Fides et ratio, faith and reason. Christians adopt the position of fides quaerens intellectum – “faith seeking understanding.” Or, showing their hand a bit more, credo ut intelligam – “I believe that I may understand” (Anselm). While reason may distinguish humanity from the animal kingdom, Christians have distinguished ourselves by remembering the importance of faith. Rather than allowing our reason to dominate our decisions and days, or even trying to hold the two in an uneasy tension, divine revelation requires us to shape our understanding and experience of the world, and we aim for a reason that submits to revelation as received in faith.Continue reading
I’ve never been a successful drummer, but I know that we all need that extreme, personality in every pretentious group. Please have a glass of water handy for the spit-takes that are sure to come in the videos below:Continue reading
“[The Advent story in Luke’s Gospel] also introduces the reader to some of the most powerful political powers of the time–and indeed, of all time.
Only then to ignore them.”
That’s how Rev. Bruce Clark begins his article at Mere Orthodoxy entitled “Advent and the Near Irrelevance of Political Power.” He points out that Luke – under the Holy Spirit – spends a great deal of time on shepherds, old fuddy-duddies like Simeon and Anna, but when Luke gets to Caesar:Continue reading
What if God’s Word is too much altered by the culture wars it finds itself within?
Beth Allison Bar writes (sidenote: Patheos is the worst coded website in the whole world, right?! Friends don’t let friends on the ad-clogged, slow, Patheos! Lookin’ at you, D.G.) in “Deconstructing the ESV“:…Samuel Perry (co author with Andrew Whitehead of Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States) published a fascinating article in the Sociology of Religion Journal (Volume 81:1, pp. 68-92). Titled The Bible as a Product of Cultural Power: The Case of Gender Ideology in the English Standard Version, Perry analyzed 16 biblical passages often used in the complementarian/egalitarian debates, comparing the ESV with the RSV. He found that while 7 of the passages were mostly unchanged, the remaining 9 were altered in the ESV to support a complementarian reading. As Perry writes, “nine of these gender passages were changed and each was altered in the direction of favoring a more complementarian, traditional gender interpretation.” For example, the RSV describes Phoebe in Romans 16:1 as a deaconess of the church at Cenchrea; the ESV describes her as a servant.
That’s an interesting and important claim. Is it true that there is cultural bias that might affect the way we read the Word of God? Let’s look at several Bible translations of Rom 16:1 down through time.
King James Bible (1611)
I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:
New King James Version (1982)
I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church in Cenchrea,
American Standard Version (1901)
I commend unto you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church that is at Cenchreae:
Revised Standard Version (1971)
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deaconess of the church at Cen′chre-ae,
English Standard Version (2001)
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church at Cenchreae,
Here’s the ultimate “what’s so great about your fourteen year old?” challenge. As much as I enjoy the following story, the music itself is what slays me. I can’t imagine being prevented from hearing these harmonies! It makes me excited to think of celestial choirs. The below story is taken from here.
“Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is widely considered to be one of the greatest musical geniuses to live. A child prodigy, who was excellent at playing music before even reaching the age of 10, Mozart has many interesting stories surrounding his life. One such story, being perhaps the most fascinating one, is the story of “Miserere Mei, Deus.” This song, translated as “Have Mercy on Me, O God,” was a song composed during the reign of Pope Urban VIII in the early 1600s. It was written by a man named Gregorio Allegri, for use exclusively in the Sistine Chapel. It was played as part of the exclusive Triduum services around Easter Time. Thus, no one could reproduce it or play it anywhere else, as only the Sistine Chapel had access to the song.* It was forbidden to transcribe or play the music anywhere else, and doing so would result in excommunication. It remained a secret for nearly 150 years.”
Here’s one of my favorite recordings of the Miserere. Listening will help you appreciate the power of this story, and if you can’t listen to the whole thing, listen to the first 45″ and from 3:10 to 4:10.
“This is the point where 14-year-old Mozart comes in. While visiting Rome, Mozart went to the Sistine Chapel and heard the song. He was enchanted by the beautiful music. Later that day, Mozart went home and, amazingly, wrote down the piece entirely from memory. You may be thinking, what is so impressive about this? However, this shows how much of a true musical genius Mozart was. Transcribing a song is incredibly difficult, especially hearing it only one time. It is very easy to mess up similar sounding notes, and remembering the song from only one listen is also incredibly challenging. However, what I just told you was the difficulty of transcribing a normal song. What Mozart transcribed was Miserere Mei, Deus, a 15 minute long, 9 part choral song. Essentially, Mozart transcribed 9 different lines of melody, playing all at once for 15 minutes straight, from his own memory after hearing the song only once. Not only was he able to transcribe the song, but he also did it nearly perfectly in one try.”
“Mozart would go back a few days later to make corrections to his transcription. Eventually, it was discovered that he had made this piece. However, Mozart was never punished. Instead, the Pope summoned him and commended him for his immense feat of musical genius.”
*I have seen other sources suggested two other copies were allowed outside of the Vatican: for the Holy Roman Emperor, and for the King of Spain. But the main idea stands!
Today is a grim day. Reformed Christians have no true “holy-day” except the Lord’s Day (Rev 1:10), nevertheless there are seasons and days that are important. Today is one of those important days to me, and it is a grim day.
St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, 1572
On August 24th, 1572, the St. Bartholomew’s Massacre was in full effect. Begun the night before with the attempted assassination of Admiral Gaspard de Coligny, many of the wealthiest French Reformed Christians were in town for the wedding of Henry of Navarre. After a few days, as many as ten thousand were dead.
In Roman Catholic France, the Reformed faith was viewed as wicked and with suspicion, a foreign infection from Frenchman Jean Caulvin (John Calvin) inserting itself from Geneva. But despite the distrust of Protestant theology in Popish France, the Reformed faith was flourishing. In 1555, there were ten churches in all of France that held to Calvin’s Reformed theology. Just seven years later, there were 2,000 churches that were Reformed Protestant strongholds. These Reformed believers went forth boldly under that name “Huguenots.”Continue reading
and make the death of thy Son Jesus Christ effectual to my redemption at the hour of my death
Samuel Johnson (b. 1709) is an interesting figure for a number of reasons, but I wanted to post a prayer he wrote in his dying days. Having held a variety of beliefs, and only coming around to biblical orthodoxy in his later years, to see him grapple with his beliefs and end in certainty on what the Scriptures say is gratifying to behold. As his positions on God, man, Christ, and the truth became more certain, his attending physicians noticed the change in his speech – about doctrine – and in his behavior. In the last week of his life, Johnson composed the following prayer:
May we all go to our final moment, before our eyes close, with such clear-sighted faith!
From the Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Center: On the day Solzhenitsyn was arrested, February, 12, 1974, he released the text of “Live Not by Lies.” The next day, he was exiled to the West, where he received a hero’s welcome. This moment marks the peak of his fame. Solzhenitsyn equates “lies” with ideology, the illusion that human nature and society can be reshaped to predetermined specifications. And his last word before leaving his homeland urges Soviet citizens as individuals to refrain from cooperating with the regime’s lies. Even the most timid can take this least demanding step toward spiritual independence. If many march together on this path of passive resistance, the whole inhuman system will totter and collapse.— by Edward E. Ericson, Jr. and Daniel J. Mahoney, The Solzhenitsyn Reader
There was a time when we dared not rustle a whisper. But now we write and read samizdat and, congregating in the smoking rooms of research institutes, heartily complain to each other of all they are muddling up, of all they are dragging us into! There’s that unnecessary bravado around our ventures into space, against the backdrop of ruin and poverty at home; and the buttressing of distant savage regimes; and the kindling of civil wars; and the ill-thought-out cultivation of Mao Zedong (at our expense to boot)—in the end we’ll be the ones sent out against him, and we’ll have to go, what other option will there be? And they put whomever they want on trial, and brand the healthy as mentally ill—and it is always “they,” while we are—helpless.
We are approaching the brink; already a universal spiritual demise is upon us; a physical one is about to flare up and engulf us and our children, while we continue to smile sheepishly and babble:
“But what can we do to stop it? We haven’t the strength.”
We have so hopelessly ceded our humanity that for the modest handouts of today we are ready to surrender up all principles, our soul, all the labors of our ancestors, all the prospects of our descendants—anything to avoid disrupting our meager existence. We have lost our strength, our pride, our passion. We do not even fear a common nuclear death, do not fear a third world war (perhaps we’ll hide away in some crevice), but fear only to take a civic stance! We hope only not to stray from the herd, not to set out on our own, and risk suddenly having to make do without the white bread, the hot water heater, a Moscow residency permit.Continue reading
From volume 5 of the works of Thomas Smyth (1808 – 1873), the following rules would help a lot of churches and Christians maintain the bond of peace. This advice is timely, even if it is around two hundred years old!
To remember that we are all subject ot failings and infirmities, of one kind or another
Matthew 7:1 – 5; Romans 2:21 – 23.
To bear with and not magnify each other’s infirmities.
To pray one for another in our social meetings, and particularly in private.
To avoid going from house to house, for the purpose of hearing news, and interfering with other people’s business.
Always to turn a deaf ear to any slanderous report, and to allow no charge be brought against any person until well founded and proved.
If a member be in fault, to tell him of it in private, before it is mentioned to others.
To watch against shyness of each other, and put the best construction on any action that has the appearance of opposition or resentment.
To observe the just rule of Solomon, that is, to leave off contention before it be meddled with.
John Witherspoon (1723-1794) was a key Presbyterian minister during the Revolutionary War period in American history, and is regarded among the Founding Fathers. As the only active clergy to sign the Declaration of Independence, to sign the Articles of Confederation, approve the Constitution, and serve as Moderator of the General Assembly for American Presbyterians, Witherspoon established himself in sacred and secular history of this nation. He has an important treatise on the doctrine of being born again, or regeneration.
Witherspoon wrote movingly about preaching the Gospel to different socio-economic groups, especially the poor. Here is a longer passage, where after addressing the unique situation the Scriptures give to those suffering in poverty, he says:
But does not the Savior of sinners beseech you to be reconciled unto God? He entreats you to come unto Him that you may have life. He regardeth not the persons of men, but values a precious immortal spirit as much in a mean cottage as in a splendid palace. Your rags and nakedness can be no hindrance to your obtaining His favor. He counsels you “to buy of Him gold tried in the fire, that you may be rich, and white rainment that you may be clothed.”