Is it LINT or LENT and why do some people have dirt on their foreheads?
In the beginnings of the Christian church, the first Christians observed with great devotion the days of our Lord’s passion and resurrection. It became the custom of the church to prepare for them by a season of penitence and fasting. This season of LENT provided a time in which converts to the faith were prepared for Holy Baptism. It was also a time for those who, because of grave sins and had been separated from the body of believers, were reconciled by penitence and forgiveness, and thus restored to the fellowship of the Church. The whole congregation was focused on the message of pardon and absolution set forth in the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It is a need of all Christians to have their faith and repentance renewed constantly. During this time of the LENTEN season it is good to focus ourselves on those parts of our life that need cleaning up. It is a time of searching out the heart and asking the Lord to show you those places in your life where you are trying to control. This is a time to relinquish that control and allow Jesus to exercise full Lordship in your life.
Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of the church season called “Lent”. This is a time of spiritual warfare, fasting, penitence, and the preparation for the Easter feast.
It was in the tenth century that ashes were imposed on the foreheads of the penitent that were to be reinstated into the fellowship and full communion of the church.
Beginning in the eleventh century, ashes were imposed on the foreheads of all the faithful believers, as a reminder that the wages of sin is death. In Genesis 3:19, God said to Adam after the fall, “dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return”.
This marking of our foreheads, in the sign of the cross is also to remind us of our baptisms, where we were also marked with the sign of the cross. This reminder speaks very loud and clear of the salvation that is given to us in the death and resurrection of the second Adam, Jesus the Christ.
Yes, the wages of sin is death; But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our LORD. (Romans 6:23)
Fr. Don Wilson
Faith in Christ Anglican Church
9317 US Hwy 90 West
Lake City, Fl 32055
www.ficang.org
Holy Communion Sundays at 9:30am
754-2827
Friday, February 27, 2009
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Call no man father
Why do Anglicans call their pastor father if the Bible says "call no man father"?
Should Anglicans be criticized for teaching children to love their parents? When discussing the catholic faith, very rarely have I heard Anglicans criticized for teaching children to love their parents. The strict biblical literalists should criticize them for teaching children to love their parents, for in doing so, at least he would be consistent.
What am I talking about? Consider the words of Jesus:
‘‘If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)
If we take the words of Jesus literally, then all of us Anglican catholics ought to be criticized because we teach children to love their parents. This would seem to be contradicting Jesus, right? Wait... Should we consider the context of the statement? and the historical context? Let's do so!
It is absurd to think Jesus was really teaching his disciples to hate their parents. A commandment right out of the Ten Commandments given to Moses is:
‘‘Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you." (Exodus 20:12)
Jesus also said,
‘‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (Matt 5:17,18)
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus makes it clear that he is not overturning the commandments. Therefore, the commandment to honor mother and father is still an obligation for Jesus' disciple. If we know this, then we can make further deductions. In the Aramaic lanuage (and also Hebrew) which Jesus spoke, there were not many words for comparison. If someone wanted to say you should love some one less, they would use the word "hate". In context, what Jesus was really saying is that we ought to love God and love Him more than we love anyone else. We are to love the others less than we love Him.
Now, what has all this to do with the silly title "Call No Man Father?" I will tell you. Catholics, Anglicans and the Orthodox, are often criticized for addressing their priests and pastors with the title "Father". The critic will cite Matthew 23:9 as the prohibition against calling their pastor or priest by the title of "Father":
"And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." (Matt 23:9)
Obviously we Orthodox, Roman and Anglican catholics are ignorant, unbiblical, and deceived for calling their pastor "Father," right? How much clearer could it get? Well, remember Luke 14:26 and the commandment to "hate" your parents? Maybe there is more to this than just what is seen on the surface? Could it be? Let's look at more of the surrounding verses:
‘‘But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one Teacher, the Christ. The greatest among you will be your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted." (Matt 23:8-12)
Some translations render it a little differently, but what the verse says is that we are not to call anyone master, teacher, or father. If that's the case, I don't know how to greet anyone anymore. Apparently, the manners that my mother taught me are useless. For example, I can't call Mr. Smith "Mr." Smith anymore. Why not? Well if we look at the etymology of "Mr." [etymology is the study of where words come from], Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary indicates that it comes from the Middle English word "maister" which means "master". Since Jesus said not to call anyone "master", I can't address anyone as "Mr." I am also going to have problems addressing my physician and dentist. I can't address them with the title of "Dr." If I examine the etymology of "Dr." it derives from the Latin word for "teacher". Since Jesus said to call no man "teacher", I can't address my doctor as Dr. Smith. Everything is further complicated since I am at a loss to call all my teachers or what to call my own father. I think it is safe to say that a mechanistic approach to this verse leads to chaos. [What will the critic do with titles like Sunday School Teacher? How will he address his clergy who have doctorate degrees since the polite way is to call them Dr. So and so?]
Could it be that Jesus meant something else?
First, let's look at other passages in the Bible where the apostles use the terms father in a spiritual sense:
"Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel." (1 Corinthians 4:15)
"But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel." (Philippians 2:22)
"For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children..." (1 Thess 2:11)
"To Timothy my true son in the faith..." (1 Timothy 1:2)
"Timothy, my son, I give you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies once made about you, so that by following them you may fight the good fight..." (1 Timothy 1:18)
"To Timothy, my dear son..." (2 Timothy 1:2)
"You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus." (2 Timothy 2:1)
"To Titus, my true son in our common faith..." (Titus 1:4)
"I appeal to you for my son Onesimus, who became my son while I was in chains." (Philemon 10)
"My dear children..." (1 John 2:1)
"I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth." (3 John 4)
Both the apostles St. Paul and St. John use terms that represent a spiritual fatherhood such as a priest would have with his own congregation. The apostles use words such as father, son, and children. Since the apostles use such terms, the mechanistic understanding of "call no man father..." does not seem to be the right understanding. It seems to me that Jesus was directing his words at the Pharisees. Right before these directives, he derides them for their pride:
"‘Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them ‘Rabbi.’" (Matthew 23:5-7)
What I believe Jesus is condemning is a form of pride which the Pharisees had. They took pride in being called "father", "teacher", and "master". A true spiritual father and teacher is not supposed to have those characteristics.
If someone condemns me for calling my priest "Father", I can live with that. But, to be consistent, he should also condemn me for not hating my father, mother, wife, and children (Luke 14:26). Thank God the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church and the Orthodox Church have preserved the Biblical notion of spiritual fatherhood. May I be as Elisha who cried out to Elijah (not his real father), "Father, father..." (2 Kings 2:12).
God Bless You,
Father Don (+)
Should Anglicans be criticized for teaching children to love their parents? When discussing the catholic faith, very rarely have I heard Anglicans criticized for teaching children to love their parents. The strict biblical literalists should criticize them for teaching children to love their parents, for in doing so, at least he would be consistent.
What am I talking about? Consider the words of Jesus:
‘‘If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)
If we take the words of Jesus literally, then all of us Anglican catholics ought to be criticized because we teach children to love their parents. This would seem to be contradicting Jesus, right? Wait... Should we consider the context of the statement? and the historical context? Let's do so!
It is absurd to think Jesus was really teaching his disciples to hate their parents. A commandment right out of the Ten Commandments given to Moses is:
‘‘Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you." (Exodus 20:12)
Jesus also said,
‘‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (Matt 5:17,18)
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus makes it clear that he is not overturning the commandments. Therefore, the commandment to honor mother and father is still an obligation for Jesus' disciple. If we know this, then we can make further deductions. In the Aramaic lanuage (and also Hebrew) which Jesus spoke, there were not many words for comparison. If someone wanted to say you should love some one less, they would use the word "hate". In context, what Jesus was really saying is that we ought to love God and love Him more than we love anyone else. We are to love the others less than we love Him.
Now, what has all this to do with the silly title "Call No Man Father?" I will tell you. Catholics, Anglicans and the Orthodox, are often criticized for addressing their priests and pastors with the title "Father". The critic will cite Matthew 23:9 as the prohibition against calling their pastor or priest by the title of "Father":
"And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." (Matt 23:9)
Obviously we Orthodox, Roman and Anglican catholics are ignorant, unbiblical, and deceived for calling their pastor "Father," right? How much clearer could it get? Well, remember Luke 14:26 and the commandment to "hate" your parents? Maybe there is more to this than just what is seen on the surface? Could it be? Let's look at more of the surrounding verses:
‘‘But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one Teacher, the Christ. The greatest among you will be your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted." (Matt 23:8-12)
Some translations render it a little differently, but what the verse says is that we are not to call anyone master, teacher, or father. If that's the case, I don't know how to greet anyone anymore. Apparently, the manners that my mother taught me are useless. For example, I can't call Mr. Smith "Mr." Smith anymore. Why not? Well if we look at the etymology of "Mr." [etymology is the study of where words come from], Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary indicates that it comes from the Middle English word "maister" which means "master". Since Jesus said not to call anyone "master", I can't address anyone as "Mr." I am also going to have problems addressing my physician and dentist. I can't address them with the title of "Dr." If I examine the etymology of "Dr." it derives from the Latin word for "teacher". Since Jesus said to call no man "teacher", I can't address my doctor as Dr. Smith. Everything is further complicated since I am at a loss to call all my teachers or what to call my own father. I think it is safe to say that a mechanistic approach to this verse leads to chaos. [What will the critic do with titles like Sunday School Teacher? How will he address his clergy who have doctorate degrees since the polite way is to call them Dr. So and so?]
Could it be that Jesus meant something else?
First, let's look at other passages in the Bible where the apostles use the terms father in a spiritual sense:
"Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel." (1 Corinthians 4:15)
"But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel." (Philippians 2:22)
"For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children..." (1 Thess 2:11)
"To Timothy my true son in the faith..." (1 Timothy 1:2)
"Timothy, my son, I give you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies once made about you, so that by following them you may fight the good fight..." (1 Timothy 1:18)
"To Timothy, my dear son..." (2 Timothy 1:2)
"You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus." (2 Timothy 2:1)
"To Titus, my true son in our common faith..." (Titus 1:4)
"I appeal to you for my son Onesimus, who became my son while I was in chains." (Philemon 10)
"My dear children..." (1 John 2:1)
"I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth." (3 John 4)
Both the apostles St. Paul and St. John use terms that represent a spiritual fatherhood such as a priest would have with his own congregation. The apostles use words such as father, son, and children. Since the apostles use such terms, the mechanistic understanding of "call no man father..." does not seem to be the right understanding. It seems to me that Jesus was directing his words at the Pharisees. Right before these directives, he derides them for their pride:
"‘Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them ‘Rabbi.’" (Matthew 23:5-7)
What I believe Jesus is condemning is a form of pride which the Pharisees had. They took pride in being called "father", "teacher", and "master". A true spiritual father and teacher is not supposed to have those characteristics.
If someone condemns me for calling my priest "Father", I can live with that. But, to be consistent, he should also condemn me for not hating my father, mother, wife, and children (Luke 14:26). Thank God the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church and the Orthodox Church have preserved the Biblical notion of spiritual fatherhood. May I be as Elisha who cried out to Elijah (not his real father), "Father, father..." (2 Kings 2:12).
God Bless You,
Father Don (+)
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)