TRINITY CHURCH, JACKSONVILLE, IL
ANNUAL PARISH MEETING
JANUARY 17, 2011
RECTOR’S ADDRESS
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. AMEN.
Trinity Church, Jacksonville is a "Parish" Church. A Parish Church is a complex and curious thing. Just exactly what is a Parish Church? Who are its people? Where did it come from and how does it continue through time? What does it do? What is its purpose? What kind of relationships pertain within itself, and to the wider society and the world? These are just some of the questions one might ask to try and get a handle on this curious and complex thing - the Parish Church.
We might start by unpacking the fundamental question, "What is a Parish Church?" The simplest way to do this is to note some of its characteristics:
A Parish Church also exists within a complex and curious set of relationships:
Even if I've only scratched the surface, I think what I've said is at least enough to consider the idea that, "a Parish Church is a complex and curious thing." In addition, there are several negative factors that have been suggested by various branches of study that would seem to go against the idea that the Parish Church can continue as a vital part or instrument in the religious lives of people.
First, the Parish Church occupies a much different place in the hearts and minds of both society-in-general and the individual, than it did even just a generation ago. Many studies have shown that even though the general notion of "religion" or "spirituality" still inhabits the psyche of the American people, the institutional or corporate notion of religion has been in steady decline - especially among those under forty years of age.
Second, what is called "denominational identity" - that would be saying, "I'm an Episcopalian, or Methodist, or Presbyterian, or Lutheran" - this idea of denominational identity has also declined greatly throughout the last 40 years. In fact, identifying oneself as a "Christian" has been problematic for many.
And third, recent studies have shown that individuals are notoriously ignorant of the content and practice of their own faith and religion. One such study even suggests that those identifying themselves as "non-Christian" are more knowledgeable about the Christian faith than those identifying themselves as "Christians."
Now, I don't cite these examples to raise a sense of panic and doom among us who still take our Christianity with great seriousness. Rather, I want to point to the possibility that the way that many of us - especially those of us over 40 - conceive of Christian faith, practice and parish life, may not strike the same chord or produce the same kind of commitment in others, as it did and does in us.
Please hear me hear carefully: I am not suggesting that the Christian faith was only a completely culturally-induced, historically-conditioned phenomenon, which we modern - or, post-modern, if you will - people have outgrown because we are so much smarter and so much more intelligently spiritual than our ancestors. I am as committed as I've ever been to the catholic faith of Christianity and to the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church as the concrete embodiment of that faith in the world. But what I am trying to suggest is that the environment in which we live has changed; and that the task of the Church in every age is - not to adapt its fundamental faith to the age - but to learn how to live as an authentic people that witnesses to the faith that was revealed in and through Jesus Christ, in an environment which is different from any other that history has known.
Some who have reflected on these same issues have suggested that we live in a "post-Christian" era; that is, we no longer live in a culture that is dominated by, and takes its point of departure from, Christian ideas and virtues and values. In other words, we no longer live in a state of "Christendom," but rather, "post-Christendom." And they go on to suggest that our context is more akin to the "Early Church," before Christianity became the accepted religion of the Roman Empire.
As I've pondered this idea, I find I can't quite agree with it. I see our context, rather, as being more like that of the early Middle Ages. Christianity had been known, believed and practiced; but in the early Middle Ages it had fallen into decline, whether by reason of external political, economic and social factors, or ignorance and apathy, or any other of a hosts of reasons that historians and cultural anthropologists might suggest. Likewise, the American church has had its time when Christianity has been known, believed and practiced; but for reasons that we are still trying to come to terms with, it has declined.
I asked myself, "What was the fundamental institution that carried the faith through these dark times of the early Middle Ages?" The answer was not "the Parish Church" - at least the Parish Church as we know it today. Rather, it was the "monastic" institute and culture which kept the flame of Christianity aglow for hundreds of years until revival came. It was the monastic Church, which self-consciously determined to find its identity and its vitality, not from the moribund culture out of which it came, but from an intentional and focused engagement with its Holy Scriptures and Tradition, and from a life ordered by Rule that gave them the freedom to work out their Christian lives without the muddying and stultifying influences of a culture that had largely turned their backs on God, or who had fallen into a hopeless morass of ignorance and superstition.
Now I've obviously painted a rather romantic picture of the early Medieval Monastic enterprise, which would certainly not stand up under the scrutiny of good historical research. But, at least in terms of monastic ideals, I think the picture is a fair one. And I think it is, at least, a picture that can give us food for thought as we wrestle with the idea of being Christians - and of being a Parish Church - in the times in which we live.
I'd like to suggest a few ideas or principles from the monastic conception of Christian life in community - that is, a community that is parallel in kind to a Parish Church - which may be a way of helping us to focus our thoughts on the nature and identity of a Parish Church like Trinity Church. I'll be very brief with each one, because they are only beginning points for thinking about such a curious and complex thing as a Parish Church. And I'll be using the term "Community" as the subject to keep from being repetitive and cumbersome.
First, is the idea that the Community is not, at its best, a place to flee from the world; but rather, it is that Community into which one might enter to seek God. Surely there were some who saw the monastery as an "escape" from the world; but the more consistent theme in the monastic literature is that one enters the monastery for a positive reason: to seek and to find God.
The second idea I would mention is that the primary task of those in the Community is the worship of God - both individually and corporately. There is certainly a lot more to do in life than only to worship God; but a life that does not flow from the worship of God is partial and incomplete. The worship of God is seen by the Community as the essential activity of the human person who is seeking God; the journey to God is punctuated along the way with many occasions of worship. For the monk that meant primarily the Daily Office - what we would call Morning and Evening Prayer - prayed daily; and the celebration of the Holy Eucharist and the receiving of Holy Communion, at the very least on every "Lord's Day", or Sunday.
The third idea has to do with the primary virtue which must guide and sustain all the relationships in the Community - and that is the virtue of "charity", or love. It is love - and only love - that has the power to shape and to maintain relationships between sinful people in such a way that they can truly live together as a Community. And the monks knew very well that the source of love was God.
And finally - the fourth idea - is that the Community must live by Rule. Please notice that I did not say that the Community must live by a set of rules - plural. Rule - as distinguished from "rules" - is that idea that the Community's life is ordered, guided, and obedient to a set of general principles that inform every aspect a life which is seeking God. The "rules" which can be deduced from Rule are variable and adaptable; Rule is the "big picture", the fundamental, overarching vision of the Community's life as a life seeking after God.
So, what have we spoken of? What are the four principles that I've suggested come from the monastic experience of the Middle Ages that have the potential to shape the life of a Parish Church in our time? They are:
Do these four principles or ideas strike us as too odd, or too idealistic, or too archaic, or too irrelevant, to have any pragmatic use for us in our day and time? Do we have difficulty in seeing how they could possibly be of any use in the 21st century Church, how they could possibly have any real meaning in the 21st century Church? Are they not too far-fetched, too out of touch, too dreamy for the hard realities and challenges that you and I have to face daily?
The answer to all these questions could be , "Yes." But I am more inclined to think that the Community which is the Parish Church - that complex and curious thing - must find its nature and identity, and its purposes and practices, in a vision that does not mimic the world around it, but rather in a vision that is revealed and given to it through the Scriptures and the Tradition of the Church. And it is a vision that can generally be articulated in terms of:
Of course, the hard work lies - not in the stating of ideas and principles - but in the working out of the details; details which address every aspect of life, for all of life is from God. But that has been the task of the Church - and especially of the Parish Church - in every age. It's the hard work of making sure that the Church is not trivial or superficial, of making sure that the Church is a life-giving body, and not a stale, antiquated institution.
The final point that I would like to make may sound disconnected from what I've been saying, and so small as to wonder why I would even bring it up. But it has precisely to do with the translating of principle into usable detail.
The Wardens and I have been talking off and on throughout the year about Trinity Church. And one of the fruits of our conversation has been the recognition of the need for the people of Trinity Church to have a voice in our on-going formation as a Parish Church.
You will find at your tables a 5 x 8 1/2 sheet of paper with the heading, "I have a question." This was originally conceived of as a way to enable people to get answers to questions that we simply do not have the time to answer at the Parish Meeting. But the more we thought about it, the more we saw the possibility that it could be a simple tool to elicit a fuller inter-Parish conversation the whole year round. So, while it is provided as a way for you to ask questions that are not answered in the Parish Meeting today, it is also a way for you to participate in the "detail" work of the Parish all year-round. These sheets will be permanently available on the foyer table, along with a box to put the filled-out sheets in; if you want, you can even take a pile of them home with you, so that you can use them when an idea strikes you.
A couple of practical points:
This process is very rudimentary and simple here at the beginning, and it may need some refining and tweaking as we go along. But I really do see it as a positive step toward a fuller Parish conversation, that can help the Parish leadership see possibilities that we might not see otherwise.
Trinity Church - that curious and complex Parish Church - has another year in front of it. Who knows what God will bring our way. Whatever it is, I hope he will find us faithful and obedient, and eager to respond to the leading of His Holy Spirit.