The Hands of Christ

Many of you who read my blog  (probably not that many) know that I am on the long and windy road towards ordination as a priest.  A priest, like all Christians is called to be an icon of Christ. The word icon in this sense means "like" or "representing" or "symbolic" of the said article. But the concept goes further. The icon leads us the reality of what it represents.I am called to stand for Christ and demonstrate his love, compassion and the reality of his ministry in the face of a broken and weary world, community, and family. I am to be Christ, and through the right action of Christian virtues I am transformed more and more into what Christ is. By the action of love I become what love is, by the action of compassion I am transformed more and more into the compassionate heart of Jesus.


One of the greatest working out of this calling is found in my work. I am a supportive care worker in a group home with 5 wonderful men with developmental disabilities. This line of work has been a godsend to me. I am in a position to love, serve, and trust others; bringing glory and dignity to humanity, the image of God in created mankind. I once had a conversation with someone about my work and expressed the challenges of recent budget cuts from the government to our program. This person seemed to think it was a necessary thing saying: "why should these people live a better life than those of us who work?" I was astonished at this attitude and found it disrupted my spirit. Something with this comment was fundamentally wrong. But before engaging in this line of work I too held this opinion. It is the opinion of a self serving culture where a persons worth comes from a twisted mutation of what was once called Protestant Work Ethic.The problem with this view is it takes the affliction of the leper and confuses it with consequence of the sluggard.


The scriptures tell us that "God is no respecter of persons". As Christians we believe that our worth comes not from what we accomplish in the arena of finance, power, or the acquisition of material goods. We believe that we are made in the image of God and he is reaching out to us, offering to share our sorrows that we may share in his kingdom.


As an icon of Christ I am standing in the gap, demonstrating Jesus, not as a poor substitute (though I am) but as a co-suffering co-labourer with Our Lord. The analogy that I like the best is that of an oxen. Jesus tells us: "Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls."

As we share in the work of Christ we are like oxen yoked together with our God, taking to the same work. When a farmer has a young ox that is inexperienced he pairs it with an experience ox that is fully developed and strong. The strong ox sets the pace and the younger weaker ox is left to keep up. The weak ox's striving to keep pace with the stronger is much like our co-labouring with Christ. We are paired with him, sharing in his good work. He has and continues to set the example, set the pace, and demonstrate his strength that we might grow into that strength. Through our work we are being fashioned into what he is, growing in our Christ-likeness, being changed from glory to glory.


Supportive care is not about administering medications, cooking meals, running errands, or providing personal care. It is about honouring the image of God that has been given to mankind, through love, service, and meekness of heart. I thank God for the experiences of placing others before me, serving them through times of great joy and personal crisis. Befriending those whom I am payed to serve. I don't do this because of the paycheque but because I have been given an example by my Lord as he has called me friend. He loves me as a friend, as one who is strong yet gentle and lowly in heart. In him and through my work with him I find rest for my soul and I hope to demonstrate this to those I am called to serve.

What is the Church?

Movements such as the great awakening and foreign missions societies began a grand tradition of interdenominational cooperation in North American. These populist and independent movements have shaped growth patterns and expectations of the modern church. Church growth and identity was really shaped by para church organizations in the later part of the 20th century. Everything from foreign aid through World Vision, evangelism through the Billy Graham Crusades, and family ministries such as Focus on the Family and Promise Keepers have greatly shaped the evangelical faith experience.

The challenge that is now posed to the Church on our continent is one of a crisis of identity. All of the above listed movements were done not as an extension but as a substitution of local and denominational church bodies. The absence of "The Organized Church" in the forefront of these bodies has led many to focus their interests elsewhere, namely the personal. The state of affairs for those 35 years and under is grim indeed. We have record amounts of professing Christians that do not regularly attend church because they fail to see the need to attend a local church. They believe in God, but the faith they have inherited has stripped the church of its position in their life and they feel less and less of an obligation to attend church for cultural reasons.

Many modern or post modern Christians feel they can satisfy their personal faith journey with television and radio resources, books, personal prayer and scripture reading or even nothing at all. This epidemic is consistent with the sharp fall in volunteerism in North America since WW2. Rotary, the Salvation Army,  various lodges, PTA's and local churches have fallen victim to this cultural change. The question is, can the church respond to this change and fill a void, and if so, how will it do this. One option is to further deconstruct and follow (pander) to the culture by telling it what it wants to hear, entertaining it with catchy pop choruses, or allowing the membership to shape the common life and worship (or lack their of) as an attempt to restore meaningfulness to the action of Church.

But, there is another way, a higher way. This way is one of a consistent ecclesiology with the ages of old. The view of the church as a consumer product where those who attend do so based on the quality or style of the preaching, music, or entertainment value must be rejected by it's leaders. The real challenge is to take a culture that has chosen their church (or lack there of) by this paradigm and ask far more than they have ever been asked. We need to replace the desire for style into an acceptance of substance. In the ever busy schedules of an overworked and tired generation, what does the church really offer other than another "thing" that has to be done.

"When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things." Mark 6:34


When we lower ourselves to the strata of a consumer product, we give people the option of accepting us to pure fancy. We ask nothing of the consumer other than to accept us or find another activity to consume their time and clutter their lives. By doing this we are stripped of our meaning, we have no inherent value: except what a depraved mind may decide to give it in a flurry of emotion.

The problem with putting our cup before the consumer and asking "it" to fill the cup is that we are stripping ourselves, and our faith in Christ of any value. Instead of saying, "Come, drink of this cup and receive forgiveness for the sins of the entire world", we say; Hey, I hope you enjoy the taste.

Our faith is not a consumer item which means it's value is not based on the free market. The value is inherent and eternal, any effort to diminish this through the innovation found in the consumer market place is to diminish the salvation offered to us by Christ. These modern innovations have turned shepherds into salesmen and elders into spin doctors.

The organized church has a mantle of leadership and responsibility in the life of the believer and the world at large.Instead of begging people to like our product, we need to demonstrate the humble authority given to us by our Savior and be what the church has always been called to be: the safe harbour of salvation, and a caring mother to it's children.

Jeff Wilson

Being Changed from Glory to Glory

Holiness is God's domain, one that he wishes to share with us. But what is holiness? Our life in Christ is all about it, the transformation of what we are into what we could be. Holiness is something to strive for, pursue, love, and cherish. It is to be our ultimate goal in the way we live and the ultimate guide to our interactions with others. Holiness however, is something that we can not attain in and of ourselves. We are powerless to achieve such a high and lofty attribute because it is not something we add to ourselves, it is something we become. It is a choice that is worked out on the anvil of fear and trembling. Holiness requires us to acknowledge that God is God, he is powerful, and there is authority beyond ourselves that we must fall subject to. It requires us to be open, honest, transparent, humbled, and free from pride. 

Being changed from glory to glory is the journey of joining God in his glory. It is easy to spot a holy person, look for one that is painfully aware of their own sin and shortcomings and who is slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love. I know that I need more of these things in my life.

Letter of the Law Vs. Spirit of the Law: Anglican Formularies VS. the Intent of Reformation

When a boat turns over the passengers instinctively grab on to whatever they can to stave off drowning. As the North American church has gone awry, several of the passengers have clung to oversimplified solutions hoping to buoy themselves in the frigid water of secularization and uncertainty. Some cling to formularies such as the 39 Articles, believing they should, and in some cases always have, acted as an Anglican confession that is perfect and timeless in their authority. Others cling to the Bible, loosened from the moorings of the interpretation found throughout the primitive Church, the Fathers. Still others seek to re-invent Anglicanism, merging it into the "Pan-evangelical" movement that does little to assert anything of an identity.

There are two things that must be agreed on as we approach any kind of reform:

1. There has never been a perfect moment by which we can model the Church after: No Freeze Framing!
2. Historic formularies such as the 39 Articles fell victim to the violent changes of the times they were born and must he held in check by the mind of the Christian Church throughout the centuries. The consensus found in the Ecumenical Councils and the undivided One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the first one thousand years of our Lord provides us with a strong and complete sense of the Christian faith. The same revelation of Scripture and the Holy Spirit should not look very different from what we believe is right in the here and now. Where there is differences, it is up to us to change our pitch to match the harmony of the saints that have gone before.

The second realization actually strengthens "Anglicanism Proper" by honouring the true history of the theology and doctrine of the Anglican Church. Unlike other protestant bodies, Anglicanism isn't marked by sharp breaks and re-breaks in it's history. After the break from Rome, the pendulum swung very reformed, back to very Catholic, and then to alternate points between. It took over one hundred years for the English Reformation to be settled with the thoughtful and cogent works of Richard Hooker, setting the groundwork for a via-media or Middle Way by which to run the course of our faith.

My priest recently met with an Orthodox priest about the use of our parish facilities. In their conversation our Priest explained the Anglican outlook employing Tradition, reason, and experience as guiding lights as we live out our faith (all advocated by Hooker). The Orthodox priest replied with the eastern orthodox perspective saying " We have Tradition, Tradition, and Tradition".

St. Vincent of Lerrins ancient cannon, "we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all", gives us a very safe understanding of the Christian faith, and this rule of faith as established by the ancient and undivided Church is the very essence by which any formlarie of the Church needs to be judged or interpreted. It is this lens of the entire history of the Church that keeps us believing what is reasonable and determines what should and should not shape our experience.

Back to the reformation; it was the will of the reformers to purge the church of those practices that had arisen as traditions of men that had no basis in the continuing Apostolic Tradition, Bible, or what was repugnant to these two. The English reformation was also some what of a fluid principle, a gentleman's agreement that allowed a workable solution based on a Creedal Christianity as apposed to the legislated authority of the Roman Church or puritanical reformers at home or abroad.

Anglicanisms chrism lies in the grease between the wheels that affords a certain variety, a moral and philosophical exchange that  gives the process of religion legs. We posses a unique quality of allowance, that is willing to work in the mess of humanity. Our call is that of the Good Samaritan, being willing to take on the mess of humanity, willing to mend the wounds the Levite and priest were not. In our zeal to restore some kind of order and function to our common life and ministries, we must still be willing to engage the mess of brokenness instead of reciting formularies that are rigidly set in a certain time and place.

By looking to the grand Tradition of the Christian Church, especially that of the early fathers and doctors, we find a constant theme of holiness and orthodoxy that the reformers sought to re-gain; this should still be our goal. Our choice is clear, follow the letter of the law and risk losing many essentials of our faith, or be led by the spirit of the the law which seeks to understand the very essence of the thing we hold so dear. Orthodoxy is found in the witness of the church that has gone before and can be seen in the consistency of it's thought, will, and actions as they are consistent with the revelation found in Scripture.

Jeff Wilson

portions in quotation are taken from:

"Anglicanism Proper"
By deathbredon
http://rtbp.wordpress.com/author/deathbredon/
May 2010

Images and Icons: Engaging our senses in life and worship

Images used for conveying messages are increasingly used in modern life. In the middle ages, images were often used in conveying secular as well as religious meaning. The advent of the Gutenberg printing press and the increase of literacy changed this. As more and more people were able to read, the written word became dominant, especially in Christian circles, in convening important information.

Nowadays one can hardly drive down a city street, walk through a shopping centre, sit in a restaurant, or use a computer without being spoken to by multiple ‘icons’. Although the written word is still a primary form of documentation and communication, the use of icons has proliferated and is now essential in conveying quick, easily understandable information across social, cultural or linguistic lines. Weather this be a sign telling us which washroom in a public place we are to use depending on our gender, warning signs of traffic changes ahead, or opening the internet browser of our choice, society is increasingly using images to convey messages.

The use of imagery has marked Christian worship for thousands of years. In churches there are crosses reminding us of the sacrifice of Jesus as he died on a cross and rose from the dead. Stained glass windows show icons of Christ and accounts found in the Scriptures. Some places of worship include images depicting Christian saints having lived holy lives worthy of our attention as they point the way for us to practically follow Jesus. We live in a fast paced culture that engages all of our senses, the more of our senses that are engaged the greater the likely hood a connection is made; the same could be said for our worship.

I remember the first time I attended an Anglican Church. As a baptized Christian  I was able to receive communion; as I did I began to notice the imagery and beauty of the worship I was participating in. I knelt at the rail, my mind being instructed by the action of my body as I knelt before God. I looked up and saw a beautiful stained glass window of Jesus wearing a crown, holding a lantern, showing me the path of righteousness and friendship with him. I saw a cross, instilling the reality of Christ’s death and resurrection; a noble gesture, and cosmic reality that opened the door of God’s grace allowing me to know God and grow in him. I was then blessed with the sign of the cross, confirming my relationship with my Savior-King as I walked with him towards death of those things that beset me so I could experience the new life of his resurrection, alongside him through his action in me. I did this alongside many others, the church, which is an icon of Christ (representative of Christ) in the world today. It struck me like a lightning bolt, this was no dead ritual, this was the reality of my heart being joined with God’s and many others, both next to me and around the world, past and present. I found even more imagery in the bread and wine being the body and blood of Jesus, as we partake of all that is him.

The printed word is still very much with us, but with this resurgence in icons and imagery for secular purpose, it seems only natural images and other things that engage our senses would serve us well in our worship, understanding, growth, and experience in God.

Jeff Wilson

Anglicanism Proper

 Anglicanism Proper

By deathbredon
http://rtbp.wordpress.com/author/deathbredon/
May 2010

Although today the term "Anglican" is most commonly employed in a generic or institutional sense to refer to the official communion of the Church of England, such usage is relatively new. Indeed, "Anglicanism," in its more traditional sense, more narrowly refers to a particular point of view within the Established Church and its progeny that "wished to see neither servility to Rome nor subservience to Geneva but a Church of England truly catholic in all essentials and yet cleansed and reformed from the abuses which and gathered round it during the Middle Ages."

As such, Anglicanism proper owes it origin firstly to the work of John Jewel and Richard Hooker, who defended the English Religious Settlement against both Roman and Puritan criticism, and secondly, to their "successors in the seventeenth century [who] did much, by their lives as well as by their [writings,] to give quality and strength to the Church of England and earned for the English clergy the title of stupor mundi, 'the wonder of the world.'

Among the most distinguished of these successors, apart from [Archbishop] Laud, was a group of Cambridge scholars including such famous names as Lancelot Andrewes, Richard Montague, John Cosin, Thomas Fuller, Jeremy Taylor, George Herbert, and Nicholas Ferrar."

"The point of view of [Anglicanism proper] may be summed up in the dying words of Thomas Ken, who had inherited the great tradition laid down by the Caroline Divines. 'I die,' he said, 'in the Holy Catholic and Apostolick Faith, professed by the whole Church before disunion of the East and West. More particularly, I dye in the Communion of the Church of England, as it stands distinguished from all Papal and Puritan Innovations, and as it adheres to the doctrine of the Cross.' These words indicated the basis of the work of the Caroline Divines."

The Anglican party, then, adhered the express intent of Elizbeth I, who famously said, "We and our people - thanks be to God - follow no novel and strange religion, but that very religion which is ordained by Christ, sanctioned by the primitive and Catholic Church and approved by the consistent mind and voice of the most early Fathers." Indeed, "theirs was an attempt to get back to the early Church before the accretions of the Middle Ages [that] the reformers were so anxious to get rid of."

"The Anglicans, [then,] stood between two great religious systems. On one side was Rome, active and aggressive under the impetus of the Counter-Reformation, trying to rebuild a Christendom shattered by the cataclysms of the sixteenth century. But to the Anglicans, there could be no return to Rome since the faith which she taught was, in their eyes, impure–corrupted by the 'innovations' which were no part of the 'Holy Catholic and Apostolick Fatih' as taught by the Primitive Church."

On the other side were the Calvinists and Lutherans, who had separated from catholic tradition and had magnified certain doctrines out of all proportion. The Anglicans were equally clear that they could not fall into line with them since they had abandoned things which the Early Church thought essential." Consequently, the Anglicans, who both received and sought to maintain and to perfect the English Religious Settlement "aimed at a Via Media between two extremes; but the Via Media which they sought was not a compromise or a 'lowest common denominator;' rather it was a real attempt to recover the simplicity and purity of primitive Christianity."

In sum, it is the vision of Anglicanism proper that is worthy of preservation today and which must be the basis of hope for the future of the Anglican Communion as an institution. Indeed, the later is hardly worth saving but for the former, as institutional Anglicanism void of the substance of Anglicanism proper cannot hope to continue as a discreet entity, as it would be nothing more than a duplicate of one or more preexisting deviations from the authentic and pure Christianity that abound today.

Indeed, those in the Established Communion that would like to see "Anglicanism" merge into the Liberalism of Mainstream Protestantism, or be absorbed into a somewhat conservative pan-Evangelical Movement, or even to once again submit to the Rome yoke, simply are not worthy of the appellation.

Moreover, either by intent or ignorance, they are engaged in a sort intellectual dishonesty when they hold themselves out as Anglicans–for they are but hollow Anglicans whose only claim to the title is by the thinest of formalistic claims. Yeah, now is the time for those loyal to the Elizabethan Settlement and its patristic method to reassert themselves as the true heirs and successors of the mantle of Anglicanism.


-----For quotations and authority, see, J H R Moorman, A HISTORY OF THE CHURCH IN ENGLAND (3d ed., Moorehouse, 1980) pp. 200, 212-16, 225-226, 233-235

Evangelism at a Funeral?

On January 10, 2009, my beloved grandfather, Bob Wilson passed away in his hospital room after a visit with all four of his sons. It came as somewhat of a surprise but I know that his flesh no longer plagues him.

On Friday January 15 the funeral was held at St. Matthews Anglican Church. I called Rev. Mike, our Rector to see if he would accommodate another pastor from an evangelical church with a service honouring both traditions as this was the pastor of my grandfathers current church. Rev. Mike graciously agreed to work with this minister.  Being Christians, my father and I spoke of Bob's decision later in life to serve Christ. The Preacher took a different approach. He was slick, polished, and told two stories that had nothing to do with my Grandfather. He made every attempt to grip the emotions of the mourning into making a decision for Christ there and then. Usually when the good news of Christ is proclaimed my heart responds with joy, but not here, not to this.

He told a story of a little boy who wanted to go to the circus. One day, the circus finaly came to his town. The boy got up that morning and began to walk down the road with other happy people  in a great parade leading to the circus. He saw some exciting things and eventually saw people thrusting money into a hat; he too thrust his money into the hat and went home.

The preacher then asked the question "does anyone see the problem... the little boy never made it to the circus." He then explained to everyone in the church he hoped they all enjoyed the parade but not to confuse it with the circus. He went on to described my grandfather as having a strong Christian faith which brought him to the circus. He then stated, "I trust that you too will make the right decision" so we would not miss this circus. I understand that this is an emotional time but I felt betrayed. I wanted to yell out to him "Don't worry, we have been to the circus, and your the clown". I felt he betrayed the memory of my grandfather and described a man that those closest too him did not recognize. But I am not so much upset with the man but the paradigm.

The paradigm of this preacher is: any opportunity I have to share the raw gospel message I must use to inform people of the consequences of not making a decision for Christ. I will contrast this with the understanding I now have as an Anglican Christian. Bob Wilson, child of God was called by Jesus to serve him, Bob responded, and walked with Him. Bob was not perfect but he grew and transformation was evident in his later years as he walked more and more in Christ. This transformation points to Jesus the Son of God and this relationship brought Bob into the loving arms of his Savior and was transforming him throughout his life into the image of God.

Paradigm of the Preacher: Decide now, this may me God's only chance.
Paradigm of the Grandson: Through Bob I see Jesus Christ, I invite you too see him too.

The importance of reaching the lost should never lead to coercion. Those who tell flowery stories in an attempt to manipulate the senses tell a sad tale of the love of Christ. I would personally give the Holy spirit more credit in the conversion process than this. I think St. Francis of Assisi said it best:

"Preach the gospel always, if necessary use words."