tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12556957713183466932023-11-15T08:36:23.195-08:00Ascension MissionAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1255695771318346693.post-78646692434259686332014-12-26T13:22:00.000-08:002014-12-26T13:22:01.497-08:00Joel Osteen Wants God to be Quiet.<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Manners are the coin in which love is
paid out. They are one of the main ways that charity begins at home.
They are extremely important in the creation and maintenance of a
healthy atmosphere in any space shared by humans. They go a long way
toward actually making a house a home and actually making a
biological unit a happy, functioning family. In a thousand little
ways throughout one single day spent together, we can chose to show
love and affection and regard for one another or we can chose to
communicate disinterest, disgust, disregard, and even hatred. In a
thousand little ways throughout one single day, we can create and
nourish and strengthen deep, lasting, profound, satisfying
relationships, or we can scratch and tear and damage those
relationships until they actually bleed to death.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Manners are especially important in a
home environment, where we often foolishly think that we can relax
our manners just because we ARE at home. But love most certainly does
NOT mean never having to say you are sorry ! Rather, how we treat the
people to whom we are most bound in this life, our wives, husbands,
sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, etc., will be an indication of
how we shall treat people in other contexts. Charity really must
begin at home, if it is to go anywhere at all, with any hope of being
even moderately well-dressed. Habits will be in place before
principles are ever understood and so parents must instill in their
children the simple, basic habits of courtesy from the earliest
years.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Manners also go a long way toward
creating a healthy work environment. When we treat those around us
with simple courtesy, we usually find it reciprocated. The principle
of "measure for measure"</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
pertains in our public life. Generally
speaking, though obviously not always, the "measure" you
use in your treatment of others is the "measure" you get
back (Luke 6:38). You get treated the way you treat. Difficult, even
volatile situations are often defused by a single word, or even by
the tone in which a single word is uttered, perhaps even by a
wordless gesture. A day at work can be made more pleasant, and
efficiency can be greatly enhanced, simply by the thoughtful
employment of the most basic rules of courtesy.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In Spanish-speaking countries, one
learns to use the subjunctive mood in order to soften requests or
demands. In this way, it is possible to ask for something slightly
indirectly and so much more respectfully. Or it is possible to use
the diminutive form of a word in order to win someone over, to
convince them to help you. "Amigo" or "amiga" can
become "amigito" or "amigita". Thus "friend"
quickly and easily becomes something like "my little buddy"
and so becomes a key to unlock a door which might otherwise stay fast
shut. Manners are the coin in which love is paid out. They are also
very effective social lubricant.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
You will have recognized by now that a
lot of this has to do with what comes out of our mouths. A lot of
this has to do with the words we chose to allow to come out of our
mouths. A lot of this has to do with the tongue. The medieval proverb
is true : the first virtue is to keep your tongue. And here is a
modern 21st century version of that : "Never miss an opportunity
to keep your BIG MOUTH SHUT!" That is, in fact, very good
advice, for the tongue is a deadly weapon :</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
the tongue is a fire, a world of
iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the
whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set
on fire of hell. For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of
serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of
mankind: But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full
of deadly poison.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Therewith bless we God, even the
Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the
similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and
cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. James 3:6-10</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
What can more easily poison the
atmosphere in a house than a whole bunch of people sitting around
griping and complaining about ... well, take your pick : the weather,
their school, their teachers, their neighbours, their friends, their
relatives, each other, their work, their co-workers, their boss,
their church, their pastor, the government, wages, taxes, and, if you
live in Saskatchewan and it is winter, the weather once again
... ? The atmosphere in a home, because of the tongue, often becomes
heavy, oppressive, and dark. In the same way, that atmosphere can
become light, refreshing, liberating, when we learn to use our
tongues to create rather than to destroy, to bless God rather than to
curse man. Again, this is done in the very simplest of ways, with a
word, or even with the slight modulation of the tone of a word.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
All this is a way of saying that it is
important for us to be "positive". We do need to be careful
that what comes out of our mouths is gracious and helpful and
encouraging (Ephesians 4:29). There must always be a significant,
conscious, and very creative gap between the instant an unspoken
thought forms itself in our mind and the instant it goes flying
inexorably out of our mouth to lodge itself in the open and
unsuspecting mind of another. Words carry powerful emotional charges.
They can pierce and hurt and explode. They are missiles. And we need
always to be so careful what sort of impact our words will have on
those around us.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
It is important, therefore, to be
positive. This is especially true for Christians, since we have so
much to be positive about. God <i>is</i> for us and so who can really
be against us ? (Romans 8:31). In a sense, everything, really
everything, has been given to us in Christ (1 Corinthians. 3:22).
Nothing can really hurt us. We are "okay". Why should we
not generally be very positive about life, about our daily
challenges, about our families, about the future, about everything ?
The fact is, our God reigneth (Isaiah 52:7). Hallelujah !</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
So, I agree that it is important to be
positive (and I insist on it very positively in my own home) but,
NOTA BENE, that statement must always, always be very carefully
qualified and cannot be held as the main principle of a philosophy of
life, the unassailable centre of a world-view. To hold to the
principle "always be positive" as if it were an absolute
value, an absolute truth, an unbreakable commandment of God, written
in stone as by His finger, is to be foolish in the extreme. It is
foolish on a very basic level because there are times when we need to
talk about things that will fall into the general category of
"negative". There are times when we really do need to talk
about things that are unpleasant or difficult or painful, times when
we need to be criticized ourselves or when we need to criticize
others. It would be impossible to raise children without punishing
them from time to time or criticizing them, calling attention to
things that they need to change in their behaviour, or in their
appearance, or in their habits. In the same way, it would be
impossible for our economy to function if employers were never
allowed to assess and evaluate and, if necessary, dismiss their
employees. Getting fired cannot usually be considered anything but
"negative", but there are people who need to be fired if
our economy is going to function.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
At a deeper level, holding "be
positive" as the main principle of your philosophy of life,
becomes quickly absurd and even dangerous. When the widely popular
Joel Osteen quips, "If you can't be positive, at least be
quiet", and everyone happily applauds, we need to recognize what
is implied by his words. If
this is actually put in the context of all that he says in general,
it in fact amounts to a denial of reality, and a denial of reality
that sadly deceives others and outrageously insults God. For what is
he really saying but that we ought not to talk about reality, namely,
the reality that this is a fallen world in which we live, and that we
are a fallen race ? And let me point out, when pressed on this, Joel
Osteen readily admits that he will refuse to talk about sin because
it is negative and he just wants to be positive. But sin is real,
both the actual sin that we commit in our thoughts, words, and deeds,
and that latent, inner sin, called "original" or "birth"
sin, that infects every human heart that is born into the world. As
Spurgeon says, "In the youngest breast there lies a stone".
And we need to take that in, even if it is not very positive.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
It is not very positive, but it is
true. Sin is the Great Negative. In the youngest breast there lies a
stone. Human beings are fallen creatures. Who could honestly read
history and think anything different ? Sin is a reality, a very
significant reality. And by refusing to talk about it, people like
Joel Osteen are really just telling God to be quiet. They are saying
that we ought not to talk about certain things that appear in the
Holy Scriptures. They obviously mean to say that God needs an editor.
And they are available. Joel Osteen and others may view the Bible as
a useful resource book for their happy pep talks, but they do not
view it as the Word of God written. And by telling God that He cannot
talk about certain things, which they as "pastors" do
simply by refusing to teach those things, they deceive those who look
to them for wisdom and guidance, ridiculously insulting the God whom
they presume to represent.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
What does it mean to be dead in
trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1) ? Every human being needs to know
the answer to that question. It is, in fact, an accurate description
of everyone that is born into this world. There is a very real sense
in which we enter this world DOA : "dead on arrival". To be
dead in your trespasses and sins means to be in very great danger. It
means to be unable to save yourself, unable to save yourself from the
judgement, the wrath, that your condition really deserves, for God is
holy, and He is light, and there is no darkness in Him at all (1 John
1:5). To be dead in your trespasses and sins means to be condemned
and unable to save yourself from the condemnation that awaits you.
And let us be clear, there is nothing, nothing that can possibly be
more "negative" than this. This is as negative as it gets.
And this is what your condition is, indeed, it is what you ARE apart
from Jesus Christ. This is what every human being is apart from faith
in Jesus Christ.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Only Jesus Christ, only God, can by His
power make you alive when you are dead in your trespasses and sins.
And, please recognize, that you are so dead in your trespasses and
sins that you are entirely unable even to desire him to save you, let
alone turn to Him and ask for His mercy and grace and help. Even that
desire and that turning He must give to you. And, please recognize,
<b>He is in no way obligated to give it to you</b>. God is not
obligated to save anyone. He is not obligated to save you or to save
me. If He left us in our sins, and to the wages they inevitably earn,
i.e. a lost eternity, He would be entirely just.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The wonder is that He does save. By His
grace, and according to His sovereign will, He calls out of death
into life all those whom He chooses to call out of death into life,
all those whom He chooses to save, all those on whom He will have
mercy. We come to Him in repentance and faith, being saved entirely
by His grace, for even our faith in Him is His gift to us (Ephesians
2:8). Salvation is of the Lord Himself, from beginning to end. The
only difference between a believer and an unbeliever is the grace of
God. And, if we are in our right minds, and understand the
alternatives, we shall have it no other way.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Of course, this is precisely why human
beings, however foolishly, hate God and hate the Gospel. The Gospel
is good news, the best news ever, the most "positive" thing
ever, the Great Positive, but it implies our sinfulness and our
complete and utter inability to save ourselves. Man hates this. And
so man will insist upon being "positive" about man and will
do His best to silence God. Man refuses to let God say anything
negative about man. And generally speaking, when folks get all
sensitive and huffy about being judged or criticized, and when they
fire at you the words of Jesus, "Judge not" (Matthew 7:1),
they are really just wanting you to let them alone in their
trespasses and sins. They want the freedom, the right to sin. They
want God to shut-up. In this case, "If you can't be positive
then at least be quiet" really means : "Shut-up. Leave me
alone. I like being dead in my trespasses and sins".
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Thankfully, God is not quiet. And He
will not be silenced by anyone, not huffy sinners nor rich
televangelists. He speaks. He speaks of the reality of sin and of the
reality of His grace and mercy and only fools refuse to hear Him
speak of BOTH those things. But those who do hear Him, who are
willing to hear ALL that He has to say, will hear the most positive
thing that can ever be, or has ever been said to man :</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
All that the Father giveth me shall
come to me ... and him that cometh to me I will in no wise
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
cast out. John 6:37</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
God grant that all who read this may so
come.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1255695771318346693.post-75394754158832679872014-12-17T20:18:00.000-08:002014-12-17T20:18:30.357-08:00The Magistrate to Obey the One, True GodThe Wisdom of the Rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer III.<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
One of the most obvious things about
the Book of Common Prayer (BCP) is the frequency with which it calls
us to pray for those who are set in authority over us, for those who
hold public office in the country in which we live, for our civil
rulers, for kings, princes, presidents, governors, for those who in
times past were referred to as MAGISTRATES. The word "magistrate"
is generally used in our day to refer to a lower court judge or minor
law officer such as a justice of the peace, but in times past was
used to refer to anyone who held high public office or authority in a
country or state. Thus, a king or a prince or a duke or a president
or a prime minister or a supreme court judge, even the consuls of
ancient Rome, all these were referred to as magistrates. And this is
an appropriate usage, as our English word simply comes from the
Latin word for "master".</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Again, one of the most obvious things
about the BCP is the frequency with which its calls us to pray for
these magistrates. The rubrics (the rules for the conduct of the
service) for Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer in the English 1662
BCP require that prayers for the monarch and the royal family be said
daily. This is not optional unless the Great Litany is to be said,
whereupon they may be omitted. In the Great Litany, however, a number
of petitions appear which cover the same themes, so that prayers for
the magistrates form a constant part of the Daily Offices in 1662. It
should be mentioned here that to pray, for example, for Elizabeth II,
the Queen of Canada, is to pray not just for her personally, but for
all those in civil authority in the country, the Queen still being
Head of State in Canada. To pray for her, therefore, is to pray for
the Prime Minister, the Cabinet, and the Federal Parliament, for the
Premiers and the Provincial Legislatures, as well as her other
representatives: the Governor-General and the Provincial
Lieutenant-Governors, the Judiciary, etc. Indeed, it is to pray for
all forms of government in Canada.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Likewise, in the Holy Communion
service in 1662, two prayers are provided for the monarch, one of
which is to be said at each celebration. Prayers on the same theme
are required in the Prayer for the Church Militant, or general
intercession, found in the same service. A prayer for Parliament is
provided in the "Prayers and Thanksgivings" section of the
book, to be used when Parliament is in session.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The rubrics for Morning Prayer and
Evening Prayer in the 1928 American BCP provide optional prayers
"for the President of the United States and All in Civil
Authority" on a daily basis. In Morning Prayer two prayers are
provided one of which may be used. In Evening Prayer one is provided.
In should be noted that, in keeping with the greater flexibility and
greater desire for brevity that is found in 1928, none of these
prayers is required to be said. They may be omitted when the Litany
is used or they may be omitted at the discretion of the Minister.
However, prayers for the civil authorities do still appear in the
Prayer for the Church Militant in the Holy Communion service and
these are not optional. Such prayers are likewise found in the 1928
version of the Great Litany, in the section called "Prayers and
Thanksgivings" and in the very beautiful "Family Prayer"
as well.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
It should also be noted that in the
earlier versions of the American BCP, starting with the 1789 edition,
the prayer for the President in Morning Prayer was NOT optional. When
the Great Litany was said, it was said AFTER the prayer for the
President. This, apparently, was due to the fact that George
Washington, who was an Anglican, lived some eight miles from his
local church. This meant that he did not usually attend the evening
service. Therefore, if the Great Litany was used in the morning (and
it seems likely that it frequently was, in obedience to the rubrics)
and the prayer for the President omitted, he was not going to hear it
very often. He, therefore, requested that it be made a "shall"
rather than a "may", so that he could be present to hear
it. So, in this small but touching way, the first President of the
United States, being a churchman, was allowed to have some influence
on the liturgy of his church. This was apparently not changed until
1928.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
If you have read thus far, you will
likely be aware that these prayers for the magistrate are included in
the BCP simply in obedience to Holy Scripture. The Apostle Paul says
it very clearly in 1 Timothy 2, verses 1 and 2 :</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> I exhort therefore, that, first of
all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be
made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that
we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
It is in obedience to this scriptural
command, then, that we pray daily for our leaders and pray for them
in the context of the Lord's Supper as well.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Significantly, a very important
principle is found in the second verse above. Paul exhorts us to pray
for the magistrate so that "we may lead a quiet and peaceable
life in all GODLINESS and honesty". At first, it may seem odd to
us, living in so-called secular democracies, that there should be a
connection between the magistrate and godliness. Yet, Paul makes the
connection. To Paul, praying for kings and those in authority, means
that we shall be able to lead quiet lives of godliness and honesty.
What is implied in his words, is that the magistrate is to be a
promoter, or a protector, of godliness or of piety.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In Romans 13:1 , we are reminded that
"the powers that be are ordained of God". And we are
exhorted by the Apostle to obey those powers because they are
ordained of God. He even tells us, in verse 2, that to resist the
magistrate is to resist God. But he also makes it clear that the
magistrate is a servant of God, a minister of God, appointed to
protect those who do good and to punish those who do evil. What is
implied here, again, is that the magistrate has a responsibility
himself, an obligation, to uphold what is good, to act and to judge
and to decide according to what is good. For Paul, this can only mean
that the magistrate is to act in accordance with God's Holy Law. In
no other way could they truly be His ministers, His servants.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
This theme appears in other places in
the Scriptures. In Psalm 72: 1,2 we read</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> Give the King thy judgements, O God,
and thy righteousness unto the King's son. Then shall he judge thy
people according unto right: and defend the poor.</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In Psalm 82, verse 1 and 2, God is
represented as appearing among the magistrates of the earth :</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> God standeth in the congregation of
the princes: He is a judge among gods. How long will ye give wrong
judgement: and accept the persons of the ungodly?</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In Proverbs 29, verse 2, we read,</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> When the righteous are in authority,
the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people
mourn.</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In Proverbs 20, verse 28, re read,
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> Mercy and truth preserve the king: and
his throne is upholden by mercy.</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In Isaiah 1, verses 10 and 17, we read,</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers
of Sodom ... learn to do well, seek judgement, relieve the
oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The "powers that be are ordained
of God" but they are also responsible to God to rule according
to His justice, His judgements, His righteousness, His law. This
theme is reflected in many of the prayers for the magistrate found in
the BCP. For example, when we pray for the Queen in the 1662 Holy
Communion service, we pray that she may "know whose minister she
is" (i.e. God's) and that, knowing this, she "may above all
things seek [His] honour and glory". When we pray for the
President in the 1928 Morning Prayer service, we pray that he, and
all those who are in civil authority, may be given by God the</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> wisdom and strength to know and to do
[God's] will ...
</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
and also that they may be filled</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i> with the love of truth and
righteousness.
</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
And what could be more clear than the
prayer "for the whole state of Christ's Church militant here
upon earth" found in the 1662 Holy Communion service? There we
pray that God will "save and defend all Christian Kings,
Princes, and Governors", granting to the reigning sovereign and
"all that are put in authority under him/her, that they may
truly and impartially administer justice, to the punishment of
wickedness and vice, and to the maintenance of true religion and
virtue". A very similar prayer is found in the Holy Communion
service in the 1928 American BCP, with appropriate changes for the
American, republican form of government.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The powers that be may be ordained by
God, but they are also responsible to God for the way in which they
wield their delegated power. Christians are to be good citizens and
to obey their magistrates. But the magistrates themselves are to be
good magistrates and are bound to obey God whom they represent. We
note in the last mentioned prayer that they are even bound to be
concerned for the "maintenance of true religion", that is,
that they are bound to be concerned for the protection of the Gospel.
They do not proclaim the Gospel, that being the role of the Church.
But neither are the civil authorities to be indifferent with regard
to the true religion, rather they are do all they can to uphold and
maintain it. This principle may seem strange even to Christians
raised in the secular atmosphere of 21st century Canada. But it is
given clear expression in the Westminster Confession of Faith,
Chapter XXIII, Section III :</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><i>The
civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of the
Word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of
heaven: yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order,
that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of
God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies and heresies be
suppressed ... </i></span>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">It was given clear
expression at the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, who was asked
this question :</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"> Will you to the
utmost of your powers maintain the laws of God, the true principles
of the Gospel, and the Protestant Reformed Religion established by
law? </span>
</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"> Totally
apart from the question as to whether or not the magistrates in
Canada, or in the United States, or in the United Kingdom, all
understand their responsibilities and actually fulfill them today (a
question that surely needs to be asked frequently), what is clear
from both the Holy Scriptures and the prayers of the BCP, is that
they do have these responsibilities. They are to be "nursing
fathers" to the church (Isaiah 29:43). They are to obey God's
law and even be concerned for godliness and piety. </span>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"> I believe that this
is a great encouragement to Christians. Yes, we are called to obey
the powers that be. But the powers that be are also called to obey
God, whether or not they want to acknowledge it. And it is also clear
in Scripture that we may not obey them if they command us to disobey
the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. For example, the Apostles are
specifically commanded by the Jewish Council and the High Priest NOT
to proclaim the Gospel. But their answer is </span>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><i> we ought to obey
God rather than men (Acts 5:29),</i></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">and they fill
Jerusalem with their preaching.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"> It is a great
encouragement to Christians to know that there is an authority above
the authority of the magistrate, above the authority of the state, to
which the magistrate and the state are ultimately and solemnly
responsible and to whom they will one day give account. It is a great
encouragement to us to remember that the</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"> </span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><i> King's heart is in
the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water; He turneth it
whithersoever he</i></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><i> will. (Prov. 29:1)</i></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">It is the Lord who
sets up kings and presidents and prime ministers and the Lord who
casts them down.</span> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">And there are times
when God will cast them down. As St. Augustine says in the City of
God IX, 4 :</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><i> If justice be taken
away, what are governments but great bands of robbers?</i></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">When the Canadian
Parliament presumes to redefine marriage, it presumes to sit on God's
throne. When it presumes to ignore the murder of unborn children, it
presumes to sit on God's throne. When it presumes to abolish capital
punishment, it presumes to sit on God's throne. But the throne, of
course, is occupied and the One who sits there cannot be robbed of
His power or glory.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"> It is a great
encouragement to Christians to remember that there is a God who rules
over all the kingdoms of this earth, to whom all the magistrates of
this earth are solemnly responsible. And while the church is not
given the power of the sword, as the civil rulers are, yet it is the
role of the church to teach the magistrate what his duty to God is.
Therefore, as we pray daily for the magistrate, let us also pray that
the church will awaken again to all her duty, that the Gospel will be
faithfully proclaimed, and that all the rulers of all the nations
will be taught to obey all that the one, true God has commanded. </span>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><i> And Jesus came and
spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in
earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching
them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo,
I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew
28:18-20)</i></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i><br />
</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1255695771318346693.post-69592958259893796942014-12-15T11:04:00.001-08:002014-12-15T11:04:50.122-08:00Canadian Diversity, Canadian Atheism<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In October of this year,
two acts of terrorism were committed on Canadian soil, one in
Montreal, one in Ottawa. In each case, a Canadian serviceman was
murdered by an individual identifying himself as a Muslim. In
response to these attacks, some in Canada have suggested that "our"
Canadian model of diversity, with its key-notes of pluralism,
multi-culturalism, tolerance, and inclusivity, has been
insufficiently taught to new immigrants, to our children, and in our
communities. It is thought that the men who committed those murders
had not been properly instructed in the importance of "Canadian
values" and had not properly understood what the core of
Canadian identity really is, namely, a deep commitment to diversity,
multi-culturalism, pluralism, tolerance, etc.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Some in Canada (for
example, Mr. Farid Rohani of the Laurier Institution) have therefore
called for a renewed emphasis on "Canadian diversity" and
for a new effort by those in authority to teach it in our schools and
communities. It has been suggested that religious schools should be
denied funding unless they teach pluralistic "values".
Usually included in the notion of diversity or pluralism will be the
following : freedom of choice (read abortion), gay rights, the
importance of celebrating different cultures and ethnicities, gender
equality, freedom of religion, and a separation of church and state
or religion and state. Again, this is assumed by many to form the
core of our Canadian identity.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Recently, however, a
survey was conducted by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation. When
Canadian respondents were asked to list 10 values in order of
importance, multi-culturalism, defined as "respect for cultural
and religious differences", was not high on the list. But 64
percent of respondents did agree with the statement that "Canadian
multi-culturalism allows people to pursue certain cultural practices
that are incompatible with Canadian laws and norms". This
suggests that many Canadians are concerned that pluralism or
multi-culturalism is itself a problem, not that it has been
insufficiently taught to new immigrants, etc. This also calls into
question the assumption that it is pluralism, tolerance, and
inclusivity that make up the "core of our identity" as
Canadians. I suspect that a desire for peace, order, and good
government are more indicative of what is in that core.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
More importantly, many
fail to realize what actually lies behind the constellation of ideas
that make up what is called "Canadian diversity". Again,
these ideas will include : freedom of choice, freedom of religion
(understood in a particular sense), respect for different cultures,
gay rights, equality of the sexes, a separation of church and state
(again understood in a particular sense). The last in this list is of
particular importance here. <b>What needs to be recognized is that to
teach these things is to seek to impose a very definite world-view on
Canadians. </b>And what also needs to be recognized is that they are
indicative of a world-view that is essentially <b>atheistic</b>. They
do not represent some safe, neutral, common ground existing in the
midst of a battle between competing cosmologies, such as, for
example, the Christian or the Muslim or the Marxist interpretation of
reality. They simply represent one more world-view competing for
dominance. They represent an atheistic view of reality. And I say so
because of what is generally understood by "separation of church
and state" : that with regard to the formation of Canadian
values, with regard to ethics and morals in Canada, with regard to
legislation and governance in Canada, God may NOT be considered
relevant. <b>This is practical atheism </b>: God and religion are not
allowed to have any influence in the development of our supposedly
shared world-view.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The problem for many
people, perhaps, is that the question "which God, which
religion?" seems to be unanswerable. Because it is assumed that
all religions are equal, and that Canadians should be free to be
Christians or Hindus or Buddhists or Satanists, it is thought
impossible to allow ANY religion to have any influence in guiding the
formation of our values, ethics, or laws. What is then assumed is
that the government must take up a <b>neutral position</b>. It is
further assumed that this is actually what has happened. But nothing
could be further from the truth. <b>Neutrality is a myth</b>. The
pluralism that exists in Canada (still a relatively recent
development) is not religiously neutral. It constitutes a real
world-view, a set of propositions or assumptions or beliefs about the
way the world really is, about reality. It involves an interpretation
of reality and that interpretation is atheistic.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Incidentally, as a
Christian, I do not believe that the cause of Christianity can be
advanced by the use of the iron or civil sword, that is, by coercion.
A forced conversion is no conversion at all. I therefore believe in
"freedom of religion" in that qualified sense but I do not
believe that all religions are equal or that the civil powers are
free from the obligation to uphold and protect true religion.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
To return to my main
point, one has a world-view, one has an idea about the way the world
really is, when one assumes that a child can be aborted at any time
during a pregnancy. This is a materialistic, naturalistic world-view
which assumes that human beings have no soul or spirit, that there is
no life after death. The child is thought of merely as physical or
material ... as unwanted, inconvenient tissue. One has a world-view
when one believes that religion is a personal, private matter, which
can never have relevance for the public square. Such a position
assumes that all religions are essentially man-made and do not reveal
divine truth, which truth, if thought real, would certainly HAVE to
be relevant and authoritative in both private life AND the public
square. Even if one assumed that God had revealed a little of His
truth in each of the religions, it would then be reasonable to try to
gather up all that scattered truth and apply it to the formation of
our laws and customs. But the assumption is that religion is simply
irrelevant in public discourse, and that, therefore, no such divine
truth has ever been revealed. In the same way, one has a world-view
when one assumes that it is good for two men to marry and have sex
with one another. This is a world-view that denies a Creator God with
special ends and purposes for His creation, and specifically with His
own special purposes for man and woman. It denies a Creator God by
denying any purpose for the biological differences between male and
female and so it implies an atheistic, evolutionary understanding of
man and the universe.</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
As a Christian, I assume
that there should be a distinction made between church and state.
They are different spheres, with different purposes. But by that I do
not mean that God is to be separated from the state. Both church AND
state are under God's authority and both are answerable to Him. God's
law, as revealed in the Bible, is no less relevant in Ottawa than it
is in my home. It is no less relevant in the public square than it is
in my private life. Ottawa is obligated to obey God. The God of the
Bible is the God of the Universe and so He is the God of Ottawa, too,
and Washington, London, Moscow, Beijing, Riyadh, etc. In fact, I
assume that the powers that be in Canada, our elected leaders, our
civil magistrates or rulers, are appointed by God. That means that
they are responsible to Him and ought to enact laws that are in
harmony with His divine laws. I also assume that every human being is
likewise responsible to God, the God of the Bible, and will be judged
by Him according to His law, and so condemned, or saved by Him
according to His electing love and grace.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I realize that some may
now want to point out that not everyone in Canada shares my Christian
world-view. I am fully aware of that. But here in Canada, and
everywhere in the world, different world-views are at variance with
each other, in competition with each other, in conflict with each
other. What needs to be realized is that our so-called "Canadian
diversity", our so-called pluralism, is just another of those
competing world-views. It is not neutral ground, it is not a haven of
peace in the midst of a battle. It is one of the armies in the
battle, a world-view, and an essentially atheistic one, which is most
definitely at variance with the other world views ... and especially
with the Christian.
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
So, it is unrealistic to
expect Christians simply to abandon their world-view and acquiesce in
another, alien, God-denying one. It has been suggested recently that
all religious schools in Canada should be made to teach gay rights,
freedom of choice, etc. And it has been suggested that public
funding should be withheld from them unless they do. So be it. I
doubt that Christians are going to abandon the truths of their
religion just because the government refuses to fund their private
schools. If they did, they would not be Christian. But why would we
accept that the Christian world-view cannot be allowed to influence
Canadian values, or Canadian laws, but that an atheistic world-view
can and must be imposed upon Christian schools and Christian
children, by the civil authorities? Apparently, I am not allowed to
impose my world-view on anyone, but some clearly have every intention
of imposing theirs on me, and on my children and grandchildren.</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Lastly, I should mention
that I also assume the following : that, in time, Canada will again
become a Christian nation, more truly Christian than it has ever been
in the past. I assume that God's dominion will truly be "from
sea to sea" as is implied in Canada's motto, taken from Psalm
72:8. I assume that His laws will be respected and obeyed, being
written not in stone but in the hearts of the majority of men. At
that time the preamble of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
will become true, where it says that "Canada is founded upon
principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law".
Someone involved in the creation of that charter had the sense to
realize, as recently as 1982, that those two things stand or fall
together. I also assume that, in time, the battle between the various
world-views will end, not only in Canada, but all over the world, and
that the Christian world-view will be triumphant, even before the
restitution of all things. In the meantime, it is of the greatest
import that, as Canadians, we be very aware of what is actually being
said when we are talking about "Canadian diversity", and
what it is that some are actually wanting to do, namely, impose an
atheistic world-view on a whole nation and on people who are not
atheists.</div>
<br />
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<br />
<div lang="en-CA" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1255695771318346693.post-90529300543744915362014-12-06T09:02:00.002-08:002014-12-06T09:03:55.264-08:00The Wisdom of the Rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Part II - The Daily Offices As Daily
Offices.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Daily Morning and Evening Prayer
constitute one of the greatest treasures to be found in the Anglican
Book of Common Prayer (abbreviated hereafter as "BCP" in
this post). They provide a rich diet of God's Word for the daily
sustenance of God's people. We are told that in the early church, in
different parts of the known world, there were two daily services
provided for all the people which were regularly attended by them. As
time passed, these daily offices seem gradually to have become the
preserve of "professional" prayers, the clergy and
lay-brothers/sisters in the monasteries, in the large cathedral
churches and basilicas, or in the chapels of university colleges. The
two early offices developed, with regional variations, into a set
pattern of multiple prayer services or so-called Day Hours (Lauds,
Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers and Compline) and one Night Office
(Mattins). Obviously, such a full daily (and nightly) round of prayer
could not be observed by the ordinary folk of the parish who laboured
in the fields or in the markets or in other vocations throughout the
day.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The English Reformation of the 16th
century has been described as, in part, a "rediscovery of the
congregation". The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, in
the first (1549) and second (1552) editions of the English BCP,
sought to re-established two daily services of prayer for the
benefit, not just of the clergy and monastics, but of all the people
of England's parishes. Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer, as they
appear in the prayer books of 1549 and 1552, use elements of the
medieval Day Hours and Night Office, but in a form greatly
simplified. They were designed to be vehicles for the real conversion
and spiritual growth of both clergy and people by means of the
consistent and systematic public reading and hearing of the Word of
God.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Cranmer himself in his Original Preface
(1549) to the BCP, points out that the services of the Church of
England had become so complicated that "many times there was
more business to find out what should be read, than to read it when
it was found out" (I cannot help but see a smile pass across his
face as he writes this). He also makes clear what his purpose was in
supplying the simplified Daily Offices. He wanted the Scriptures to
be read right through without their "continual course"
being broken by interpolated bits and scraps, such as hymns, anthems,
responds and invitatories. That is, whole books of the Bible were to
be read through chapter by chapter, day by day, month by month, year
by year. He provided a Calendar, or list of daily Bible readings,
which we call the Daily Office Lectionary, "which is plain and
easy to be understood". That is, he provided an</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
order of prayer, and for the reading
of Holy Scripture, much agreeable to the mind and purpose of the old
fathers, and a great deal more profitable and commodious, than that
which was of late used. (from the Original Preface of 1549)</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
His guiding purpose, in other words,
was spiritual edification, the building up of both clergy and people,
by means of the constant and faithful proclamation of the Word of
God. His desire was to profit the people entrusted to him by making
God's truth accessible to them.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I believe that one of our greatest
responsibilities as faithful Anglicans is to honour the Archbishop's
purposes and intentions. I am not ashamed of being called an Anglican
when that word is properly defined. The Bible, with the use of the
Prayer Book, and a faithful, honest, humble submission to the 39
Articles of Religion (which includes, by definition, a submission to
the three Creeds of the primitive Church, to the Homilies of the
Church of England and to the Textus Receptus), with the authority of
the Bible being first and foremost, these give us a way of being
Christian that is healthy, rich, and deeply rooted in Christian
history. For Christianity is not something that we are required to
re-invent for ourselves day by day. It is a great river into which we
step, by the grace of God alone, by the call of God, and by which we
are carried along in one good, strong current or another. The real
Anglican current of that great river carries me along just fine and I
am thankful to God for it.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
For those of us who are clergy, we can
best respect Thomas Cranmer's vision by our own faithful, daily use
of Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer, for this is clearly what he
purposed for us:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>And all priests and deacons are to
say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly,
not being let by sickness, or some other urgent cause. And the Curate
that ministereth in every Parish-Church or Chapel, being at home,
and not being otherwise reasonably hindered, shall say the same in
the Parish-Church or Chapel where he ministereth, and shall cause a
bell to be tolled thereunto a convenient time before he begin, that
the people may come to hear God's Word and to pray with him. (from
"Concerning the Service of the Church")</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
We may not have a
bell which we can cause to be tolled. We may not even have a Church
or a Chapel to which we can call the people to come. We may live very
busy, tent-making sorts of lives. But saying the Daily Offices
remains our daily responsibility and an example we ought to be
setting for the people under our care. Let us always remember,
although we tend not to use the word anymore, that we are still
"curates" and have as our responsibility the "cure of
souls", which "cure" has as its root meaning our care
and concern for those entrusted to us.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I have always been
somewhat surprised to find that many clergy, in various churches
which claim to be Anglican, feel no responsibility for saying the
Daily Offices but are wont instead to substitute other forms of daily
devotions and disciplines. Devotional reading, as well as biblical
and theological study, ought to be part of our daily lives, as time
permits, as should extempore prayer throughout the day, but the Daily
Offices ought to be bedrock for us, the place where we begin. They
are the ground floor of our devotional life as clergy.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The compilers of
the 1928 American BCP clearly had the intention of making the Daily
Office much more flexible and adaptable than it might arguably be
said to be in the 1662 English BCP. In 1662, there are few rubrics
that allow one to shorten the service or to make it more flexible,
although it is important to remember here the so-called "Shortened
Services Act" passed in the English Parliament in 1872 which
permitted the occasional shortening of Morning and Evening Prayer and
provided guidance for the same. But we see in the 1928 American book
a clear attempt to make the Daily Offices more readily adaptable to
local, 20th century situations. Although it is possible to have too
much flexibility and too many options, so that the basic shape of the
service is so distorted as to become unrecognizable, some flexibility
is surely welcome, when the heart of the service is protected. This
balance seems to be struck in the 1928 book.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In the 1928
American BCP version of Morning Prayer, after saying one or more of
the opening Sentences of Scripture, the minister is not required to
say the long Exhortation to Confession which begins "Dearly
beloved brethren...". He may replace this with an exhortation
which consists of a single sentence. But he may also omit altogether
the Exhortation, the Confession, and the Absolution, and go directly
to the first Lord's Prayer. He may also omit the Exhortation, the
Confession, and the Absolution, AND the first Lord's Prayer, going
directly to the Versicles and Responses, "O Lord, open thou our
lips ...". After the first lesson, he has the option of saying
or singing ONE OF THREE different canticles, one of which is the very
short "Benedictus Es, Domine", a canticle not found in
1662, being taken from the Apocryphal book "The Song of the
Three Holy Children" where it forms the first part of what we
call the "Benedicite" (one of the other canticle options in
both 1662 and 1928). After the second lesson, he likewise has the
option of ONE OF TWO different canticles, including the short Psalm
100, the "Jubilate". After the Creed, the Lord's Prayer,
further short Versicles and Responses (fewer than in 1662), the
Collect of the Day, the Collect for Peace, and the Collect for Grace,
the minister may simply end the service
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>with such
general intercessions taken out of this Book as he shall think fit,
or with the Grace.</i></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In other words, he
may essentially end Morning Prayer after the third Collect, just as
in the original prayer books of 1549 and 1552. Clearly, he has a
great deal of freedom to make Morning Prayer adaptable to even the
most busy, modern, 21st century cyber-world schedule. It is difficult
to see how such a service could take longer than 15 minutes. And a
similar flexibility is provided for Evening Prayer.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
If the clergy ought
to be committed to saying the Daily Offices, it seems also incumbent
upon the laity of our parishes to remember and respect Archbishop
Cranmer's intentions as well. We have enjoyed in North America and
England the venerable custom of having Morning Prayer celebrated
regularly as our main Sunday morning service, a custom which seems to
have developed in the 19th century. Previously, the pattern on Sunday
morning was Morning Prayer, the Great Litany, and the Holy Communion
or, more frequently, the Ante-Communion, a custom which continued up
into the 20th century in many places. But many of us North-American
Anglicans have grown up learning to love the beauty of Morning Prayer
(it alternated with Holy Communion in varying patterns, of course),
complete with its organ, choir, sung canticles, hymns, sermon, and
offertory. The 1959 Canadian BCP wisely provides rubrics which
recognize this custom, permitting a sermon after the Third Collect of
Morning Prayer, for example, or after the Grace, followed by an
offertory and a hymn.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Yet however much we
have grown to love Morning Prayer in that form (and hopefully we love
it in that form because it gives us so much of God's Word), we need
to remember that it is a Daily Office and is meant to be PART OF OUR
DAILY LIVES AS WELL. Immediately, we shall hear those voices which
will say that such discipline is not required of the laity as it is
of the clergy and this is so. But it was what the old Archbishop
wanted for the people of the church and it will surely be profitable
to them. It may be that many lay folk are unable to find the time to
say Morning and Evening Prayer each day, although it will be
instructive to compare the daily time spent in prayer with the daily
time spent, after work, before a screen of some kind. But with the
great flexibility provided, for example, in the 1928 BCP, there
really does not seem to be any reason why even the laity may not
learn to use the Daily Offices as such. At the least, it would be
possible for our people to begin to edify themselves by reading each
day the lessons provided in the Daily Office Lectionary. And once
again, that Lectionary in the 1928 book is notable for providing
plenty of options and variations.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
What I am
suggesting is that, as Anglicans, we should all be SERIOUS STUDENTS
of the prayer book. We should be students of the Bible on a daily
basis, of course, that really being the whole point of the Daily
Offices, but being students of the prayer book can only help us to be
better students of the Bible as well. A serious student of the prayer
book will be familiar with what is in the book, will know the
different services that are there, and how they relate to one
another, for the various services are entirely interdependent. The
celebration of the Holy Communion assumes, for example, the proper
use of the Daily Offices, and a basic understanding of the Catechism.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Being a serious
student of the prayer book also means knowing that options and
variations and minor changes are going to part of our regular Sunday
fare and that we should learn to welcome them. Parishes which insist,
for example, on never using a particular canticle of Morning Prayer
because "the Reverend Mr. Brown never used it during his 200
glorious years of ministry with us", ought to be awakened to
their perversity. A minister of the Anglican Orthodox Church, without
doubt, has a duty to follow the rubrics of the BCP when he leads a
public liturgy in the parish, and he is wise to be sensitive to local
custom, but as long as he follows those rubrics he is doing his duty
faithfully, even if it means that there are some slight variations
from the Sunday before or from the well-remembered patterns
established by some beloved previous minister. No congregation or
clergyman, even a bishop, really has the right to overrule the
rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer or to tell a minister that what
the BCP tells him is an option is entirely ruled out by fiat of the
congregation or by some other unwritten, pseudo-romish tradition.
This is not faithfulness to the Anglican Way ... the Bible, the
Prayer Book, and the Articles ... but a perilous capitulation to
local idiosyncracy and pettiness. An Anglican congregation that
refuses to use portions of the prayer book has simply taken it upon
itself to revise the prayer book according to its own preferences,
something which it has absolutely no right to do. For example,
according to the Canons of the Anglican Orthodox Church, a revision
of the 1928 prayer book can only take place by decision of two
separate national conventions of the church, a very healthy proviso.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Again, daily
Morning and Evening Prayer are among the greatest treasures to be
found in our BCP. They are instruments of grace to us because they
proclaim to us, constantly, incessantly, gloriously, the great Word
of Grace, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. They keep us focused
there. They are a daily still point in the midst of a rapidly turning
world. Let us thank God for them and day by day, Sunday by Sunday,
year by year, allow God, through them, that is, through His Word and
Spirit, to establish in us what by His grace we trust he has already
wrought in us. And to His Name be all the glory.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1255695771318346693.post-33520907918115048502014-12-04T11:52:00.000-08:002014-12-04T11:52:23.695-08:00On Being Told You Have Cancer<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Getting ready to die is hard work. I
realize it probably should not be. As Christians, we are to live each
day <i>sub specie aeternitatis,</i>
that is, under the aspect or in the light of eternity. We are to be
aware that our days are numbered, that they may not accrue to even
the usually allotted span of three score and ten. I am presently just
pushing three score. But throughout my ministry I have buried enough
people, among them many people much younger than myself, and
accompanied many as they lay dying, to awaken me to the reality of
death and its unexpectedness. As the character in the old medieval
morality play is made to say, "O Death, thou comest when I least
expected thee"! Likewise, Bishop Thomas Ken's stately evening
hymn teaches us frequently to sing,</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Teach me to live
that I may dread the grave as little as my bed.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Teach me to die
that so I may rise glorious at the awful day.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I know that my
Redeemer lives. I know that I am justified by His righteousness, and
not at all by my own. I know that this faith which lives in my heart
is a gift from Him. I know that I need Him every hour. I know that He
loved me with an everlasting love, from before the foundation of the
world. I know that he who dies believing dies safely in His love. I
know that I must bear my own Cross and follow Him. But when they tell
you that you have cancer, in my case a very large B-Cell type tumour,
the corrupt fruit of a disease called Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, it seems
there are some unavoidable reactions.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
This is so because
information of this type, "you have cancer", tends to carry
with it a fairly powerful emotional charge. Words and ideas and
thoughts carry with them an emotional charge, just as a pair of socks
can become electrically charged when you walk across a dry carpet in
winter. And the emotions attendant upon learning that you are very
sick are both involuntary and relentless. They insist that you attend
to them. And so you must. This takes time and is laborious, just what
you do NOT need when you are sick, of course, but it must be done,
and, if we are wise, it will get done. How complicated our emotions
are need hardly be said. They carry us here and there, up and down,
in and out. We cannot escape them. They demand our attention.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Perhaps we feel
cheated, thinking that we are being robbed of precious years of life,
while others, surely less worthy than ourselves, go on living
disease-free, utterly useless, wastrel lives! Perhaps we dread saying
goodbye, if only for a while, to those who we feel still need us in
some way, those who are perhaps vulnerable and in need of our
protection and care. Perhaps we just feel afraid, and unwilling to
think about what our last hours may be like, what kind of pain we may
have to endure. Perhaps we feel just a strong sense of uselessness,
that we have not lived our lives as we should have.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
And, of course, we
have not. As Christians, we know about Original Sin and we know that
even a life repeatedly dedicated to God's service is far from being
what it should. We are not what we ought to be. We are not what we
shall be. And, yes, thanks be to God, we are not what we used to be.
We may, however, find ourselves thinking "if only", and
re-running those deeply imbedded video clips of our most stupid,
ridiculous, sinful moments. This may not be entirely without its
uses. It does not hurt us to remember that we are sinful, even when
we are regenerate. But there is something to which we must constantly
return, especially when we are sick and faced with a death which may
come sooner rather than later.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
And it
is this : <i>He hath made every thing beautiful in his time</i>
(Ecclesiastes 3 11). It is a beautiful thing to have cancer. And this
is so because there is a purpose for everything. Nothing happens
outside, or apart from, God's wise counsel and foreknowledge. He
makes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust. He overrules all
His creatures and all their actions. As Dr. Gill wisely notes ...
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
God has made
everything; as all things in creation are made by him, for his
pleasure and glory, and all well and wisely, there is a beauty in
them all: so all things in providence; he upholds all things; he
governs and orders all things according to the counsel of his will;
some things are done immediately by him, others by instruments, and
some are only permitted by him; some he does himself, some he wills
to be done by others, and some he suffers to be done; but in all
there is a beauty and harmony ...</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In other words, it
is a beautiful thing to be told that you have cancer. It is not an
accident. You are not a victim of blind chance or fate. It is, in a
very real sense, God's visitation. It is a gift. This is what it
means to understand God's "providence". We mean that He
overrules all things, that His wise, loving, holy, good, guiding hand
is finally behind everything which happens to us and, if we are wise,
we shall consciously receive it ALL AS FROM HIS HAND. He is never
unjust, never evil, never sinful. But even what is evil or sinful, He
overrules it for His own purposes and those purposes are always
beautiful. <i>He</i> <i>hath made everything beautiful in His time</i>.
And, as John Calvin reminds us, therein lies true felicity:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
give heed and you
will at once perceive that ignorance of providence is the greatest of
all miseries, and the knowledge of it the highest happiness.
(Institutes - 1 17 11)</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
In other words, for
the Christian, it may not be pleasant to be told you have cancer and
that you may die sooner rather than later. The emotional charge that
comes along with those words is real and pressing. But behind all
this lies reality. And what is real is that God is God, that this is
His world, and that I am, by His grace, His son. Can anything happen
to me that is not designed to increase my faith in Him? Can anything
happen to me that is not for my good? Can anything happen to me that
can really hurt me? The answer to each of these is an emphatic "no".
Also, is anything impossible with God? Is He no longer the sovereign
ruler of His universe? Is it beyond His power to heal either directly
or by means or even against means? We give the same answer.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Of course, I am
heartily sick of being sick. The treatment which is, thanks be to
God, making me gradually, steadily better, also has the effect of
making me feel right poorly, and as day follows day, and month
follows month, the mind and body grow weary. I certainly did not plan
to be sick this long! But there is another level, the level where we
really live, the level of the soul or spirit. There is no weariness
there, only joy, joy in knowing that real happiness is a by-product.
It is one of those things which, if we pursue it, will always remains
just out of our reach, but which will flow to us freely and easily
when we pursue what we ought. For it remains forever true, that if we
seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, then all that is
needful will be added unto us as well. <i>He hath made all things
beautiful in</i> <i>His time</i>. God grant that we may embrace as
beautiful all that he sends and to Him be all the glory.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1255695771318346693.post-33413838828045815872014-11-28T18:13:00.000-08:002014-11-28T18:13:51.029-08:00The Wisdom of the Rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer.
Part I - With a Loude Voyce.
<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The RUBRICS of the Book of Common
Prayer (abbreviated BCP) are those directions and instructions,
usually italicized and in small print, provided for the proper
ordering, conduct, and celebration of the various services contained
in that venerable book. The rubrics are found interspersed throughout
all the liturgies as a guide to the minister as he plans and leads
the service, whether it be the Daily Offices, Holy Communion, Holy
Baptism, or any of the other Rites and Ceremonies. In many older
editions of the prayer book, the rubrics are actually printed in RED,
which reminds us of why they are termed RUBRICS, this being a word
derived, either directly or via the French, from the Latin word for
the colour red.
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Throughout my some 30 years of using
the Book of Common Prayer in both public and private worship, I have
come to appreciate the rubrics for what they are, namely, rules for
the proper, decent, ordered, and dignified conduct of the service.
But I have also come to value them as sources of real insight into
the minds and purposes, and even into the vision, of our brave
English Reformers, who compiled, translated, ordered, arranged,
edited and, in part, composed our Book of Common Prayer, one of the
greatest treasures of the Christian Church. The rubrics are really a
treasure-house of information and wisdom, in spite of their seemingly
humble purpose.
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
As an example, I need only point to the
rubrics supplied for the office of Morning Prayer found in the 1552
version of the BCP. The reader will most likely know that the first
complete English edition of the Book of Common Prayer appeared in
1549 during the reign of young Edward VI, when Thomas Cranmer was
Archbishop of Canterbury. This first book was superseded in 1552 by
the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI, the book which became, with
minor variations, the BCP of 1662, the version which has the right to
be called the basic pattern of all later variations and editions of
the book. Although it is necessary to note here that some modern
"variations", which are still called the BCP, no longer
bear any real, faithful, theological, or linguistic resemblance to
1662, the 1979 "BCP" of the Episcopal Church of the USA
being an example. There are also bishops of the liberal, apostate
Anglican Communion, personally known to me, who feel free to create
their own liturgies, rites which bear far more doctrinal and
linguistic resemblance to the modern Roman Mass than to the BCP,
which resemblance is entirely deliberate. These are usually the same
bishops who have severe allergic reactions to the 39 Articles of
Religion.
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
First of all, we should notice in the
1552 book that the service is entitled "An Order for Morning
Prayer Daily Throughout the Year". This often comes as a
surprise to folks who are accustomed to experiencing Morning Prayer
only as the main Sunday service in their local parish, complete with
hymns, sermon, and offertory. But it is clear that Cranmer and the
other Reformers intended that it be a daily service, that it was to
be said or sung in the local church, with the minister of the parish
ringing the bell each day at the time of service. The same is, of
course, true of Evening Prayer. It was to be a daily service in each
local parish, with the minister ringing the bell to call the people
to prayer and to hear the Word of God. In our 1928 American BCP, in
use in the Anglican Orthodox Church, the service is still entitled
"The Order for Daily Morning Prayer".
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Perhaps most striking in the rubrics
for Morning Prayer in the 1552 book, however, is the clear emphasis
on making sure that the people can actually HEAR the Word of God. For
example, we read ...
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>The morning and evening prayer, shall
be used in such place of the Church, Chapel, or Chancel, and the
minister shall so turn him, as the people may best HEAR.
</em></div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
That is, the service is to be said in
that part of the church where the people may best hear what is being
said, and the minister is to place himself for the accomplishment
that same purpose. Likewise we read, referring to the penitential
Scripture sentences that open the service, that
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>at the beginning both of Morning
Prayer and likewise of Evening Prayer, the minister shall </em></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>read with</em><em> a LOUD VOICE some one of these
sentences of the scriptures that follow.</em></div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Also, when we come to the first Our
Father, we read that</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>then shall the Minister begin the
Lord's Prayer with a LOUD voice.</em>
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
When we come to reading of the two
appointed lessons after the Psalms of the day, the rubric reads,</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>Then shall be read two lessons
distinctly with a LOUD voice, that the people may hear ... </em></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em> the minister standing and turning him
so as he may best be heard of all such as be present.</em>
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
And another rubric then adds,
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>And to the end the people may the
better hear, in such places where they do sing, there shall the
lessons be sung in a plain tune after the manner of distinct
reading, and likewise the Epistle and Gospel.</em>
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
After the Creed, when the minister
calls the people to prayer with the Mutual Salutation (The Lord be
with you, etc.), he is again instructed to pronounce this "with
a LOUD voice". At the second Our Father we read
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em>Then the Minister, Clerks, and people,
shall say the Lord's Prayer in English, with a LOUD</em></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<em> voice ...</em>
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
It appears that there are at least two
things going on here. One, we see evidenced a deep concern that the
service be intelligible to the ordinary man. Archbishop Cranmer and
his colleagues wanted the people of England to be able to hear the
Word of God, the Holy Bible, the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Gospel,
and to hear it read to them in a language they could understand,
namely, English. But he also wanted to ensure that it would be read
to them in such a FASHION that they would be able to understand that
English clearly. There was to be no mumbling of the lessons, no
reading of the lessons from some obscure corner of the church where
nothing could be heard. The minister was so to position himself and
so to use his voice that the people would hear and understand the
Word of God. The Reformers were very aware, therefore, that "faith
cometh by hearing" (Romans 10 17). No doubt, we have all been
frustrated by hearing lessons read very poorly on a Sunday, whether
by a minister or by a lay person, who seems to assume that faith
cometh by "making unintelligible". It is always possible to
tell whether or not the reader has taken the time to prepare himself
for the reading, by the starts and stops, the stumbling and bumbling
that goes on, or not. But we all know that a good, clear,
faith-filled reading of God's Word can be a great and powerful
blessing to those present. Cranmer was supremely aware of this and
the rubrics of Morning Prayer reflect his awareness.</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
These same rubrics also implicitly
impress upon the minister the weight of the responsibility of his
most important function, and that is actually to be a minister of the
Gospel. He is to be no longer a mummer, an actor, a false,
sacrificing priest. He is to proclaim to the people under his care
the pure Word of God, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That this remains
our task I trust no one reading this will doubt, while we note again
that it is the simple but wise rubrics of the prayer book which
remind us of this great duty and privilege.
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Secondly, it is of real significance
that the people themselves are being encouraged, by the rubrics of
the BCP, to participate fully and heartily in the service. They are
to say the prayers with the minister with a LOUD voice. This, too, is
a privilege and a great responsibility. It is to be their service as
well as the minister's. Gone now the habit of each individual
worshipper whispering his private devotions while the liturgy goes on
around him. Now all voices join together in the ancient and beautiful
words of the Our Father and the Creed, or in the saying or singing of
the Psalms and the great scriptural canticles of Morning and Evening
Prayer. And it is to be done with a LOUD voice, that is, unashamedly,
openly. "O Lord, open thou our lips". For if we are ashamed
to confess our faith in God loudly and clearly when we are in midst
of the congregation, it is not likely that we shall confess Him very
readily in the public square.
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Sadly, I have often noticed that many
worshippers are accustomed deliberately NOT to say the common prayers
on a Sunday. They are there and they are worshipping but they
DELIBERATELY do not participate in the prayers. On various occasions
I have simply asked the reason for this and am often told that they
find it helpful to their worship to say the prayers to themselves or
in just a very quiet voice. Sometimes, their silence may be due to
the presence of liturgical bullies, either lay popes or clerical
ones, who push the prayers at such a rate that no one can possibly
keep up with them. And personally, I would rather not say the Lord's
Prayer at all than run through it at such a rate that I cannot even
catch my breath. One of the most beautiful customs of the aboriginal
Cree people of Canada is their habit of saying the Lord's Prayer very
calmly, very slowly, and very thoughtfully. How I love to recall the
sound of their voices ... <i>Notawenan kitchekesikok ayayan</i> ...
Our Father which art in heaven ....</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Generally, when prayers are being said
in unison, such as the Lord's Prayer or the Creed or the General
Confession, the minister ought to allow the people themselves to set
the pace of the prayer. He can take control again if there is no
unity, due to the presence of bullies, or simply to a lack of
leadership and confusion among the voices. But that everyone should
participate in the common prayers seems only too obvious. We are not
there primarily to conduct our own private little conversations with
the Almighty, although we come to be personally in His presence, to
sense His presence, to hear His voice, and to lift our voices to him.
There may and should be times in the service where we can, in
silence, utter our own private prayers to Him, but the common prayers
are meant to be just that. We are not there alone. We are there as
members together of the same Body of Christ, the blessed company of
all faithful people and, as I have often reminded my listeners, when
you lift up your voice and I hear it, when I hear you say "I
believe in God", that encourages me in my faith, perhaps on a
day when it greatly needs encouragement. In worship, we should all
work hard at making the common prayers truly common, being
prayerfully aware and deeply sensitive to the presence of those
around us, striving to speak to God in one voice.
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Thus, dear friends, there is great
wisdom to be found in the humble rubrics of the Book of Common
Prayer. Take the time some Sunday to read them over before the
service begins. There is much there to feed our sense of devotion and
worship and much to help us better to understand this great, deep,
rolling river of Christianity into which, solely by the grace of God,
we have stepped, for even as we wade in the shallows of that river,
we may often hear echoes of the deepest depths.</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11411497131276628320noreply@blogger.com0