The Unseen World

“As Christians we know that there is more to reality than what can be sensed through empirical processes.

For a start, God is spirit, and so can’t be seen under the microscope or through a telescope. And we believe in angels and demons – spiritual beings that could affect us in ways we may not be aware of.

But I suspect that you, like me, tend to sail through each day blithely unaware of these unseen realities…”

– At The Gospel Coalition Australia, Tim Thorburn writes about the unseen realities.

Should I Choose a Church for its Pastor?

“If you are looking for a good church, the role of the preacher of God’s Word is the most important thing to consider.

I don’t care how friendly you think the church members are. I don’t care how good you think the music is. Those things can change.

But the congregation’s commitment to the centrality of the Word coming from the front, from the preacher, the one specially gifted by God and called to that ministry, is the most important thing you can look for in a church. …”

– In this extract adapted from Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, Mark Dever shares some advice on choosing a church. At Crossway.

From Meat to Meta: Facebook’s Disincarnate Dreamworld

“I knew that I found something about Zuckerberg’s invitation to the metaverse profoundly disturbing, but I couldn’t put my finger on what it was about Facebook’s new incarnation that made me so uneasy. Then I realized: the problem is that it is not an incarnation at all. …

Zuckerberg’s utopia is one without bodies, without the material, without weight. It is Exhibit A in what Charles Taylor calls the modern prejudice for ‘excarnation,’ the idea propounded by Descartes and others that we need to distance ourselves from embodiment in order to arrive at a clear understanding of things.…”

– The Gospel Coalition Australia has published this thoughtful piece by Chris Watkin reflecting on last week’s announment from Mark Zuckerberg.

(Image: Practical Wireless, July 1974.)

The End of Humanity Would Result in End of Meaning?

In his The Briefing for 21st October 2021, Albert Mohler begins by considering a recent statement by Professor Brian Cox (pictured) about humans and meaning.

Perhaps a good conversation-starter.

D. A. Carson on the Two Jews Talking the Day Before the First Passover

“Picture two Jews, by the name of Smith and Brown. Remarkably Jewish names.

The day before the first Passover they’re having a little discussion in the land of Goshen, and Smith says to Brown, ‘Boy, are you a little nervous about what’s going to happen tonight?’…”

– Justin Taylor shares this wonderful illustration from Don Carson.

Anglican Priests — Ontological? Functional? Or something else?

Joshua Bovis at St John’s Tamworth shares this article written for his parish newsletter –

Anglican Priests — Ontological? Functional? Or something else?

The 1st of May is the anniversary of my ordination to the Priesthood.

When I used to have a Facebook account I placed a picture of the occasion on my news feed (yes that is me, the man in white just right of the middle). One of the others in the photo also placed the same pic on his Facebook page. What I found interesting was that he received many comments and ‘likes’ whereas I received no comments and not many likes.

Of course it is Facebook, it does not really mean anything because the world of Facebook is not real, but what is real is that my friend who was priested with me held to an ontological view of ordination. Whereas my view of ordination is functional (though I suspect he agreed with some aspects of the functional view).

For those who are not sure what I am writing about, here is an explanation:

Ordination – The Ontological View

When a person is ordained, there is a change regarding their very nature. In essence you become a different kind of person, a different king of Christian, and this is not to do primarily with your role, (though it shapes and dictates your role) but with who and what you become. God effects an ontological change in the very nature of who you are. Deacons, Priests and Bishops who hold to this view see themselves as being in Holy Orders until they die, still recognised as one by retaining their title even at retirement and still wear their clerical garb. The Roman Catholic Church holds to this view. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) states that ordination “confers an indelible spiritual character” which “cannot be “repeated or conferred temporarily” (CCC#1583). “The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently” (CCC#1583).

The late Rev John Richardson (aka The Ugley Vicar) describes this view like this:

“In ordination, the person being ordained is, as it were, ‘made into’ a priest — he (or she) is no longer quite what they were as a layperson, and is not simply ‘authorised’ by ordination, but is changed and ‘empowered’ by it.”

The views on this ‘empowerment’ may vary, but the essential characteristic is that priest and laity are in some way separated in what they are, not just in what they do. We will call this simply the ‘priestly’ model, since for most people, the word ‘priest’ conjures up exactly this ‘set apart specialness’ of someone different from the layperson.

Ordination – The Functional View

When a person is ordained, nothing happens to them in regards to their nature. The change is only in regards to what they can do publicly. Actually what presbyter/priests do in church, anyone Christian can do in their own homes.

And as for the prayer in the Anglican ordinal asking God to send down The Holy Spirit, is so that the Newly ordained priest may do what the ordinal and the Scriptures set out for them and require them to do, Scripture is very clear what the role of the ordained is to be. The Pastoral Epistles (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus) are very clear on what the role is of a Presbyter/Priest, and the Anglican Ordinal very clearly states what the roles, requirements and expectations are of a Deacon, Priest or Bishop and the roles are functional.

So while I do not hold to the ontological view of the Priesthood (due it its origins lying in Roman Catholic Theology rather than the Scriptures, nor is it supported by the Anglican Ordinal), I do wonder if the understanding of the Functional view of ordination is deficient in some way for it seems to me that there are two weaknesses with the current understanding of the Functional view:

First weakness – The role of the ordained is professionalised – Where they are likened to that of a CEO, service leader, preacher, Bible study teacher, manager of other clergy (who are called paid staff). In other words the role seems to be reduced to that of someone who is a paid professional, rather than a role that is vocational and one of calling.  So one’s suitability as a priest and effectiveness as a priest is discerned by ‘success’ (however ‘success’ is defined in modern 21st ministry culture) and in practice one’s godliness, holiness, piety, love for others is minimalised or reduced.

Second weakness – The role of the ordained is compartmentalised – It allows for the vows ordinands make at their ordination to be compartmentalised from every day life and their roles to be compartmentalised from everyday life when the reality is that neither is possible.

Whether a deacon, priest of bishop likes it or not, (although there is no ontological change within them at the ordination), the way they are perceived by people will change. Whether those views held are right or wrong; based on weird theology or something they have imbibed from childhood or previous experience; whether they are Christians in their own church, or unbelievers without their church; it cannot be avoided, even when they are not in church, even when it is their day off, and even if they are out and about not wearing a clerical collar attempting to be anonymous. Once a person is ordained, it does not go away, and there is no off switch. Of course they can take a day off from ministry, (and they should) but they cannot take a day off from the vows that they made at their ordinations, nor decide to reject the very doctrines that they affirmed at their ordinations; just as they cannot take a day off from being a Christian and they cannot take the day off from how people will see them.

Personal Example when I was serving as an Assistant Minister in my previous parish, I was at the shopping centre buying a DVD, I was not wearing a clergy collar and the girl served me remembered me from her Mother’s funeral I conducted. In her eyes, I was the priest. At the moment I was not leading a service, nor reading the Bible, nor preaching, nor was I managing church staff, so according to the functional view I was not acting as a priest. But in her eyes I was, simply by being.

This was supported by something I read which stated:

“There are appropriate whole-of-life expectations for ministers such that they cannot ever switch off from their role in the same way that a pilot can when they’re not flying. And even once they’ve retired from a position, a failure to live up to their ordination vows can have significant impact on those that the clergy have previously ministered to in a way that a pilot’s post-flight behaviour doesn’t affect their previous passengers”.

I viewed an online piece some years ago pertaining to the UK series entitled Rev and the author noted the confusion between being a priest and leading the church; the ontological view of being a priest and the functional view of being a priest. The author looks at it from the problem of the ontological view (i.e. Just because someone is called to be a priest, doesn’t mean they’re called to lead a church). We see this with the Rev’s main protagonist Rev Adam Smallbone. In short Smallbone is absolutely not suited to being a Priest. But because his role is defined by the Ontological view, therein lies the problem. The author points this out in his piece and I think is absolutely correct when he says:

The result is people like Adam Smallbone in Rev. He’s a nice guy; he’s clearly got some kind of call on his life. But according to that list, he isn’t called to lead a church, and the tension in the series comes from fact that no-one quite grasps that he may well be called to be a priest by the C of E’s understanding (Ontological), but he isn’t called to lead a church by the Bible’s understanding (Functional).

We see the problems shining through in the series. Adam isn’t a good preacher; as a result his congregation don’t have transforming encounters with God’s word and so don’t change. We see that painfully clearly when it comes to welcoming a repentant paedophile into the church. Adam understands grace, but he hasn’t communicated that understanding to the rest of the church, so they reject him. Adam’s wife isn’t properly on board with him being a vicar – she clearly resents it and it causes all kinds of problems for her faith, and for his leadership. I know both from personal experience and from that of friends that if a vicar’s spouse isn’t keen on them following the calling to lead a church, it won’t work. The tragedy is that Adam has been badly let down by the C of E in its confusion between the calling to be a priest and the calling to lead a church. As a result, everyone loses – Adam, the local church, and the wider church”.

This is the weakness of the ontological view, but the weakness of the current understanding of the functional view is just a serious. A priest who is professionalised and is compartmentalised and sees their role as a priest as a job rather than a calling and a vocation is just as unhelpful as the Rev Adam Smallbone.

So back to my FB pic. I suspect that the reason why my post did not receive so many comments from many of my ‘friends’ is because they hold to the functional view of ordination, they don’t view being priested as being that much of a big deal. Another author expresses this point using the analogy of acquiring a pilot’s licence:

“Being ordained is a bit like getting your pilot’s licence. You need one to fly but it’s no more than a mark of recognition that you’ve proven yourself able to fly, that you choose to be an active pilot and that the authorities are happy to accept you. There’s no way in the world that just issuing a licence gives you your flying skills and there’s no reason to hold a licence once your active flying career is over”.

If this is the understanding of the functional view of ordination then I think it goes too far, however the answer I believe is not for Anglicans (ordained or non-ordained) to embrace the ontological view of ordination, but to re-examine the functional view of ordination in light of God’s Word and to a lesser extent (though not insignificant) the Ordinal. Scripture is clear that all Christians are members of a new Royal Priesthood, however those whom God has called to be ordained, like every Christian, are to be living examples of those who worship God in Spirit and in truth who offer their bodies to God as living sacrifices (Romans 12:1). This means that the oaths clergy made at their ordinations, the doctrines that they affirmed and the promises that they made are to be lived out transparently (and by God’s grace, contagiously) every day, and it does not matter if they are not rostered down to lead or preach that Sunday or whether they have parish council coming up that week.

Not ontological, but more than merely functional.

– Joshua Bovis is the Vicar of St John The Evangelist in Tamworth.

Covid Vaccines and the “Mark of the Beast”

“In this time of pandemic, in which vaccines have been quickly developed and rolled out across the world, some Christians are asking whether the vaccines are the ‘mark of the beast.’ The ‘mark of the beast’ comes from Revelation 13. …

Now, lots of Christians read this chapter with one eye on the news to see if anything happening in our world today lines up with the weird and wonderful imagery of Revelation’s rich apocalyptic world. And some have suggested that the Covid vaccines seem to match the description of the mark of the beast.”

– Dr. George Athas, Director of Research and Lecturer in Old Testament and Hebrew at Moore College, has written a very helpful post, putting ‘the mark of the beast’ into its historical and theological context. At With Meagre Powers.

Learning to forgive

“Jesus teaches his disciples to pray to our Father to ‘forgive us our debts’ (Matthew 6:12). He reminds us that we need forgiveness and God is the one who grants it.

The word ‘debts’ conveys one aspect of what the Bible calls sin, and what we owe God. We need forgiveness because we do not give God what we owe him: thanks, praise, love and obedience, and because, as the Anglican confession prayer says, ‘we have not done what we ought to have done’.

Yet, amazingly and wonderfully, the God we offend is a God of mercy. …”

– SydneyAnglicans.net has published this edited version of Archbishop Kanishka Raffel’s address from the Centre for Christian Living’s Learning to Forgive event in August.

Review of Reformation Anglican Worship

“Reformation Anglican Worship by Michael Jensen is the latest volume in The Reformation Anglican Essentials Library. As its name suggests it provides a thorough survey of the principles of Anglican worship found in the denomination’s Reformation legacy.

For what is obviously a scholarly work, Reformation Anglican Worship is a surprisingly enjoyable read. Jensen has found just the right balance between depth of information and an accessible style which anyone with an interest in the topic will appreciate. …”

– David Ould provides this review, plus a link to a special price from The Wandering Bookseller.

Growing Old — Blessing or Curse?

Equal But Different has published three reflections on growing older – by Lesley Ramsay. She writes of the dangers and blessings of growing older:

Growing Old — Blessing or Curse? Part 1.

Growing Old — Blessing or Curse? Part 2.

Growing Old — Blessing or Curse? Part 3.

Keep the Bible Front and Centre

“To state the obvious, we must let the Bible shape what we do as mission leaders.

That means that we need to keep on constantly thinking about the priority that we give to our personal reading of the Bible, to our use of the Bible in our day-to-day ministry and to the way that we apply the Bible as we think through what is happening in the world today.

I’d like to encourage you to do two things …”

– Kevin Murray, National Director of Australian Presbyterian World Mission, writes at Missions Interlink.

John Piper’s 9/11 Radio Interview

From Desiring God:

“Twenty years ago today, at 8:14 a.m., American Airlines Flight 11 was highjacked. And with it began a nightmare no one who lived through it will forget. …

The following morning, Pastor John was called on to be one of the Christians who would speak into the tragedy — for him, on KTIS, a local radio station. Where was God on 9/11? There, for about forty minutes, he spoke wisdom into the shock and sorrow.

We want to share the recording with you today on Ask Pastor John, on this twentieth anniversary. The interview covers the importance of grieving and creating space for sorrow, yet a sorrow under God’s all-encompassing sovereignty. Pastor John explains why 9/11 was a call for national humbling, a wake-up call. God was shaking the foundations of America and calling sinners to come to Christ — a global call not just for Americans but also for Palestinians, Saudis, and Afghans. …”

– Read the background and listen – at Desiring God.

Seeing God at Ground Zero: an Aussie’s testimony from 9/11

“A meteorologist would tell you there were sprawling areas of high pressure, but to me it was simply a picture-perfect day for my last full day in New York, and an opportunity to explore the tourist hot spots. First on the list was the viewing observatory inside the World Trade Center’s South Tower. It was Tuesday, September 11, 2001. …”

– Two years ago The Australian Church Record published this reflection and testimony from Anthony Philips. Good to re-read and share.

See also:

‘September 11 – Twenty Years On…’ – John Mason at Anglican Connection.

“Twenty years ago Judith and I were living three short blocks south of the Twin Towers in Downtown Manhattan. We had awakened that Tuesday morning to clear blue skies and the sparkling waters of New York Harbor. But it was not to last. …”

The Day the World Stood Still — Dean Phillip Jensen, St. Andrew’s Cathedral, September 11 2011.

Spiritual Conflict…?

“In his Screwtape Letters C.S. Lewis says that there are two equal and opposite errors that people fall into regarding the dark powers. One mistake is to disbelieve in their existence, the other is to believe in them to excess.

In Ephesians 6:10-12, Paul the Apostle writes: Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his power… For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places…”

– John Mason has posted his latest “Word on Wednesday” at Anglican Connection in the USA. John reminds us that “spiritually speaking, God’s people live in enemy occupied territory”.

Present Distresses and Wedding Dresses

“The seventh chapter of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians is full of all sorts of brain-stretching moments. Sitting right up near the top of its ‘vexing verses list’ surely has to be vv.26-27 –

I think that in view of the present distress, it is good for a person to remain as he is. Are you bound to wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife.

A copious amount of ink (and pixels) have been spilt over these verses, not the least about what this so-called ‘present distress’ could possibly be and how on earth it relates to marriage. And yes, here I come to spill more of the same! But before I do, let me give you some important context. …”

– At The Australian Church Record, Dani Treweek begins a two-part series on what 1 Corinthians 7 teaches us in light of the current Covid restrictions on weddings.

← Previous Page — Next Page →