Dom Ruso

Why Divorce Hurts Your Health?

Some recent research suggests that the trauma and stress associated with broken relationships is deadly for our physical health. It seems that the wisdom of the Church on the sacredness of Marriage has
multiple benefits. Maybe one of the ways the church continues to provide healing to the physical body is by preventing marriages from falling apart. Also, we can’t forget to keep helping those who have gone through the pain of divorce.

Do NOT welcome everyone in the name of Jesus.

The recent homosexual debate on my blog has led me to think through many issues. One in particular is the idea of inclusion. A fellow blogger (see comments) suggests that INCLUSION is a core teaching of Jesus. While i would agree, inclusion when understood holistically must always be paired with TRUTH. This debate, once again, is not a new one.

The writer of 2 John discusses this issues at length.  A key question is ‘ Is it ever o.k. to exclude some one from the universal community of Jesus?’

The writer of John carefully explains that although the earliest believers were known and praised for their hospitatlity there was an instance in which a neighbour could be excluded and rejected. John writes.

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh This is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch yourselves, that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward. Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; or the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.

Maybe another important reminder to a world who seems to believe that  inclusivity is the mother of all virtues.

Can Curiosity Crush the Church?

In an age of constant change  it’s difficult to balance innovation and integrity.  This balancing act becomes much more crucial for those who are Christian leaders since the truth of Christianity has an historically rooted story. If innovation is the goal, the ancient story easily gets lost. If holding on to the integrity of the past is the goal, changing and innovation are shunned as evil and useless.

This tension continues to play itself out in many of the today’s contemporary debates. Whether in worship wars, or doctrinal debates the struggle remains, does curiosity and innovation eventually crush and weaken the truth and rootedness of the historical truth of the Gospel? Could our history teach us something about our present struggles?

This debate is an old one. Within the first few years of the common era, the earliest Christians wondered how they might be faithful to the story of Jesus yet remain true to their mandate of reaching a complex and changing world.  In their case that world was made up excellent Greek thinkers and philosophers who loved and embraced ‘curiosity’ for curiosity’s sake. I’ve often thought how similar our world is today.  Few people ask and seek for the sake of knowing the truth. Most ponder and banter for personal recognition and the pride that comes with dialectic.

One of the great responses of the time came from a early Christian thinker named Tertullian.  He remarked ‘ after one has believed [in Jesus] there is but one thing more to be believed, namely that there is nothing more to believe’ .

Maybe the way through this maze is to embrace change while remembering the wise thought of Tertullian. One who to would struggle to remain faithful to the one, true, univeral and holy Church.

Conciliarism and the homosexual debate!

Thank you to all who’ve been posting. Your thoughts and persepctives are indicative of the complexities of this debate. Also, your approach has been most respectful.  Thanks.

I think what all the comments have demonstrated is that everyone feels that their position is grounded in the historical teachings of the church and the scriptures.  So is it o.k to call this a stalemate and allow  new churches to emerge that embrace homosexual union and homosexual leadership?

One of the questions i have is, “what role does  Conciliarism play in this debate.”  This is the leadership question no one seems to be addressing. Is there a governing Ecceslial body that can make a decision on this issue which prayerfully listens to both sides and then decide what the Church needs to affirm?   It is my knowledge that this is what Rowan Williams tried to do. The problem lay in the how the Episcipal church responded.  To belong to the church is to commit and submit to the teaching of the universal church and ones  local denominations even when we disagree with them. All of this is for the sake of unity,  the central teachings of Jesus and the Church.  Maybe memorizing  John 17 might help us with this.

Perhaps the greatest unifying factor  is found in the fact that Jews, Muslims and Christians all agree on this issue.

The Great Tradition vs The Gay tradition

The homosexual debate seems to be causing a Web 2.0 fire. From the New York Times to the  National Post and now to this dude who thinks he’s smarter than the Bishop of Durham.  This monstrous debate is a sign of a much deeper problem.

When Christians fail to understand that they belong and are called to submit to a tradition greater than their present context things get confusing. Now i know what your thinking. If Christians embraced the great tradition of faith we’d still have slaves etc…. But that just isn’t true. The sexual orientation issues is a very different debate.  Freak’n do your homework.

The struggle within the Evangelical context stems around the authority of scripture and ones personal hermeneutical position. Like many would argue, you can make the bible say whatever you want it to say, FINE! But what does the Great Tradition of Christian history have to say?

There are a select few within the Protestant Evangelical tradition that have earned the right from their fellow ecumenical brothers  and sisters in Christ to speak with such authority and N.T. Wright is one of those people.

His recent thoughts in a  Times UK article speak for themselves. Read it and make a decision.  Are you part of the Great Tradition or the Gay tradition.

The Revolution has begun! Are you ready?

Here is a great video on the power and complexities of a changing world. Pertinent to my context is ‘how will the Church adapt and change to meet the challenge of a whole new world’.

Bishops May End Gay Ban

There is no summer rest for Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of the England Church. The Episcopal Church, (name for the Anglican communities in the U.S.A.) continue to move forward on issues related to same sex marriage and ordination. This morning the New York Times posted another story revealing the struggles within this once, vibrant and strong Christian Fellowship.

The leader of this movement is openly gay bishop Gene Robinson. His personal position has quickly moved the Episcopal church into a complex and uncertain future.

One of the concerns with this article is how quickly the ordination has become the available to all who desire it. What began as a concern for homosexual couples to be loved and welcomed by the church has turned into a desire to hold significant leadership positions in the church.

As long as a segment of the Episcopal church decides that it does not have to submit to the larger body of catholic Christians this issue is bound to get uglier and much more complex.

Perhaps the heart of the issues is found in this remark by Pamela Reamer Williams, a spokeswoman for Integrity USA, an advocacy group for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members. She remarks, ““The church has stated very clearly that all levels of the ministry in the Episcopal Church are open to the L.G.B.T. baptized….”  Key word-BAPTIZED!

When the sacramental  spirit of  Church life is lost and the symbols of the faith are relegated to some random acts of memory complexities abound. Baptism, one of the great sacraments of the church, must be reclaimed as a central symbol for those who desire to be part of the body of Christ. With this comes the confession to surrender ones right and submit to the teaching of the Great tradition of the church. Last time i checked, same sex marriage didn’t make the cut.  Sorry!

Monasticism for the 21st Century

The monastic movement seems to be getting some press. In addition to Shane Claiborne and his return to simplicity and frugality, there seems to be a move toward a deeper desire for reflective living. Maybe it’s our financial crisis, maybe it’s the realization that there is more to life that just THIS.

I’m presently teaching and writing a church history class and I find that my students are beginning to also rethink what  it mean to live in the monastic tradition and still be part of the daily activity of the 21st Century.

During the early monastic period,  monks, when joining the monastery made certain vows as a sign of their obedience to the rule of the abbot. This was a non-negotiable. In this they set aside their own rights and desires to surrender and serve in the monastery. We have much to learn from those who gave up everything to serve in community and to slow down to listen to God.

My wife is moving along in her pregnancy and as she gets bigger she does less and less. J While I say I understand, I don’t really do. I can never understand how it feels to have to share your body with another human.  I can never understand what it’s like to always be tired. In this season, the monastic tradition and my own context converge.

What I’m learning is that you don’t need a monastery to live in the rhythm of the monks. All you need is someone to serve. One of the great voices of the monastic tradition was know as Basil of Caesarea (a.k.a. Basil the Great) He once remarked ‘one who lives alone has no one to serve’

Who are you serving? No strings attached, nothing to gain, just plain old serving.  For me  it’s my boy and wife.

Shane Hipps and Going Deeper

I’m coming to the end of Shane Hipp’s new book Flickering Pixels.  It really comes across as an idiots guide to Postman and McLuhan.  While it’s a good primer for those who have never thought of how Christianity and technology converge  it just does not go deep enough.  For example, his use of Narcissus misses the whole point since this great Greek myth means nothing without the role of Echo. There are numerous examples where he fails to make his point in a compelling way.

If you really desire to work through the implication of our technological advancements and their influence on Christianity read Power Failure by Borgmann.  Here is a philosopher with a much better grasp of the issues.

Did she say Dr. Jones?

I can’t believe that this stuff happens in the name of Christianity. While i understand some of tension inherent in interfaith dialogue, i must say that this is the stupidest approach.  In addition, where did this dude get a doctorate?