When the Homily is about Immunology

Counter cultural

Recently at a series of Mission Talks I attended I heard something I found to be interesting. The speaker, Fr. John Hainsworth mentioned that today we have far more in common with the early church than our forefathers did, in the sense that we are fast becoming a post-Christian generation whereas similarly the early church was amidst a pre-christian. He is right of course and he also noted something else: Orthodox Christianity is THE most counter-cultural thing on the planet earth. He even noted that Marilyn Manson with his attempts at expressing his counter-cultural notions cannot hope to compete with the radicalized Orthodox Church.

It got me thinking about how so many breeds of Christianity are choosing NOT to be counter-cultural, but rather to let culture be the new authoritative magisterium they often fear exists amidst "Institutionalized" religion. Like the protestants of old, now jacked up on pomo crack, they have exchanged one pope for billions. Of course, it's not just the emergent folk who "flow with culture", it's also the liberal belief systems and denominations like episcopalianism.

That's about when a friend emailed me this link to a PBS special on the emergent "church" thingy. There is much I could say...should I? Well I am inclined to speak because they do very much give the impression that those of us in "traditional" expressions of church are missing the boat to the future. A couple of things:

Doug Pagitt says in the video that, "Christianity is....not stagnant belief....and has never been about uniformity."

Of course there is some room to interpret what he means here, but there is also a great deal of room to say that what he says here is absolutely not true. Schism in the early church (i.e. between Orthodoxy and gnosticism) didn't happen because the early Church was laissez-faire about its belief. Reading the early fathers doesn't give one the impression that they were all into letting everyone be in charge. I mean how can one read read the letters of St. Ignatios of Antioch (or Scripture for that matter) and envision a "church" that remotely looked like a room filled with encircled couches where everyone contributes equally (theologically even).

I often hear the pomo crowd trying to deflect the criticisms of some with appeals to the early church...which of course bore no more resemblance to Calvary Chapel than it does to "solomon's Porch." And so when I hear this from the video:

"More and more Christians say the usual ways of doing church no longer resonates with a contemporary postmodern culture."

...I have to wonder how this notion played out for the early Church. Well, of course, it didn't at all. Let's pause and consider what resonate means:

To evoke a feeling of shared emotion or belief
To correspond closely or harmoniously

Well the early church met secretly, in part because it was illegal of course (rather counter-cultural I'd say) but also because vicious rumors had been flying about them. They were accused of having wild orgies and of cannibalism! They were not exactly devising ways to better resonate with the pagan culture...perhaps because they were being too busy being killed by the pagan culture. And really, how often did they fail to save themselves by simply burning a pinch of incense to Caesar and walking away? They sound pretty stubborn to me...just a pinch of incense for crying out loud! And today we have Christians whining about how church no longer resonates with them and their secular friends. How they want to do church in a way that appeals to them...well maybe the early church should have wrapped their brains around the notion that it's appealing to not be eaten by lions and just burn a stupid pinch of incense. But they didn't and those that did were often ostracized and huge debates raged about what to do about those who repented of having burned the incense. These early church folk seemed pretty stringent...maybe even stagnant in their beliefs.

I suppose I should not complain too much about this all...I truly do honor the awakened desire to seek genuine faith. And much of what they rebel against has little to do with the Orthodox Church, though they of course would never understand this because Orthodoxy has all of the apparent external "trappings" they vilify. Let us consider the Orthodox Divine Liturgy:

1. It isn't for non-believers. In ancient times the first half was for catechumens, and the latter half was for MEMBER'S ONLY. It is not designed to appeal to the unillumined. It was not invented to be cool and to resonate...it was taken from the traditions they already had from the Synagogues and from the Temple itself.

2. Furthermore it is not "designed" by some lone artist or "DJ" seeking to "bless us", but rather it is the product of generations. Yes, it bears the name of St. John Chrysostom (save those of St. James and St. Basil), but clearly St. John put much of it together from far more ancient sources. And since that time it has indeed not remained static, it has changed with all the speed of a glacier in the hands of those who "forget not the ancient landmarks." Yes, we give our ancestors a vote and there are more of them than us. What has happened to us that we ignore those who've gone before us?

3. Amidst the Divine Liturgy, the Kingdom is present, NOW. It doesn't matter if you feel it, or even believe it really...because (GASP) it's not about YOU right now, it's about the community (meaning those in the present, the past, and the future). The Liturgy begins with a welcoming proclamation "Blessed is the Kingdom of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit!" It's not time to express your feelings about your personal faith journey. It's time to be changed by God via generations of wisdom, which is, believe it or not, grander than the vast wisdom collected in any individuals head over the past 30 years (give or take).

4. Encircled couches replace pews. BLECH! STAND you wusses! Stand like men! Good night, you are in the KINGDOM (meaning, usually, a King is present), and really only three postures make sense: stand, kneel, or prostrate. What is this sit in circle and chat?!?!? Save it for afterwards.

5. Okay I'll stop. Look, the pomo folk have this to teach us: we can allow our rituals to become stagnant to us. We may sit through the Divine Liturgy and not participate and who would ever know, save God? (Though even being present in a non-participatory state of mind can still have redemptive value) But you see the problem here isn't the externals, it's the internals. You don't want to appeal to those internals, you want to rip them out and regrow good fruit. Why fertilize weeds?

What to take from all my rambling? I stand in the presence of the Kingdom of God, while in my hands are generations worth of wisdom, and in my mouth is the medicine of immortality. How can I profane these wonders by giving ANY personal credence to the notion that these things ought to be changed or abandoned in order to "work for me or others." In other words, let us truly commit ourselves to wholly participating in the Liturgy...to letting its beauty and wisdom wash over us and revive us, enlighten us, change us, heal us, and empower us. And more than that, let us participate to give glory to God and to manifest to Him our profoundest thanks for feeding us LIFE.

Really now, how can a DJ blaring ethereal keyboard music while synchronized to pretty flowing colors on a big screen, all planned and thrown together while staying up late sipping a Triple diamond grande peppermint Mocha from Starbucks compete? This is the Wisdom of the ages...let us attend.

Oh what a treasure we have before us in out Liturgy. Let's recognize and appreciate it.