preferences

 

Breakfast, then thoughts about Sunday School this weekend. 

What? fresh baked rye bread from Germany, warm from the oven - - the loaves arrive frozen and baked, only need to thaw and finish baking, 12-15 minutes at 350°F and allowed to cool 5 to 10 minutes before slicing. While the bread is in the oven baking, mix tbsp diced onions and tsp Hellmann's mayonnaise in a small bowl and cut a thick slice of Limburger cheese, then cut cheese into slivers. Also cut a thick slice of braunschweiger, loved by me in my youth as liver cheese or liver sausage. 

Have a cup of coffee brewing.

Bread slices beautifully, with warm, soft inner and crunchy crust, two slices from the center is My Way, if you want to slice properly from the end, that's your problem. Spread on mayo-onion and lay slivers of cheese on top. Spread mayo on other slice and lay on top to close the breakfast sandwich. Take a knife to the table so as to cut bits of braunschweiger as desired to touch on each bite. What did my Australian friends say? "tucker in" as I recall. No, it was "tuck in", wasn't it, tucker was the food itself, eh? as in bush tucker, eh?

Sip coffee with, hot and black.

A fine breakfast. Sorry, no food picture this morning.

So, Sunday morning then.

I'm not an Ephesians fan, but happily there's more about king Solomon (why God loves these tyrant monsters is beyond me, but there you go). The gospel is our final of five consecutive readings through John chapter 6, Bread of Life discourse, although it's more of a back and forth than it is a monologue like the so-called High Priestly Prayer that comes later. 

We may contemplate Solomon a bit, and we'll surely say something to close out this, Jesus' I AM saying that links him to the Great I AM who spoke to Moses from the Burning Bush, and also links Jesus as Bread to the manna that God gave the Israelites as Moses led them on their trek through the wilderness those forty years.

The main thing on our agenda is to be the Gospel of Judas (Iscariot), an early Christian writing that did not make it into the New Testament canon. It's not that long, we may read it aloud start to finish. The most interesting parts are conversations between Judas and Jesus, and maybe we'll discover whether it presents Judas as actually one of the good guys specially chosen, appointed, his destiny to carry out the Will of God. Or was the Cross indeed the Will of God? And if it was Judas' fate, "is Judas predestined for damnation or for salvation?" is an apt question for the class hour. Was Judas foreordained, or did Judas have a choice and so act voluntarily? Did he act out of love, or out of frustration that the Moschiach adventure was not going as he thought it should? Or was Judas, as in the film "Mary Magdalene", acting to speed things along because his wife and child are "in the ground" as he tells Mary, waiting for the End Time and its resurrection, when they will be raised and join him again. Or was Judas acting out of greed, as Gospel John alone presents him? 

In the Christian Church worldwide, there are those for whom Pontius Pilate is a saint: has anyone canonized Judas Iscariot? Have you heard of St Judas Iscariot Episcopal Church?

Anyway, I had the Gospel of Judas ready for discussion last Sunday, but we took up the entire hour discussing the Creeds, so shifted Judas to this coming Sunday.

BTW, in our Creeds discussion, I'm not sure everyone in the classroom or watching online came to an opinion and expressed it, but some did prefer the new short "Statement of Faith" being used in place of the Nicene Creed in at least one parish of the Episcopal Church. That parish is a self-proclaimed member of so-called Progressive Christianity, which the class looked at another Sunday several weeks ago, IDK, maybe it was Trinity Sunday. My one thought was whether that parish is substituting this statement with their diocesan bishop's knowledge and consent - - which in any event, as I mentioned in class last Sunday, the bishop does not have authority to grant, as it has not been authorized by General Convention of the Episcopal Church, which could lead to disciplinary action (or, conversely, Episcopalians being tolerant of each other, it could turn out ignored, "suffered" might be the word, as it has and is for those of us who go against the canon that says "No unbaptized person shall be eligible to receive Holy Communion in this church" and open the Altar Table Meal to invite, welcome, and feed everyone present).

Nevertheless, to stir the pot again this morning, here's that Faith Statement. As one remote class member pointed out, it leaves a lot open for individual interpretation. Is that good, or is it better to have the characteristics of Jesus Christ, and the relationship between Father and Son, defined specifically, as the Nicene Creed does? What do the "Free" churches do, and aren't they as "Christian" as us? As Anglicans, Episcopalians, we are content to avoid trying to define how Christ is Present in the Eucharist, maybe we'd also rather not be so definitive about Christ and the Father/Son relationship as the Nicene Creed does? Lots of room for point of view. 

Anyway, here are the two: you are invited to read both and choose one or the other as your preference!!

The Nicene Creed

We believe in one God,

    the Father, the Almighty,

    maker of heaven and earth,

    of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,

    the only Son of God,

    eternally begotten of the Father,

    God from God, Light from Light,

    true God from true God,

    begotten, not made,

    of one Being with the Father.

    Through him all things were made.

    For us and for our salvation

        he came down from heaven:

    by the power of the Holy Spirit

        he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,

        and was made man.

    For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;

        he suffered death and was buried.

        On the third day he rose again

            in accordance with the Scriptures;

        he ascended into heaven

            and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

    He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,

        and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, 

    who proceeds from the Father and the Son.

    With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.

    He has spoken through the Prophets.

    We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

    We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

    We look for the resurrection of the dead,

        and the life of the world to come. Amen.

OR

An Affirmation of Faith 

We believe in God the Father, 

from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named.

We believe in God the Son, 

who lives in our hearts through faith, and fills us with his love.

We believe in God the Holy Spirit, 

who strengthens us with power from on high.

We believe in one God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.

Myself, I rather like the "Affirmation of Faith", although, as someone in our class last Sunday pointed out, the phrase "from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named" is high and holy sounding but what does it mean? Keep it simple! Might the phrase better read "who brings all that is into being"?

And, oh, the pictures of Jesus: what did he look like? How did he really look? I am inclined to believe that he looked, looks, how whoever confesses him needs him to look, which depends on who and where we are in life.

T+