05 July 2009 / Labels: ,

A Eucharistic Bread Recipe

For many years I have struggled to find a manageable Eucharistic bread recipe that is unleavened, tastes halfway decent, and has an acceptable texture. I also have wanted to try to maintain a connection with the Semetic traditions that our faith came from, and so flatbreads seemed like a good place to start experimenting. The result isn't a wafer, nor does it look like most Eucharistic breads I have seen, but it is true to the Semitic traditions our Lord would have followed (well, except that I use T-Fal... I don't have the kind of cookware they did!) The following is, I hope, the fruit of my labors.

Father Rob's Eucharistic Bread

Ingredients
2 cups of all-purpose flour
1 cup of whole wheat flour
1 to 1 1/2 cup of warm water

Sift together the two types of flour several times to get it as fine as possible.

Add 1 cup of warm water.

Stir mixture until the dough pulls away from the side of the mixing bowl. If necessary, add more warm water.

Stir until relatively smooth.

Knead by hand for 5 minutes.

Shape dough into a log, and cut into thin sections (usually 10-20, depending on what sized breads you are making).

Use your hands to form balls out of the dough sections.

Cover dough-balls with a damp towel and let rest for 5 to 10 minutes.

Heat a non-stick skillet or griddle over medium-high heat (you will need to experiment with your stove to determine the best setting for your cookware). Do not use oil!

Remove one dough-ball at a time and, by hand, strech and pinch the dough out as flat and thin as you can get it while keeping it relatively round.

Place formed loaf on to the skillet/griddle surface.

Watch carefully for lighter colored dry areas to emerge (approx. 30 seconds),

Flip the loaf with tongs and repeat.

Flip a third time, pressing lightly after the flip on areas that are still dark and shiny (indications of higher moisture content). Also, watch for puffing during this stage.

If you made your loaf too thick, you may require several flips. It is better to flip repeatedly in 30 second intervals for several minutes than to attempt to get them all done on one side before flipping.

When done, transfer to a wire cooling rack... do not set them on a plate, as they will absorb steam and get mushy.

Let set at least 15-20 minutes, then wrap in a paper towel and transport to Church.

I haven't tried freezing and reheating these yet, so I'll update this post when I do.

Let me know how these work if you try these!

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

19 June 2009 / Labels: ,

Review: "Opening Prayers: Collects in Contemporay Language"

In the past several years, many resources have become available to those desiring to provide a more thematic approach to the praying the Scriptures of the modern three-year Eucharistic lectionary (i.e., the modern Roman lectionary and its various cousins, including the Revised Common Lectionary). "Opening Prayers" from ICEL and the Canterbury Press fits the bill.

To be sure, there are a few collects that could still use some tweaking to make them more chant friendly or to allow them to flow a mite-bit-better in the American idiom (these prayers were originally drafted in the UK), but on the whole it provides a refreshing take on praying the Scriptures that is deeply rooted in the appointed readings of the day.

These collects are not mere reassignments of existent collects (not that there is anything wrong with such an approach) - the are all, each and every one of them, completely new. As such, they will probably not appeal to liturgical purists who want to tie the historic collects of the western liturgy into the new lectionary. (For such a resource, I would recommend a copy of the Evangelical Lutheran Hymnary which assigns the historical collects to the three year lectionary based on similarities of theme, or the "Propers of the Year" volume from the Lutheran Service Book (LCMS, Concordia Publishing).)

"Opening Prayers" manages to balance mild horizontal inclusive language (phrases like 'sons and daughters' and 'your children' are used and feel just right) with unswerving confessions of God in traditional idiom. It avoids issues that plague the collects of Revised Common Lectionary Prayers and Evangelical Lutheran Worship (Leaders Desk Edition), both of which suffer from (the former moreso than the latter), at times, vapid texts which carry little inspiration and bear utterly musical or repetitive qualities whatsoever. (ELW has some gems, 'diamonds in the rough' that need to be polished to shine brightly, but RCLP has nothing worthwile).

Several of the collects in particular stand out: the Easter Vigil and Trinity Sunday collect for Year C are the two best in the book, with Ordinary Time 27b coming in a close third. One outstanding feature is that, while a basic conclusion is used in Ordinary Time, one with thematic implications is generally used (with a few exceptions) throughout specific seasions. Thus, the doxological conclusion of collects in Advent have an emphasis on Christ 'whose coming is certain, whose day draws near'. In Paschaltide, Christ our 'Passover and peace' is praised... outstanding features that one might miss with a cursory glance.

If you are looking for a series with collects for the three-year lectionary, this is the volume for you. Laypersons will find it to be a stimulating way to prepare for the Sunday service, or to integrate the preceding Sunday's readings into one's daily prayer life during the subsequent days. Clergy will find it a rich treasure to enhance their experience in the modern lectionary, one which may help their own spirituality find new ways to comprehend what is the length, breadth, depth, and height of the love of God made manifest to us in Christ Jesus.

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

09 June 2009 / Labels:

It's a girl...

Kristen and I had the second ultrasound of the pregnancy today, and our little lady, Clare Adele, was staring back at us. We are officially at 20 weeks plus 1 day today, with our due date still holding at October 26th.

Looking at Clare's little fingers and toes, her spine, rib cage, her heart (pumping away like crazy)... seeing her hiccup (or cough, or whatever she was doing) is just an amazing witness to the glory of God and his love towards us.

We rejoice in all he has blessed us with, and I ask for you to continue to pray for Clare's safe keeping and delivery, for Kristen's continued good health and good spirits, and for the wisdom on both of our parts to be good, loving, and - most importantly- godly parents for our little one.

comments (1) / Read More

Links to this post

07 May 2009 / Labels:

REVIEW: "Star Trek"

The wait is over…

Star Trek roared onto movie and IMAX screens tonight as the film received it’s general release. While I am preparing an article for my column over at TrekMovie.com on the film’s adaptation by Alan Dean Foster, I wanted to present my review of the film here in greater detail. The following review is broken down on several levels, and will be spoiler-laden. Reader beware. All assessments are on a five point scale.

MAIN STORY – 1

If you’ve seen Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, you’ve seen a lot of this movie. Nero (Eric Bana) is a Romulan miner whose wife (among billions of others) is killed when a supernova wipes out Romulus. This sets in motion a desire for pure revenge that will only be quenched when Spock is made to equally suffer for his perceived sins. Just bare Bana’s chest and you have a near clone of Khan. Such a pity to rely on the ‘horrible baddy with personal vendetta’ line to bring about a new era in Trek.

ACTING – 3

Most of the acting in Star Trek is very good, though a few folks stand out. Karl Urban (McCoy) easily walks away with the best performance of the film, with Zoe Saldana (Uhura) coming in a close second. Both Chris Pine (Kirk) and Zachary Quinto (Spock) deliver good performances that bode well for the inevitable sequel. Chris Hemsworth (Kirk, Sr.) delivers an outstanding –if all too brief – performance as Kirk’s father, with Jennifer Morrison (Kirk’s mother) doing an equally amazing job. Their work together in the first major pivotal scene in the film is some of the best acting in the entire flick, and will almost certainly make any fan get misty-eyed. Ben Cross (Sarek) would be a very welcome retention in any future film. His work was very much his own, but also very much what one would expect from the father of Mr. Spock. Winona Ryder’s take on Spock’s mother was fair enough, though given the amount of her screen time that was cut out of the film, it’s hard to make a good judgment on her work in the role from what we see.

Bruce Greenwood’s portrayal of Captain Christopher Pike is something of a 50/50 proposition. While I accept that the movie’s function was to get people to accept a new cast and crew for a new series of Star Trek adventures, Pike really winds up with the short end of the stick. Greenwood plays well a role that comes across feeling very compromised due to the story’s service of Kirk and Spock. As a major fan of Christopher Pike, I was terribly disappointed with how he was used, but find myself immediately and instantly placing Greenwood’s Pike in place of Hunter’s (no disrespect intended to Jeffrey Hunter, as his Pike was excellent, but there was something a little extra about how Greenwood played the part.)

Simon Pegg's (Scotty) performance was acceptable, if not a bit over the top; and John Cho (Sulu) was also acceptable. While Sulu was given more to do this time out, I still feel more could be done with his part in the future. Turning Pegg and Cho into deeper characters will only help their roles in future films.

Leonard Nimoy’s (Spock ‘Prime’) was touching to see on screen, even if it suffers from the direction of the film. He still has the acting chops to pull off the most endearing role in Star Trek history, even after forty-five years (the first pilot, “The Cage” was shot in 1964).

Bana (Nero) and Ayel (Collins, Jr.) are simply cardboard cutout villain and henchman, who could easily have been played by anyone else. The fact that they won’t be in a sequel is no great loss. And, since continuity is now totally open to reformulation, I look forward to finding a way to jettison Anton Yelchin’s Chekov, mainly because he was basically a 1st season TNG Wesley Crusher with a wery, wery bad Wussian accent. I like Yelchin. I hate his take on Chekov.

SCIENCE – 1

Besides getting some technical advice on Saturn’s moon, Titan, and reminding the special effects artists that space is a three-dimensional environment, what the heck did the filmmakers bother to hire a science advisor for? The science is awful. There are so many inconsistencies in the ‘science’ of this new Star Trek that it would make your heads spin to just think about it. How did Nero and Spock get thrown back in time? A black hole you say? Really? And what about this red matter business – one little syringe full and ‘poof’, you get a black hole? Warping from Earth to Vulcan in, what, an hour or two? Seeing Vulcan destroyed from light years away while standing on Delta Vega? Delta Vega (regardless of its location) back to earth in under ten minutes? ‘Transwarp Beaming”? Come on! This Star Trek outing isn’t Science Fiction, it’s just fiction.

THE LOOK – 3

I love the more formal (gray and red) academy uniforms, and even the Kelvin era uniforms look pretty good. I don’t care for the new take on the TOS uniforms, the Apple Store bridge, the Titanic-esque engine room, the fan blades everywhere, and the hideous outfits that the Admirals at the Academy were wearing (as well as that horrible TMP-esque business that Pike wore at the end of the film). Admittedly, however, the new uniforms tend to blend out in wide shots, only becoming truly annoying in close-ups. Oh, and the moon boots, they have to go. The Vulcans are well designed, and their planet is amazing. San Francisco appears to be a bit busy, but otherwise OK. Nero’s ship, the Narada, is just plain crazy looking, and the crew is all decked out in typical baddie attire.

PRODUCT PLACEMENT – 0

A Nokia car phone… A Budweiser at the bar… I don’t want product placement in my Star Trek. Epic Fail.

SPECIAL EFFECTS – 4

This is a summer action flick, it has to have great SFX. While I still hate the use of CGI, it is pretty good in this film (though, ironically, I prefer the CGI in “Nemesis” better). Some scenes are very obvious (long shots of the fighting on the drilling rig in painful particular), but for the most part, the CG is pretty seamless with the live action. The Narada was an overkill, future Spock’s ‘jellyfish’ was about the most annoying ship I have ever seen in a Star Trek film or episode, and the transporter effect was abysmal. My opinion of the new Enterprise softened a bit, though I still think improvements could have been made to the ship…

DIRECTION, EDITING, and PACING – 2.5

For the most part, director J.J. Abrams did a very good job, as long as you don’t mind lens flares. My main objection to his directing style centers around his use of Nimoy’s Spock, who seems constantly rushed in every scene. Is this a direction or editing issue? I can’t tell, but it limit’s Nimoy’s effectiveness in the role. A particularly bad decision is the mind-meld sequence between Nimoy and Pine that simply fell flat with me. The misuse of Nimoy's time on screen is a absolute disappointment.

OVERALL – 2.5

The movie is a fun action flick, and I’ll definitely go and see it again; but I, both as a fan and as a person who wanted to see a complete reboot, find the film to be a disappointment. That being said, the ending of the film aboard the Enterprise sets us up for an adventure that can be worthy of the Star Trek name in the future. I think that Orci, Kurtzman, and company can deliver such a film now that the business of re-establishing the Star Trek universe has been completed.

MY NEW RANKING OF TREK FILMS:

As it stands this morning, after seeing Trek XI once...

  • 11. Nemesis (F)
  • 10. Generations (D-)
  • 09. Insurrection (D)
  • 08. The Voyage Home (C)
  • 07. First Contact (C)
  • 06. "Star Trek" (The new film) (C+)
  • 05. The Final Frontier (B)
  • 04. The Search for Spock (B)
  • 03. The Wrath of Khan (A)
  • 02. The Motion Picture (A)
  • 01. The Undiscovered Country (A+)

I am sure this will change in the future.

comments (2) / Read More

Links to this post

04 May 2009 / Labels:

What do I have in common with the Discovery Channel's Wednesday Night Lineup?

Well, while watching this week's DVR'ed episodes of Mythbusters and Pitchmen, I realized I have a deep connection the Discovery Channel on Wednesday nights...



I was born in Alameda County, California, where the bulk of Mythbusters is shot.


When I was six months old my grandmother took me in, and we lived in Pinellas County, Florida, where the bulk of Pitchmen is shot.





If any Discovery Channel executives are reading this blog, you are welcome to contact me for my guest appearances on these programs.

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

28 April 2009 / Labels:

Homily for Tuesday of the Third Week of Easter

Readings:

Acts 7:51 – 8:1
Portions of Psalm 31
John 6: 30-35

How often throughout human history have people felt more than free to reinterpret God’s own words to suit their purposes? In our own day we see such practices running rampant, but it is important to remember the old adage that I so often use when illustrating points in my homilies: “There is nothing new under the sun.”

Yesterday we heard the beginning of Stephen’s prosecution at the hands of the Jewish Sanhedrin. Today, Stephen speaks up and convicts the lot of them of opposing the Holy Spirit; effectively challenging and rewriting the teachings of Scripture to suit their desires. “They were stung to the heart,” records the Book of Acts, but being stung resulted not in repentance and contrition, but in “grinding their teeth in anger” at Stephen. Stephen would go on to witness to his Savior through the blood of martyrdom for his refusal to revise the Gospel to suit the prevailing opinions of powerful people.

And yet, it is not only the powerful whom we must exhibit a consistent witness before. In our Gospel reading today from the sixth chapter of John, we hear the beginning of the heart of the Bread of Life discourse, which finds its roots in response to the request of the people, “Sir, give us this bread always!” Jesus responds to them: “I am the bread of life. No one who comes to me shall ever be hungry, no one who believes in me shall thirst again.”

Though we won’t hear it in our setting this week since Friday’s readings will be pre-empted for the Feast of Saints Philip and James, Jesus goes on to tell the multitude that has followed him: “I am the living bread come down from heaven. If anyone eats this bread, he shall live forever; the bread I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” And then, even more clearly, “Let me solemnly assure you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” This seemed like a pretty nasty idea to at least some of Jesus’ followers. “This sort of talk is hard to endure” they said… their faith suddenly slacking off in the wake of Jesus’ words. “How can anyone take it seriously?” they ask.

For over fifteen hundred years, the vast majority of Christians took Jesus at his word… that he had given his true flesh and blood to us under the forms of bread and wine in the usage of the Lord’s Supper. And yet, in the sixteenth century, a new teaching began to surface. It was impossible, the purveyors of this new teaching claimed, for Christ to be present both on earth in the Eucharist and in heaven at the throne of God. Thus, the Eucharist was just a symbol, and there was no presence of Christ. “Besides,” some of them would argue, “that’s cannibalism… that’s nasty… that’s awful!” What a poverty! The very seal, the means of grace, in which the atoning death of our Lord Jesus Christ is communicated to us becomes a shell for those who would reject the plain words of Christ “This is my body… given for you” and “This is my blood… shed for the forgiveness of sins.” Jesus did not give us a symbol, he gave us his Body and Blood. To ignore his clear words in the sixth chapter of John’s Gospel, and in the various narratives of the Last Supper is tantamount to rejecting all of his work outright, for through the Sacramental means of grace that God pours out on us the grace and strength of his work.

And so we are left to wonder why so many other basic Christian doctrines are being denied today; why groups like the Jesus Seminar can find such an audience. We are so convinced that the Word has no authority that we freely renegotiate what it means. Sadly, this trend began five hundred years ago in the name of restoring the Church to what it once was. But when you attack the power of Baptism and the Eucharist, you must attack the authority and power of Scripture. Thus, if you can redefine the Sacraments, you can redefine the Scriptures which establish those sacraments… and then all hell breaks loose in the Church.

Today’s Church must accept the conviction of rejecting the plain word of Scripture, as was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and then must determine how the sting in the hearts of her leaders is going to affect them: do we recover the primal place of Word and Sacrament, purely preached and ministered, in our congregations and ministries, or do we continue to embrace a Gospel that denies the very basic beliefs and practices of the Christian faith in the name of inclusively and kindness?

Surely it is a question we will not be able to answer for anyone else, but you… what do you believe? How will you choose? Will you embrace God’s Word and Sacraments at face value with faith, or will you reject what Christ has spoken about his own creation and sacraments for the sake of substituting your own belief, one more palatable to you?

Those who refuse to accept Christ at face value, no matter how much they may like elements of his Gospel, will ultimately drift away (regardless of what they call themselves on the door of their building or what kind of clothing they wear). No number of fish stickers on the back of their cars will ever change the fact that when we reject the plain Word of God, we reject God.

May God have mercy on us, and strengthen us to confess the pure Gospel and receive the Sacraments in purity of belief and of heart… and when we falter, when we fear, when we find it impossible to believe, let us cry out to God, “Lord, I want to believe… help my unbelief!”

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

27 April 2009 / Labels:

Homily for Monday of the Third Week of Easter

Readings:

Acts 6: 8-15
Portions of Psalm 119
John 6: 22-29





Every good and perfect work flows out of faith. In a world where signs on public transportation state “You don’t have to believe in God to be good”, this concept stands as a strong counterbalance to what we read about in the closing words of our Gospel reading today.

Why did Stephen, the first Martyr of the Early Church, perform such great works? Our reading from Acts tells us that it is because he was ‘filled with grace and power” – a grace and power which he possessed not on his own account, but only on account of his faith in Christ.

Now, you would think that in our Gospel, which follows in the wake of the miracle of the loaves and the fishes, that the crowds would have had some measure of faith. And yet Jesus points out to them “You aren’t looking for me on account of the miracle, you are looking for me because you aren’t hungry anymore.”

What a stinging rebuke – and yet it is a rebuke that will go on to illustrate the power of the flesh of the Son of Man and of his blood. In the reading appointed tomorrow, we will get more deeply into this portion of John 6, but suffice it to say Jesus is setting his massive following up for a major decision, all stemming around the veracity of his words.

Do we today accept Jesus at his word? Do we side with him when confronted with a society and a race that is so far gone from its original righteousness, or do we conform and compromise our message for the sake of ease?

Over the centuries, the Church has had the chance time and time again to compromise her message, her proclamation of Christ… but even in the darkest hours of Church history, the Truth has always been proclaimed somewhere, somehow – for indeed, even when sinners proclaim the Gospel, it is the power of the Word and it retains the power to change people’s lives. This change effects faith in people, and faith brings us to performing the good works of God.

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

24 April 2009 / Labels:

Homily for Friday of the Second Week of Easter

Readings
Acts 5: 34-42
Portions of Psalm 27
John 6: 1-15

Fear is a constituent element in our lives. From the moment of our birth, the primal cry of the infant is one of fear: fear of the unknown, fear of going hungry, fear of being dropped, fear of being abandoned… fear often undergirds many elements of our day to day life, and, ultimately, for many, fear forms the basis for our relationship with God.

To be certain, the sins we commit should make us fearful when we consider our relationship with God… our sins are like scarlet when compared with the prefect righteousness of Jesus Christ. And yet today, the words of the Psalmist call us to a transform our fear through the simplicity of trust.

Look at our other readings:

In our passage from Acts, some of the Apostles have been brought before the Sanhedrin and, in spite of preaching the Gospel that Christ has handed them, the find themselves flogged and ordered to stop preaching the Gospel. What a miserable situation! And yet, as we are told by Luke, the author of Acts, “The apostles for their part left the Sanhedrin full of joy that they had been judged worthy of ill-treatment for the sake of the Name.” Here the leaders of the infant Church had been brought before what is, in essence, the Supreme Court of Israel… and they lost their case. Imagine the despair that they might have had – but no! Most certainly the words of the twenty-seventh psalm rung in their minds and hearts with every lash of the whip: “The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the refuge of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?”

Compare and contrast this with their reaction in our Gospel when, just a few years before, they were confronted with the impossible task of feeding over five thousand with five barley loaves and two dried fish. “What’s the use!” they cry, “Even with two-hundred days worth of wages, we couldn’t begin to even give them a bite!” Jesus works a wonder, feeds the multitude, and the people marvel – but soon enough things will be back to the way they were. Faith will falter, followers will doubt, and they most certainly won’t be willing to hang around for a flogging or worse.

So what compelled Jesus’ followers to transform from a rag-tag band of vagrants and vagabonds to the bold preachers of truth and witnesses of faith that we celebrate so often in the Scriptures and in the Church’s Calendar (as we will tomorrow on the Feast of Saint Mark)?

The Holy Spirit, cleansing the heart, strengthening the mind, and compelling the soul to follow where Christ has trod is the answer – for the Spirit inspires us to trust in the Gospel, and to sing with joy the words of today’s Psalm… the Holy Spirit further emboldens us to seek, in the wake of our reception of God’s mercy and reconciling love, a place in the eternal kingdom where we may contemplate the beauty of the Lord and sing his praise.

The final verse in today’s Psalm selection so wonderfully sums up how the Apostles and Disciples undoubtedly viewed their situation: “Wait for the Lord with courage; be stouthearted, and wait for the Lord.”

Are you courageous in waiting? Are you stout-hearted? Do you allow anything to draw you away from Christ? Do you trust in anything or anyone except Christ to rescue you from your sins and bring you to that dwelling-place secure?

If so, fear and trouble will surely follow you; but if you trust in the Lord, and embrace the indwelling Holy Spirit, you can grow, day by day, in the grace needed to transform adversity to joy – even in the face of persecution, hatred, and death.

May God give us this grace, now, always, and forever. Amen.

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

21 April 2009 / Labels:

Still Not Happy...

So I am still completely unhappy with the site setup, but having tooled around for a bit with WordPress, I am unimpressed with how complicated and un-intuitive the format over there is... so, anyone got:
A) Tips on a better template for this site?
B) Any idea why my Blog Post setup isn't taking hold?

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

/ Labels:

Homily for Tuesday of the Second Week of Easter

Readings:
· Acts 4: 32-37
· Portions of Psalm 93
· John 3: 7-15

Last Wednesday was tax day. Around the country, thousands of American citizens gathered at so-called “Tax Day Tea Parties”. While a broad range of grass-roots anger brought everyone out, one of the themes I kept seeing on signs and in the words of participants was an opposition to the adoption of Socialism in the United States.

Participants pointed at the failures of the European and Canadian systems, as well as the fall of the Soviet Union, the recent capitalist upsurge in China, and even the status of Cuba as proofs of the failures of socialism.

Imagine the shock they must feel if, today, they are sitting in Church and they heard this Scripture read. They find a place where Socialism did work. It was the Christian Church.

In our first reading today, drawn from the fourth chapter of Acts, we have just about the most perfect example of voluntary socialism that we have ever seen… complete with the amazing result “…nor was there anyone needy among them…” Stop for a second and consider that. There was not a single needy person in the Church at Jerusalem. Wealth was freely and joyfully redistributed! Can you fathom that? How could this possibly occur?

The answer is not a mystery, at least, not to those of us who have bothered to listen to the words of our Lord. In today’s Gospel reading, Jesus speaks boldly to Nicodemus about how we can be transformed into the image and likeness of God – by the power of the Spirit.

We who believe that the Son of Man has been lifted up for our salvation know that when we conform our lives to his example – something that occurs when the Holy Spirit indwells within us and is allowed to transform us – great things can happen. Imagine a Christian Church today where no member goes without basic human needs and services… I’m not talking about some kind of Prosperity Gospel knock-off; I am talking about THE GOSPEL and the example of the Apostles and Church Fathers who found that their calling to proclaim the gospel included a calling to relieve not only suffering from sin but from worldly anxieties as well.

In stark contrast to the prosperity Gospel:

THE TRUE CHRISTIAN GOSPEL is one that says our sins are forgiven through the gracious work of our Lord Jesus Christ.

THE TRUE CHRISTIAN GOSPEL does not promise us perfect health in this life, a new Cadillac if we just pray the right way, or the exchange of a one-hundred dollar ‘seed offering’ for a one-thousand dollar ‘harvest return’. That is the Gospel of hucksters and cheats who seek to make the message of Jesus palatable to a perverse and materialistic generation.

THE TRUE CHRISTIAN GOSPEL is one that says that we are called to be transformed into the image and likeness of our Savior and Brother, a likeness that is filled with compassion and concern for those less fortunate than ourselves.

THE TRUE CHRISTIAN GOSPEL is one that requires us to live sacrificially – not because we are atoning for our own sins, but because living sacrificially is the first step to meeting the needs of our brothers and sisters who are less fortunate than ourselves.

The Tax Day protestors were right about one thing – Government sponsored socialism is a questionable (at best) proposition. But Socialism is not a questionable philosophy. It is the only one that has ever enabled the Church to be what it is called to be in response to the social end of her Gospel mandate. Christian Socialism must not be a political movement, as it has been in the past. Christian Socialism is a gospel lifestyle made manifest in the lives of believers – those who have been reborn by water and the Spirit.

May God give us the grace to accept this teaching, and the boldness to live it out; in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and by the power of his all-holy, good, and life-giving Spirit.

comments (0) / Read More

Links to this post

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)