend in contemporary churches--and yes, particularly in the Church of the Nazarene--is the eventuation of what I will call "msd": multiple service disorder. The church my wife and I just moved from recently built a second "campus" in addition to the main church building (located some 8 miles away in a much more secluded area, yet where houses will soon be surrounding the building on every side--a brilliant seeker-sensitive move if I've ever seen one). Once this move was finalized the two-service church then shifted to an option of three services: one in the main sanctuary and one in the gym of the old building, and another at the "north campus." After a trial run of this model, the decision was then made to make *four* services (an additional service being added to the north campus building), each one with its own "campus pastor," eventually leading to the requirement of, at times, at least three preaching pastors to make it to all of the services (even in the previous three service model, the pastor was being stretched thin).

A Means of Grace...

"God our Father,
maker of all that is living,
we praise you for the wonder and joy of creation.
We thank you from our hearts
for the life of this child,
for a safe delivery,
and for the privilege of parenthood.
Accept our thanks and praise,
through Jesus Christ our Lord."




"Almighty God,
look with favour on this child;
grant that, being nourished with all goodness,
he may grow in discipline and grace
until he comes to the fullness of faith;
through Jesus Christ our Lord."

"God our Father, we pray to you
for all who have the care of this child.
Guide them with your Holy Spirit,
that they may bring him up in the ways of truth and love.
Through their care enable him to grow in grace
and become daily more like your Son, our Savior Jesus Christ."

Amen.

What a miracle. To God be the glory.

[Prayers from The Alternative Service Book 1980, "Thanksgiving for the Birth of a Child," pp. 213-17]
[Edit] By the way...IT'S A BOY: Andrew Scott Hancock!

Hymn-of-the-Month (x2): March Madness edition

A long time ago, I proposed to do a Hymn-of-the-Month each month, with a sacramental theme naturally, and really wanted to get others involved in the process of choosing a hymn to highlight. However, after one measly effort, I let it drop, much to my embarrassment - odd, too, since this is an easy way to toss up a new post without major time investment.
So anyway, here's an effort to revive the Hymn-of-the-Month. To welcome back feature that was never even given the chance to become a feature, you get a 2-for-1 deal because it's March, the month of my birth, and my first-born's birth as well (any day now)! If you've got a good hymn, "sacramental" or otherwise - or anything, for that matter: reviews of books, albums, liturgies, worship services you've attended, etc - that you'd like to share in a future month, by all means, post it. "The more, the merrier" around here.
And to be clear, this is in no way to be confused with the "March Gladness" promotional that has recently been brought to my attention. [gags self]
The common theme of "(un)veiling" struck me when considering these two eucharistic hymns: that Christ is somehow simultaneously both concealed and revealed, both hidden and known, in the Church's celebration of the Supper. Rather than go too far with my own exposition of these two texts - and inevitably get caught up in questions about whether it is Christ in the bread and wine, or Christ in the ecclesial, liturgical performance, etc (the correct answer, by the way, is both) - I'll shut-up and let Saints Thomas and Wesley speak for themselves to provoke and inspire you as they might.

Thee we adore, O hidden Savior, thee,
Who in thy sacrament dost deign to be;
Both flesh and spirit at thy presence fail,
Yet here thy presence we devoutly hail.

O blest memorial of our dying Lord,
Who living bread to men doth here afford!
O may our souls for ever feed on thee,
And thou, O Christ, for ever precious be.

Fountain of goodness, Jesus, Lord and God,
Cleanse us, unclean, with thy most cleansing blood;
Increase our faith and love, that we may know
The hope and peace which from thy presence flow.

O Christ, whom now beneath a veil we see,
May what we thirst for soon our portion be,
To gaze on thee unveiled, and see thy face,
The vision of thy glory and thy grace.
St. Thomas Aquinas (13th century); translated by James Woodford (1852)
Meter: 10 10 10 10
Music: Plainsong, Mode v (Adoro te, devote) (Solemnes)
* * * * *

Author of life divine, who hast a table spread,
Furnished with mystic wine and everlasting bread,
Preserve the life thyself hast given,
And feed and train us up for heaven.

Our needy souls sustain with fresh supplies of love,
Till all thy life we gain, and all thy fullness prove,
And, strengthened by thy perfect grace,
Behold without a veil thy face.
John (or Charles?) Wesley (1745)
Meter: 66 66 88
Music: Author of Life (John Stainer, 1875)

Oh, and while we're on the topic of sacred music, as I type this I'm listening to the new Wilco album (due out in May - please don't ask how I came into possession of it...), and it is really good. So's the new Arcade Fire album, Neon Bible, which begs for theological engagement.

Prayers of the Eucharist, or "so many liturgies, so few Sundays..."

In the previous post's comment thread, Brian (UrbanMonk) began to take us a bit deeper into discussion about the possible structures of our eucharistic celebrations and the range of possible prayers that we might utilize. Although I'm not sure how "eloquently" (his word) I can comment, he did allude to my interests in liturgical history and eucharistic theology, which I took as an invitation to expand a bit on the subject.

Now, while I naturally have convictions and preferences about liturgy, I hesitate to make any strong recommendations of particular "best" liturgies, because I know different folks have different views and theological opinions about the eucharist. But I will indicate a few things for those who might be interested in trying out or adapting certain historic rites and prayers.

My doctoral supervisor's late father, Ronald Jasper, was a prominent liturgist in the Church of England, and headed up the ecumenical Joint Liturgical Group in the 60s and 70s. He co-edited an anthology with Geoffrey Cuming, now in its 3rd edition, called Prayers of the Eucharist: Early and Reformed (Liturgical Press, 1990), which despite its boring cover design is an excellent resource, covering everything from Jewish table blessings through the 1790 Prayer book of the Protesant Episcopal Church. However, note that it contains only the anaphora or eucharistic prayer of a given liturgy, NOT the whole liturgy. Liturgies of the Western Church, ed. Bard Thompson (Fortress Press, 1961/1980) is a good resource for complete liturgies beginning with Justin Martyr and ending with Wesley's Sunday Service - but it's only the major liturgies, e.g. the Roman Rite, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Bucer, Knox, etc, and they're all Western, which to me is a bummer. Have a look at Richard Baxter's 1661 liturgy ("The Savoy Liturgy"), which is in both of the aforementioned books, and in the Jasper and Cuming book, the Nonjurors' Liturgy of 1718, both of which I think are of particular interest for those with Wesleyan proclivities.

Baxter's epiclesis: "This bread and wine, being set apart, and consecrated to this holy use by God's appointment, are now no common bread and wine, but sacramentally the body and blood of Christ." This statement has a charming simplicity about it, especially when considered in context of the whole liturgy, which over and over emphasizes sanctification, both of us and of the meal, which is "meat and drink indeed." And I love this exhortation at the start of the liturgy of the sacrament:

"The benefit of the Sacrament is not to be judged of only by present experience and feeling, but by faith. God having appointed us to use it, and promised his blessing, we may and must believe that he will make good his promise; and whatever we feel at present, that we sincerely wait not only him in vain."

Point of interest: my colleagues at Nazarene Theological College tell me that Baxter is an influence on Wesley, but I can't say much about this connection - maybe a possible topic for further research, or for someone who knows what they're talking about to comment on!

The Nonjurors' liturgy, which certainly influenced the Wesleys via William Law, actually refers to the eucharist as a "Sacrifice", which is somewhat shocking for the 18th century Protestant context. This epiclesis says:

"...send down thine Holy Spirit, the witness of the Passion of our Lord Jesus, upon this Sacrifice, that he may make this Bread the Body of thy Christ, and this Cup the Blood of thy Christ; that they who are partakers thereof, may be confirmed in godliness, may obtain remission of their sins, may be delivered from the Devil and his snares, may be replenished by the Holy Ghost, may be made worthy of thy Christ, and may obtain everlasting life, Thou, O Lord Almighty..."

That's the stuff right there. Change all the "they"s and "their"s to "we" and "our" and you've got yourself a pretty incredible prayer of consecration. Who wouldn't be moved by that? (Give that one a couple of tries and we might find that the eucharist can be a "converting ordinance" after all!)

To go back even earlier, WAY back in fact, the Jasper and Cuming book also includes the Egyptian Anaphora of St. Basil (probably 4th century), which doesn't include a request for the Holy Spirit to change the bread and the wine but only that the "Holy Spirit may descend upon us and upon these gifts that have been set before you, and may sanctify them and make them holy of holies. Make us all worthy to partake of your holy things for [the] sanctification of soul and body, that we may become one body and one spirit..." Anything with sanctification language should work pretty well in our context(s), I would think, so this is an excellent and very ancient possibility.

If I may take the liberty to say also that I am very inspired by and proud of the ministry team at Community Church of the Nazarene, Longsight (near Manchester, England and Nazarene Theological College), who in addition to having a weekly Word and Table service was brave enough to use an adaptation of the entire Coptic liturgy of St. Basil for their service on Pentecost Sunday last year - my wife was at the service and brought me back a copy of their liturgy booklet. The version they used asks that the "Holy Spirit descend upon these gifts set forth, and purify them, change them and manifest them as a sanctification of your saints." The entire liturgy is wonderful. And as a sort of side-note, Longsight celebrates their liturgy in a very small, communal setting - usually only 10-20 people seated in an oval with a small table bearing the bread and cup at one end. They use a combination of lay and ordained leaders so that, e.g., the "priest" parts of the liturgy, the sermon, and the epiclesis, might not always be performed by a member of the clergy.

Along these lines, I have also heard about experiments with the entire congregation praying the epiclesis, which is a decided break with tradition but might have its merits in a Nazarene setting. So, for example, everyone would pray together:

"Hear us, most merciful Father, and send your Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these gifts of bread and wine, that overshadowed by His life-giving power, they may be for us the body and blood of your Son, Jesus Christ, that we may be kindled with the fire of your love, and renewed for the service of your Kingdom."

Those are the words of epiclesis in the liturgy of the Scottish Episcopal Church, which is my own current worship setting (although only for a short time longer...it's been incredible, but the PhD is drawing to a close and it's nearly time to move back to the USA and Nazarenedom). The SEC liturgy revisions of 1982 were heavily influenced by Eastern liturgies, so there is a definite affinity here. The whole thing is available online directly from the SEC, and earlier versions of the Scottish liturgy can be found on the queen mother of prayer-book sites, although it must be said that the earlier versions are extremely "groveling" and penitential (e.g. "We acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, which we form time to time most grievously have committed by thought, word and deed, against thy Divine Majesty, provoking most justly thy wrath and indignation against us...we are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs from under Thy table..." &c ~1929 Scottish BCP - very Cranmerian), such as might be objectionable to Nazarenes who (as my father-in-law says) "don't believe in a sinnin' religion." The 1982 revision was a pretty significant move in a new direction, and I have grown quite fond if it, I must confess.

And a final word, if I may: never forget that eucharistic prayers, and the liturgies they are a part of, can as (if not more) often be instruments of polemic and ideology as they can be true expressions of worship to the Almighty - see John Knox's "Forme of Prayers" 1556 as one example: "...let us not suffer our minds to wander about the consideration of these earthly and corruptible things, which we see present to our eyes and feel with our hands [i.e. the bread and wine], to seek Christ bodily present in them, as if he were enclosed in the bread and wine, or as if these elements were turned and changed into the substance of his flesh and blood...[but] lift up our minds by faith above all things worldly and sensible..." (&c.) (Seems to me that somebody doesn't quite understand that sacraments are necessarily "worldly and sensible," embodied and bodily, and only as such do they re-present the incarnate Christ.)

I guess what I mean is, even though many of us feel strongly about the need to emphasize Christ's real presence in the eucharist, I think we need to exercise caution and a bit of restraint to ensure we're not cramming it down people's throats (!) and turning worship and celebration and communion into soap-boxing. Although I've not been given many opportunities to try it out in practice in Nazarene churches, I suspect the way to go is to just use these (or any) prayers as naturally and nonchalantly as possible and hope that the theological significance seeps in gradually to the hearts and minds of all those who participate, such that we all are sanctified and transformed.

The Real Presence: survey says...

I know what I hope the answer to this question is. And I'm pretty sure I know what the answer should be as well. But I want to know what you think, fair reader - both your own conviction and what you observe in the practices of your own church(es):
Do Nazarenes believe in the "real presence" of Christ in the Lord's Supper?

I unfailingly attempt to defend that we do...but then sometimes I wonder...

The Church of the Nazarene's 13th Article of Faith puts it thus:

XIII. The Lord’s Supper

17. We believe that the Memorial and Communion Supper instituted by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is essentially a New Testament sacrament, declarative of His sacrificial death, through the merits of which believers have life and salvation and promise of all spiritual blessings in Christ. It is distinctively for those who are prepared for reverent appreciation of its significance, and by it they show forth the Lord’s death till He come again. It being the Communion feast, only those who have faith in Christ and love for the saints should be called to participate therein.

To appeal to another authority, John Wesley's adaptation for Methodist use of 25 of the Anglican 39 Articles states:

Article 16—Of the Sacraments

Sacraments ordained of Christ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they are certain signs of grace, and God's good will toward us, by which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm, our faith in him. There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. [...]

The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about; but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same, they have a wholesome effect or operation; but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves condemnation, as St. Paul saith.

Article 18—Of the Lord's Supper

The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death; insomuch that, to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ.

Transubstantiation, or the change of the substance of bread and wine in the Supper of our Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith...

So, whaddaya'll think?

Nazarene Magisterium?

Hi everybody. For those of you who don't know--or remember--me, I'm Dave Belcher...just an ordinary guy who plays the guitar. I just finished an MA in theology from Vanderbilt University, and I was around when Brannon was a guitar-slinging rockstar in a band I will not here mention!

Well, I've been thinking a whole lot about my "vocation" lately (finishing a degree can force that upon a person), and I keep falling back against my previous "thrownness" (to poach on Heidegger's terminology) into the field of theology. I have always understood myself to be a theologian "of and for the church" (not "the people"...never been too keen on American democracy); and this has led me more recently to a consideration of my theological vocation as a particular teaching vocation to and for the Church of the Nazarene. But, immediately my considerations begged the question: "Is there room for something like this in the Church of the Nazarene, or, is it possible for the Church of the Nazarene to have a sort of 'magisterium' within its body?" (and though we usually associate that word "magisterium" with the office of the pope in the RC church, it is really just another word for teaching that answers questions of how our truth statements--or doctrines--are in fact true...in other words: it is an exercising of faith seeking understanding).

I think this has implications for all of us here concerned with the sacramental life of the church, or with a "sanctifying worship" through the sacraments--since telling us why these are good for our church is an exercise of "speculative theology" and not simply an affirmation of faith. So, what do y'all think? [I would especially appreciate comments from those of you who might have some historical background info on "theologial education" within the church body...which, of course, is not the same thing as "caravans." But, please, all comments are always welcome]. Peace.