[faithandlife] CAN THESE BONES LIVE?

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : October 2002 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "Charles Scott" <crscott@...>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 15:32:47 +0000
SON OF MAN CAN THESE BONES LIVE?   EZEK 37:3

Prophecy over these bones, Son of Man!

Every one of us have asked that question; can these bones live?

The articles from the Anglican Communion that I posted today reflected
the frustration of Presiding Bishop Griswold and of Bishop Ingham in
regard to affairs in their spheres of responsibility and their dealings
with their peers.

Regardless of theological, political, or social stances; serious
Christians wonder the same thing about the state of Churches in the
West.  Can these bones live?

We can't help but wonder if the pain is the birth pangs of some greater
new life to come, or the pain of death.

Some have died while wondering what is happening.

Here are the nearly last words of one who wrote often on these matters.

Charles
-------------------------------------

How do we know when we're led by the Holy Spirit?

Dr. Hugh Dempster, Anglican social activist and TOPIC contributor, died 
September 13. This article was submitted last month.

The debate on the blessing of same-sex unions at our recent Synod, and its 
aftermath,left me with one nagging question. When there is a fundamental 
disagreement within a church body, how do we discern which voice (if any) 
represents the leading of the Holy Spirit?

At Synods and other decision-making meetings of the church, we begin with 
prayer, which typically includes a request for guidance of the Spirit in all 
that we are about to do.

It may be that the various members of such a body have somewhat different 
attitudes to this act. Perhaps for some it is more or less a formality, 
expressing and focusing our determination to proceed with all the wisdom and 
care we can muster.

For many, I am sure, it is much deeper than that; they believe firmly that 
God does hear and answer prayer, that the Spirit does guide us, and 
therefore that such guidance will be given in response to that prayer. My 
expectation is that this latter group would include most of those we might 
label "conservative" Christians - their faith strongly based in the Bible 
and church tradition.

This expectation reshapes my question. In its light, should I not also 
expect that most members of Synod (but especially those holding the 
"conservative" attitude to prayer) would trust the guidance of the Spirit to 
be reflected in the result of our carefully chosen
decision process: a full and thoughtful debate, listening for the Spirit's 
voice, followed by a carefully considered vote? Obviously, that did not 
happen.

Moreover, it was the "conservative" members (if I may continue to use this 
label for simplicity), whom I had expected to be the most certain that the 
voice of the Spirit would emerge, who rejected the decision.
One answer I can anticipate - and indeed it has already been given: "The 
Synod's decision is inconsistent with the teaching of scripture and the 
traditions of the church, and therefore it cannot represent the voice of the 
Spirit." That assumes that our understanding of scripture has always been 
correct, that our traditions have always
matched God's will, and that no change in circumstances can make any 
difference.

In short, that the Spirit never has need to say anything new. That seems to 
me highly unlikely, and indeed there are scriptural examples to the 
contrary. Let me cite some words from the Spirit which were totally at odds 
with the hearer's expectation.

Abraham had God's promise that he would be father of a great nation, but he 
and Sarah were childless, and aging to the point that they laughed when the 
promise was repeated. Yet a son was born, and given the name Isaac, 
reflecting that laugh. Imagine for a moment what that boy must have meant to 
Abraham, and then how he felt when, one
day, the voice of the Spirit came again (Gen. 22): "Take your son Isaac, 
whom you love, to Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering." Surely, 
that could not be God's voice, asking him to throw away God's greatest gift! 
Yet Abraham trusted, and obeyed - and of course was rewarded in the end.

Peter, in Joppa (Acts 10), was praying on the rooftop and became hungry. 
While waiting for food, he had a vision of a sheet being lowered from heaven 
containing all kinds of animals, and a voice saying "Rise, kill and eat." 
But apparently the animals were not acceptable under Jewish law, for Peter 
refuses: "I have never eaten anything common or unclean." The voice comes 
again, "What God has cleansed, you must not call common." Just then 
messengers arrive from a Roman centurion, and Peter understands that he is 
to go with these gentiles - surely an act at variance to his understanding 
of Jewish law and tradition.

"Behold, I make all things new" says the voice from the throne near the end 
of John's apocalypse (Rev. 21:5). How can we assume that no new word will 
ever come from God?

Let's see, then. We think of God as our loving parent, and we readily 
acknowledge ourselves as sinners. I can imagine, in some situation, God's 
paternal voice almost shouting "NO! That's NOT what I said - you've got it 
wrong!" And then, more gently, "Look. You know that I love you, just as I 
love all my creatures. And all I really expect in return is that you love me 
too. But that implies that you reflect
my love to each of your fellow creatures - your neighbours, all of them. It 
is not up to you to choose who to love, or who to despise: remember the 
example I once gave you, in which the one who showed true love was, of all 
things, a Samaritan - one of a group most hated and despised by my people of 
that day!

"It is not up to you to decide that some other is a greater sinner than 
yourself, and hence unworthy of your love (and mine): that is mine to judge! 
Nor is it your responsibility to withhold my blessing from any who seek it: 
have I not said 'Ask, and it shall be given you'?"

I believe that God has been saying something like this to us through our 
three recent Synods. If so, we in this diocese are being called to lead, not 
just the Anglican Communion but the whole Christian world, into a new and 
clearer understanding of God's law and God's love. Have we a compelling 
reason to believe that such a call is impossible? Or do we have the 
conviction and courage to hear and respond to that call?
- J. R. Hugh Dempster
©Copyright Diocese of New Westminster, 2002.













_________________________________________________________________
Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. 
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp