Uncategorized

I receive a daily reminder of events in Christian History over the centuries.  Today, Easter Sunday of 2020, had the following entry. 

April 12, 1944: The National Religious Broadcasters Association is founded in Columbus, Ohio, in order to represent and build the credibility of Evangelical Christian broadcasters after a set of regulations, proposed by the Federal Council of Churches, banned paid religious programming and limited broadcast personalities to denominationally approved individuals, effectively removing Evangelicals from the airwaves.

I wonder how the message of Christ resurrection would have been published in Jesus’ day?  Who would have published the headlines?  What would have been said? 

“He is risen.” 

How would this have been written – according to women, to soldiers, to disciples, to religious leaders, to the ordinary person?

Perhaps I’m asking too much.  As a person trained in archives, I know that documents don’t always survive.  The question then is whether the documents we do have are reliable.  I recognize that they may contain a bias.  But to the best of the author’s ability, is this reporting or just wishing?

Without turning this into a full-blown research paper, I go with what is found in the Bible.  Reliable and proven over the centuries through word and deed.

He is risen.  He is risen indeed.

As I was writing this post, I received word that a friend of mine had just died of a heart attack.  The post seemed to make all the more sense!  Here is what I had written.

A best seller made the way around Europe – called the “Ars Moriendi”.  The date was around 1415 and was in part inspired by the Black death (the Bubonic Plague) of 60 years earlier.

The Art of Dying (Ars Moriendi) was read by a population that had experienced a pandemic of huge proportions.  The text was put together by the Catholic Church to help Christians address their own deaths.

In this last month we have become a society that needs to consider our own deaths outside of scientifically (psychologically, socially, medically, mathematically) proposed approaches.  In 2015 a book examining the idea of the Ars Moriendi was published.  The authours wrote an academic tome examining where we are at in the 21st Century – how we have moved from art to technology/scientism in our approach to death.  [Lydia S. Dugdale, editor.  Dying in the twenty-first century:  toward a new ethical framework for the art of dying well. MIT Press, 2015]. 

While I have not read the enitre text, here is a part of Dugdale’s text that describes the original “Ars Moriendi” from the 1400’s.

“These books emphasize that a Christian can prepare for a good death by leading a repentant and righteous life.  They argue that the dying faithful should not fear death, since God is in control of every moment including death itself.  The texts warn against temptations to unbelief, despair, impatience, pride and avarice and lead the dying through a series of questions for reaffirming belief and receiving consolation. 

The Ars Moiendi texts also prescribe specific practices and prayers that might be performed by attendants on behalf of the dying – activities that would , in turn, encourage them to prepare for their own deaths”

I wonder if it is time to write another book on the “ART” of dying versus the many texts we have on the “TECHNOLOGY” of dying?

From a friend of mine (thanks, Carol).  One of those thoughts that just pop into her mind, formed in poetry and rich with content.

It seems to me that we’re in a time of:

Sketching all of our plans in pencil

Engraving our commitments in stone

Well, a new age is dawning – and its not the age of Aquarius!

If church can be virtual, how is communion to be conceived?  Can this be done online, or do we need to be present together?  Who are the officiants?  And many more questions.

Here is a reply to one such thread that I posted today:

In the 1970’s, at Canadian Bible College, the question was whether we could hold communion off campus without a faculty member present. A question of the officiant (sacramental view).

Soon the question was whether there was real presence in the elements – and not just symbols. A desire to go deeper than just a picture but not as far as transubstantiation. A question of the efficacy of communion.

Then we moved to the matter of community – not just a selfish act but one of communion in community. A question of ecclesiology and how we combat selfishness.

Now we are into the whole question of virtuality. There is connectedness (community), but not presence (physical) of the participants. I have been affected by the Salvation Army over the years – they did not have baptism or communion for some time (although in the past decades they have questioned that). There would be no problem with virtuality in this case.

So, just studying historical precedents, you can pick one side or the other.