Nielsen’s Nook

In about 347 A.D. Cyril of Jerusalem laid out a succinct list of four connotations that were circumscribed by the notion of catholicity:

The Church is called ‘catholic’ or ‘universal’ because it has spread throughout the entire world, from one end of the earth to the other. Again, it is called catholic because it teaches fully and unfailingly all the doctrines which ought to be brought to men’s knowledge, whether concerned with visible or invisible things, with the realities of heaven or the things of earth. Another reason for the name ‘catholic’ is that the Church brings under religious obedience all classes of men, rulers and subjects, learned and unlettered. Finally, it deserves the title ‘catholic’ because it heals and cures without restriction every type of sin that can be committed in soul or in body, and because it possesses within itself every kind of virtue that can be named, whether exercised in actions or in words or in some kind of spiritual charism [(i.e., spiritual gift)].^[1]

Geographic Ubiquity

While the invisible church is no doubt spread across the face of this earth in places like Egypt and Iraq, Nigeria and Uganda, India and Uzbekistan, China and Laos, Brazil and Mexico, and Britain and the United States, Cyril’s ecclesiology does not so readily allow for the abstraction of the visible from the invisible. It is certainly the invisible church that is Christ’s instrument to create in us a theological world-view, to disciple us and to heal us from our many sins. However, it is that in the context of the visible church.

So catholicity is very important because the visible is connected to the invisible ostensibly. Our presence as a church in the area in which we live does say something about the invisible church (may we not misrepresent it!). The connectedness of all who are part of the invisible church via Jesus is to be demonstrated in the relation of the organization and attitude of the visible church. In other words, while the visible church is bound together and throttled forward by polity and committees, these are but instrumental vehicles that correspond to the invisible catholic work of the Spirit. Nevertheless, independent churches would be inconsistent with what Cyril seem to articulate here because they do not visibly demonstrate the invisible connection to the church worldwide.

Look for part 2 tomorrow…

^[1] The Catechetical Instructions of Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, d. 386, Catechesis 18, 23-5: Patrologia Graeca  33, 1043-50. Tr. The Office of Readings according to the Roman Rite (Slough, 1983), p. 926. As cited in G. R. Evans and J. Robert Wright, The Anglican Tradition : A Handbook of Sources (London: SPCK, 1991), 27.

Parts: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

Translation

the resurrection of the body, [1] and life eternal. [2] Amen.

[1] σαρκὸς (σάρξ) is the word St. John uses to speak of the Incarnation where the Logos became flesh (ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο, Jn 1:14). This is the flesh that was just like ours. The difference between us and Jesus is that Jesus overcame sin, and swallowed up death by his own death. τοῦτο γινώσκοντες ὅτι ὁ παλαιὸς ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος συνεσταυρώθη, ἵνα καταργηθῇ τὸ σῶμα τῆς ἁμαρτίας, τοῦ μηκέτι δουλεύειν ἡμᾶς τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ· “This we know, that our outmoded self was crucified with him with the result that the body of sin was sacked, that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.” (Ro 6:6, author’s translation)

[2] αἰώνιον (αἰώνιος) that is, life without beginning or end, timeless, eternal. This is the kind of life that Jesus possessed as the Second Person of the Trinity. It is the kind of life that swallowed whole the condemned life that humanity ekes out as a result of the Fall and sin. It is the life that a New Humanity, one rooted in Christ Jesus participates in by mystical union, Christ giving himself to his people via means of grace, (e.g., the Word, sacraments and prayer).

Parts: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

Translation

the forgiveness [1] of sins

[1] When used with ἁμαρτία, ἄφεσις speaks of the forgiveness or “cancellation of the guilt” of sins (BAGD). 1 Esdr 4:62 employs the word to denote “release from captivity” in the context of Israel being allowed to return from exile to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. The LXX of Isaiah, regarding the Day of the Lord, is compelled “κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν” (Isa 61:1 LXX) to proclaim the release of the captives and restoring sight to the blind. Here ἄφεσιν is used to translate the Hebrew דְּרוֹר (dərôr), which has the idea of liberty or free flowing as in Ex 30:23 where it is used to describe myrrh (BDB). So when ἄφεσιν arrives in the NT there is a tremendous history and colorful circumference to its semantic field (cf. this list from BAGD: Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; Lk 3:3; Lk 24:47; Acts 2:38; Acts 5:31). Thus, the nature of the forgiveness Christians confess is one that is liberating and free-flowing, one that deals with the forensic (cancellation of the guilt) and the existential (liberation from sin’s dark grip).

I was overwhelmed last weekend at the quite sensational(ized) AP news story of J. K. Rowling’s statement that she “always thought of Dumbledore as gay.” As one who has loved reading the Harry Potter books, I wasn’t sure what to make of it. When I read the CNN version of the story the line that seemed to have such a vicious barb was:

Not everyone likes her work, Rowling said, likely referring to Christian groups that have alleged the books promote witchcraft. Her news about Dumbledore, she said, will give them one more reason.

As far as promoting witchcraft, I would think one would be hard pressed to make such a claim of the Potter series. To do so would seem to require one to dismiss Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings and C. S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia with all of its “deep magic” and “magic deeper still.” And, of course, the real question is not the magic of fantasy and fiction but the politics of adding the sexuality to magic. I was not sure what to make of the CNN article. There were myriad feelings and thoughts. I was glad to find out the discussion was not happening with a thousand twelve year-olds or something like that (something the CNN article seemed happy to let one assume).

A colleague of mine pointed me to a piece by John Granger over at HogwartsProfessor.com. Granger has written at least four books on the Potter series. His article is written thoughtfully, with access to primary source material (i.e., Dr. Amy Sturgis, who was at Carnegie Hall and heard J. K. Rowling speak for herself. The assessment, being from a Christian perspective, is worth the read. The following are some summary points taken from the conclusion of the piece:

(1) The meaning of Ms. Rowling’s words are best understood in the contexts of her “connection” that night with the 19 year old woman who asked the question and of the dynamics of the crowd at this Open Book Tour event;

(2) The media presentation of the event as Ms. Rowling’s endorsement of homosexuality and an anti-faith agenda was straight from Rita Skeeter’s notebook and part of their endless campaign to convince the public that Ms. Rowling is the enemy of their enemy, namely, the Church;

(3) The anguished and disappointed response of many Christian readers to these reports was also according to Culture War formula and in keeping with a hyperextended understanding of the word “gay;”

(4) “Dumbledore is gay” no more makes the books an invitation to homosexuality or contrary to orthodox Christian belief than “Sorcerer’s Stone” made them a “gateway to the occult;” and

(5) If you want to understand the ten qualities of postmodern story telling and how Ms. Rowling weaves her engaging stories using all ten, you need to read the Postmodernism chapters of Unlocking Harry Potter: Five Keys for the Serious Reader. (I’d blush about the shameless plug except it’s the only thing I know in print or online that covers this subject.)

A colleague of mine passed a link onto me (thanks Stephanie!) for a blog that deals with all things Inklings. As she said, one of the things so likeable about this blog is its simplicity and conciseness, there is plenty to ponder yet not to much to drive one away. Enjoy The Inklings.

Parts: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

Translation

I believe in the Holy Spirit, [1] the holy catholic [2] church, the communion [3] of saints

[1] τὸ πνευμα το Ἅγιον is a double articular phrase, not uncommon, but seeking to make sure we understand which Spirit the Creed confesses (lit. the Spirit the holy one).

[2] καθολικὴν (καθολικός) speaks of the universal or general “in contrast to a single congregation. The Martyrdom of Polycarp (ca after 156 AD) fleshes out some of the semantics. Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν σωτῆρα τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν καὶ κυβερνήτην τῶν σωμάτων ἡμῶν καὶ ποιμένα τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας. “… Jesus Christ, the savior of our souls and captain of our bodies and shepherd of the catholic church which is throughout the inhabited earth.” (author’s translation)

[3] κοινωνίαν (κοινωνία) is the often used and not-very-understood word for fellowship or communion. Philippians 2:1 speaks of communion of/with the Spirit. Εἴ τις οὖν παράκλησις ἐν Χριστῷ, εἴ τι παραμύθιον ἀγάπης, εἴ τις κοινωνία πνεύματος. If therefore there is any comfort in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any communion with the Spirit. (author’s translation) Semantically, the idea of communion seems to capture the more ready notion of fellowship and its connection to participation. In other words, κοινωνία suggest an active participation in the fellowship that is the basis for all things common.