Tags
As difficult as riding this virus storm has been, it’s an ill wind that doesn’t blow someone some good. During the darkest part – called ‘shelter in place’ in Florida (as when facing a direct hit from a hurricane) – when we had no contact with our churches, our priests, our church families, it was indeed dark and lonely and depressing and fearful. Kindly intended emails were nice, even the deeply concerned ones but we are a gregarious animal by nature and we tend not to do well with extended periods of lack of contact with other folks. Technology came to the rescue. We weren’t alone anymore.
Old news now, of course, but priests and ministers across the nation mastered enough technology to at least live stream on Face Book using their laptops or desk top computers. Wealthy congregations got cameras and sound to their priests. The really brave priests went to companies like Zoom – said a prayer, and took the leap. Zoom was like manna in the desert – it fed us with the faces and voices of our church families and our priests. It was fun, it was surprisingly intimate, and we were together again.
Churches are opening across America, thank God from Whom all blessing flow, but the smart priests are keeping their Zoom meeting rooms. As we are still not out of the woods regarding the virus (as the ‘news’ so happily tells us), smart priests are using Zoom for Bible study. We ‘Zoom’ at 9 a.m. on Sundays when we would normally gather for Bible study. I attended another Bible study with my sister in New Hampshire at 7 p.m last night.
The Zoom Bible study that got me excited, however, was a complete surprise. I also attend a Zoom Bible study, presented by one of our Bishops, in Dunwoody, Georgia at 11 a.m. Bishop Chad was called away for a family funeral in Maryland and he left us ‘students’ in the hands of a young man named Creighton. I was skeptical; you know us old folks. I should have known better.
Creighton was astounding! Friendly, knowledgeable, outgoing, not at all intimidated dealing with folks very much his senior. Quick to laugh, eager to explain. I asked a question and he paused to think about it and simply said he wasn’t comfortable answering my question – I think it may have been a little over his pay grade, so to speak – but he was fine with telling me that and I was truly impressed. Creighton will have his deacon ordination next month and I couldn’t be more delighted! The Church of the future is in good hands if Creighton is any indication.
So, yes, joy cometh in the morning, even if it is at 11 a.m.
All Along the Watchtower 
This is a bit tangential but I would be inclined to say ‘gregarious creature’ rather than ‘gregarious animal.’ The reason for that would be that there is a materialist supposition that differences between animals are merely of quantity not of quality, that is, there is nothing particularly special about humans.
By thinking of ourselves, however, as ‘creatures’ we are reminded that there is a Creator and that He has purposes for those whom He has endowed with mind, spirit and free will which are qualitatively different from His purposes for those which He has not so endowed.
I appreciate that the word ‘animals’ stresses our essential solidarity with those lives that share the planet with us and that is important. Because of the gifts with which we have been endowed though I think that this solidarity is best expressed as a stewardship exercised out of love for our Creator and all His creatures rather than as some sort of illusory sense of a non-difference between animals and humans.
None of my comments should be read as a criticism of this post or its author who is a most welcome addition to the team here.
LikeLiked by 3 people
You make a valid point in your comment, Thoughtfully. I agree; ‘creature’ would be a better choice. Thank you for your insight.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Audre, it is good to have you here with us. Yes, joy can indeed be found in the most unexpected places. Creighton sounds just the sort of person the church needs, and I would think he was equally delighted to have been so welcomed.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’m afraid I may be that ‘student’ that study leaders fear – the person with questions. Every Bible study I have attended has a far greater number of folks who just sit there. They don’t even take notes (brownie points for me! I always do!)
He was very Orthodox, very solid. Gives me great hope.
LikeLiked by 3 people
And so, Audre, welcome to my second home, where I have for quite a while felt you had a place waiting. An excellent article, and yes, the world needs more Creightons, even as it does Audre’s. They bring the sunshine after the storm.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I know you – you just want to make me weep this morning; weep at your kindness. Bless you, NEO.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nonsense, sit down in my kitchen, and I’ll get you a cup of Black Rifle coffee. Straighten you right out.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bible studies in one form or another are valuable for several reasons.
(1) I believe sermons are generally intended for exhortation, comfort, and rebuke. People generally have short attention spans, and so they are not well suited for lengthy, complex teaching. For that reason, whenever I am invited to preach at my church, I tend to adopt the same sort of length as my pastor uses. Given this model, which is followed in a lot of churches, it is incumbent upon the Christian to study the Scriptures in another context better suited for length and complex analysis.
(2) While studying with other people has risks, it has various benefits, the two most notable being the ability to drawn on the skills and knowledge of other people and the opportunity to be challenged, which can help one to refine one’s beliefs or drop erroneous ones.
(3) Bible studies are also often used as joint prayer meetings, so they are another opportunity for corporate prayer and intercessory prayer.
(4) In some contexts people will say things they just wouldn’t say on a Sunday. This can be a valuable opportunity for a church to grow closer, to take stock, and to seek the Lord afresh.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Some famous preacher (American, I think, but can’t remember who) said of his sermons:
1) I tell ’em what I’m going to tell them
2) I tell them what I’m going to tell them.
3) I tell them.
4) I tell them what I told them.
5) I tell them what I told them
6) I pray aloud that they got the message which was what I told them.
My home church had a large clock on the front of the rear balcony, to make sure the pastor knew when his time was up.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve heard both points before, and I personally tend to use that structure as well when preaching (though not always). I also try to sign post at the end what I think are the “practical / take away” points. I hope Audre also enjoys reading the archives here as there are all sorts of good posts from former days.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yep, and in truth 20 minutes, which was the schedule, is about as long as people pay attention.
I couldn’t agree more, and I’ve occasionally fed a few to her, but she really should follow her own interests in them. They have a lot to do with why this blog is still here.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yeah, and it’s interesting to see how our thoughts have also changed over time (at least mine have on some matters).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Mine have more hardened than changed, but I started from a different place.
LikeLiked by 2 people
NEO – traditionally, an Anglo-Catholic sermon in church is 10 minutes long. Our new priest – way more evangelical than any I’ve ever had – has introduced us (whether we like it or not, lol) to the thirty minute sermon!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Audre – I’ll point you to what is (in my opinion) a good sermon. This is the sort of thing that fired me when I was a student. Click on
http://www.thetron.org/resources/the-james-philip-archives/james-philip-archive2/
On `mornings evenings and midweek sermons’ click on `evenings’, Click on 87-89 Romans (you’ll find it fourth down on the left) and then click (for example) on the sermon for 3rd July 1988 on Romans 7v19-25. It is approximately 47 minutes and each of these minutes is worth listening to.
Back then, this is what I thought that sermons were all about, but sadly over the last 32 years, I have had to down-grade a little.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jock, that was brilliant. I would have responded sooner but you told me to listen and I did. My gosh, he’s a spirited and dramatic speaker! “Oh retched man that I am … ”
You’re quite right; well worth the listen. Thank you so much!
It would be unAmerican of me not to mention – I love the accent!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Audre – thanks for yours – and I’m glad you enjoyed it. I now understand that he was `one of a kind’, but I wasn’t aware of that at the time.
Yes – his accent – he is a true Aberdonian and he sounds like it (even though he moved down south to Edinburgh in 1957).
Well, now you know where I’m coming from – this is what I was listening to as a student and it basically shaped my Christian faith.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No wonder Anglo-Catholicism grew so fast, traditional Dissenter ones were about 203 hours. 10 minutes is actually a bit too short, I think 20 minutes is about right. Of course, usually 10 minutes is often called a homily and is a somewhat different creature.
LikeLiked by 3 people
NEO – surely it depends on whether the sermon has a content.
At our college, lectures in engineering subjects are 90 minutes long and this is considered to be all right and correct, nobody complains. But when you go to church, you find that exactly the same people who think that 90 minutes is all right for an engineering lecture think that the sermon should be no longer than 10 minutes long.
When I first discovered that in some churches the sermon was limited to 10 minutes in length, I was shocked and remarked on it to a friend of mine. He replied, `you know, for most sermons, 10 minutes is 10 minutes too long’ – and he is right.
I always wonder – how come church people can get away with spouting absolute drivel – and they are lauded for keeping it short and sweet – when they would be sacked if they were as slovenly in other professions (for example lecturing at an engineering college).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here is what I have found, Jock; a good priest who really knows his subject, can make 10 minutes the equivalent of an hour’s worth of reading. Finding and condensing the important elements for consideration is a great talent. I can write a book but writing say, a song, is out of my reach. How do you put the important parts you want folks to respond to and remember in as few words as possible? To me, that’s a real talent. But I’m not castigating the longer sermons, either.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Audre – yes – putting it concisely is an art.
Actually, with James Philip, he was sometimes forced to shorten it. This happened if one of the theology students attending his church was getting ordained. The ordination service would take place somewhere else at 8pm and his evening service started at 6.30 pm. Under these circumstances, he would shorten the sermon to half an hour, so that he could finish the sevice early (by 7.40) thus allowing people to get to another part of town. The sermon was actually better when he did, when he was forced to martial his thoughts and put them down more concisely, he was more selective with his quotes from C.S. Lewis (whom he often quoted from the pulpit at great length) etc … etc …..
So yes – agreed – I also saw this.
But for the most part, I have usually found that shortening it is an excuse for removing the content, so that you end up with the situation that Nicolas described above – where the sermon doesn’t do the job it is supposed to do, so they try to make up for the deficiency by having a bible study. Bible studies are good things, but there is a problem if it has to be used to make up for deficiencies in the sermon.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There is a lot of truth in that, I’ve heard many poor sermons, and few good ones. My first pastor did little than another Gospel reading, much longer than the official one. A sermon is a good deal like writing a blog post, try to get as much meaning as you can into a definite limit. It’s hard. Audre is pretty good at it, I’m not. I want to put too much detail, some of it extraneous in,
You’re right, most wouldn’t be tolerated where I went to college either, although our lectures were 50 minutes, but even there, too many were excellent sleep aids.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nicholas – I concur! That’s why I’m now attending three each week. Why three? I believe each priest has a charism; they bring much of themselves but, also, all that they’ve learned to the classes.
LikeLiked by 2 people
At a local parochial school, there is a meeting of sorts to set the mission statement for instilling authentic Catholic culture in the school. I have a friend on the particular council that is fighting with the theology teachers about refraining from using the word happy and instead using the word joy.
The teachers tried to say that joy is the fruit of the spirit, so it can’t be found in this life, so happy is best used in the context. I went over a lot of theological reasons why that is bogus, but mostly it rest that joy is an effect of choosing to live a life of holiness. In fact, I did a word search and happy doesn’t even appear in the New Testament and Joy appears 60+ times.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hate when people want to play the word game. Joy is above happy – even in casual conversation, we use the words – we choose the words- to denote the difference. A slice of chocolate cake makes me happy – seeing children in church gives me great joy.
LikeLiked by 1 person