Friday, February 22, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Weird Saints
Have you ever considered just how weird the preeminent saints of the Bible were? As I read through the Bible, this is one thing that jumps out at me. We live in a time when being relevant seems to be the chief virtue. Thus, we have the pierced youth leader and the cool in every way attitude of the youth in the church. And what is strange is that all the fifty-somethings in the Church seem to support this view and do not know what to do about it.
Relevance seems to breathe cool. The problem, though, is that cool is by its very nature, antiChrist. Cool vies for the applause of men but does not have as its object, the applause of God.
How does this play into weird saints? Simply this, that the saints of the Bible that are most strikingly weird, and I am thinking particularly of John the Baptist and Jesus, Himself, did not give a hoot about what men thought of them.
John the Baptist wore a camel's coat, a leather belt around his waist and ate locusts. Now, this may be cool today, say, if he was on Survivor. But it was not cool in his day. He was extremely strange.
Jesus did and said a lot of weird things, as well. Eat my flesh, drink my blood? That one was not framed up to start the rush of an altar call.
In the last 28 years as a Christian, I have heard a lot of lip service about being a freak for Jesus. But as I look around at the Christian Church today, I see a lot of freaks but they aren't for Jesus. The freaky Evangelical Church looks extremely worldly. They look just like the world. To a great degree, they act just like the world. Can barely tell the difference.
Is that relevant? Maybe. Is it weird, like John the Baptist or Jesus?
Hardly.
Relevance seems to breathe cool. The problem, though, is that cool is by its very nature, antiChrist. Cool vies for the applause of men but does not have as its object, the applause of God.
How does this play into weird saints? Simply this, that the saints of the Bible that are most strikingly weird, and I am thinking particularly of John the Baptist and Jesus, Himself, did not give a hoot about what men thought of them.
John the Baptist wore a camel's coat, a leather belt around his waist and ate locusts. Now, this may be cool today, say, if he was on Survivor. But it was not cool in his day. He was extremely strange.
Jesus did and said a lot of weird things, as well. Eat my flesh, drink my blood? That one was not framed up to start the rush of an altar call.
In the last 28 years as a Christian, I have heard a lot of lip service about being a freak for Jesus. But as I look around at the Christian Church today, I see a lot of freaks but they aren't for Jesus. The freaky Evangelical Church looks extremely worldly. They look just like the world. To a great degree, they act just like the world. Can barely tell the difference.
Is that relevant? Maybe. Is it weird, like John the Baptist or Jesus?
Hardly.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Classical Ed-Ain't it Great?!
As we were driving to school this morning, we heard a report on the radio that in the near future, we should expect to be seeing armed security guards, some even with automatic weapons, on our commuter and passenger trains.
I made the offhand comment, "Liberty and freedom for all."
My 14 year old son, Zachary, immediately chimed in with an apt quote. Zach quoted Benjamin Franklin, who said, "Any nation that would trade freedom for security deserves neither."
And I'm glad that they do teach them something in these schools.
I made the offhand comment, "Liberty and freedom for all."
My 14 year old son, Zachary, immediately chimed in with an apt quote. Zach quoted Benjamin Franklin, who said, "Any nation that would trade freedom for security deserves neither."
And I'm glad that they do teach them something in these schools.
Weight of Glory-Jamie Soles New Album Review
Weight of Glory- 2007
By Jamie Soles
Reviewed by Virgil Hurt
2/19/08
This is a longish review. Can’t help it. Soles gives you lots of songs and then packs a pile of meaning into every line of them. Get the CD. Listen to it haphazardly once or twice and enjoy the music and then listen to it again and again, carefully, thinking about the stories and The Story of God.
The Weight of Glory, begins with a flourish and that eternal Weight of Glory is immediately upon the listener, as he opens with Cain. Cain has killed his brother, and right at the beginning of the story of man, the plight of mankind is ever before us. This song is a departure from Soles’ other children’s music, at least in the tenor of the musical sound. While the children are likely to enjoy the music and the lyrics, it is not expressly children’s music. Perhaps this is a bit of a twist from Sole’s other music, at least the one I am most familiar with, That’s The Way My Story Goes. On that CD, I think it would be safe to classify the record as a children’s CD, but it is immensely enjoyable for adults as well.
Soles’ music is very enjoyable and he is a master at producing meaningful lyrics. His plan is to tell the story of the Bible. He often does this by telling Bible stories that are not taught in Sunday school. Or, he simply tells them from a novel perspective. With both methods, we get the story of the Bible AND we have to think about it. The ability to think is a much needed, and largely missing virtue, in Christian music today.
Consider Soles’ last stanza in the opening song, with God speaking to Cain.
Don’t despair, there is still tomorrow
I still care, though you’ve chosen sorrow.
But vengeance wears a wreath of pain.
And you shall bear it as the mark of Cain.
Cain, here, becomes a good representative of God’s people, even those who systematically and regularly reject Him. God is willing and able to punish, and He will do so. But we have the sense of reluctance in God to do this. He is patient and long-suffering, desiring his people to come to repentance. And thus, the Weight of Glory, it looms before all men, both the good and the bad, the just and the unjust.
The Weight of Glory continues with, Waiting for Me, an interesting story of Joseph rejoicing in God’s providence in providing a wife for him in the land of Egypt. Soles seems to really catch the spirit of Joseph portrayed in the Scriptures. He is really able to rejoice in God’s providence, even in the harsh past that brought him to God’s protection and provision in an ‘interim land’. A great line here as Joseph thinks back about his sojourn to Egypt. “I was seventeen when I left my home, Chained in a line for a land unknown.” Neither the music nor the rest of the lyrics of this song give any indication that Joseph is bitter about these circumstances. It is a joyful song about God’s provision.
In Shiloh, the Weight of Glory is presented as a duty to fulfill God’s plans. The people are in the Promised Land but they have not done all that they said they would do, nor what God had required them to do. They possessed some of the Land but not The Land. But even in this half-way obedience, which we see is disobedience, God calls them to Himself at Shiloh. In this song, Soles captures the sense of rest and relief and beauty that we have in God, His tabernacle and His rest. There is a great last line in this song, “Shiloh, If you love the Lord of Shiloh; your warfare will go well.” That is a sentiment seldom spoken today but one we would be well advised to get our minds around if we are to ever fully possess The Land.
Ahithophel has an eerie eastern sound to it, and I think, appropriately so, as Soles has woven together a couple of Bible stories that produce an unpleasant outcome in the life of David. This song sent me to do some Bible study, as I wondered where he got his source material for the opening stanza.
Ahithophel of Gilo, my counselor;
Your son Eliam, my mighty man;
Your granddaughter Bathsheba, my secret;
I sought not your counsel this time.
Okay, what’s my problem? I did not know that Ahithophel was Bath-sheba’s grandfather, nor that Eliam was also intertwined in the story, as her father and one of David’s mighty men. Remember that Uriah was a mighty man of David, as well. Folks, this is why you should pay attention to those genealogies that you like to skip over. There are many gems to be mined in those places! Soles speculates that Ahithophel deserted David partly due to his taking of Bath-sheba. The Scriptures do not make this clear but we do see these twisted family relationships causing these sorts of problems all the time in the world that we live in.
In Confession of a Fool, Soles offers up a humble look at oneself, as formerly a fool, and asking God to show mercy to those who still offer the confession of a fool, saying in their hearts that there is no God.
Crying is Wisdom in Proverbs 8, calling out to you. This is a beautiful song which calls us to the beauty of Wisdom’s banquet and to despise the bed of the harlot, where fools go, where death is found.
Make sure to look up all the Scripture references and read about the context of these songs. As I listened to What Are You Doing Here?, I turned to 1 Kings 19 and read the story of Elijah, as he was ready to perish from the earth. But God sent an angel and food and drink to save him from death. The music fit the story wonderfully.
The Weight of Glory breaks into the New Covenant with Jesus is Here! The hope and waiting is realized in this song of joyful celebration. “Prophets, priests, and kings, extend their welcoming, proclaiming to all who will hear, ‘Have no fear, Jesus is here!’”
Son is one of my favorite tracks on this album. It is simple, beautiful in poetry and music. The poetry is a string of mostly individual words, not much in the way of sentences. But the words paint the lovely story of Joseph and Mary and more; the story of redemption and hope in this new Son.
Blessed is the Beatitudes. This is not straight Scripture texts but for those of you who have enjoyed learning the Kings of Israel along with Soles, you will enjoy learning the Beatitudes with him, too.
What have I got if I gain everything but I lose You? is the refrain of Soul. It is a man talking to his soul. Great keyboards in this song.
Soles continues with the story of God as he marches through the New Testament, speaking of the life and trials of Christians, working for us the greater Weight of Glory all the time.
This Confidence in Me is about faith in God. This song, like so many songs on this disc, breathes of true humility. Soles is confident and hopeful but this confidence and hope are not derived from himself. He points us to God and His promises to find our confidence there. This is the Good News. This is another beautiful song and a fine way to end the record.
I suppose any decent review ought to give reservations. I have few and they pale in significance to the goodness of this album. It sounds a bit electric, synthesized to me. I prefer a simpler, acoustic, or shall I say, more natural?, sound. The tunes and the lyrics of many of these songs make me think of orchestras and strings and maybe brass, too, and I’d like to hear more of that sort of thing in the accompaniment. Maybe that is just not his sound or it is just too expensive to hire an orchestra.
I might also add that I was a bit unsteady about what I thought of this record on the first listen. I had agreed with Jamie to do a review, so he gave me the album. Thanks! It sort of hit me that I might not like it. And after the first listen, I wasn’t sure. But I have listened to the album several times now and like it very much and am looking forward to spinning it many more times. So, if the music is a bit different than what you expect from hearing Sole’s children’s albums, give it time and a few more spins and you will find that you like this CD very much.
You can purchase Weight of Glory on CD or download it in MP3 format at solmusic.ca.
By Jamie Soles
Reviewed by Virgil Hurt
2/19/08
This is a longish review. Can’t help it. Soles gives you lots of songs and then packs a pile of meaning into every line of them. Get the CD. Listen to it haphazardly once or twice and enjoy the music and then listen to it again and again, carefully, thinking about the stories and The Story of God.
The Weight of Glory, begins with a flourish and that eternal Weight of Glory is immediately upon the listener, as he opens with Cain. Cain has killed his brother, and right at the beginning of the story of man, the plight of mankind is ever before us. This song is a departure from Soles’ other children’s music, at least in the tenor of the musical sound. While the children are likely to enjoy the music and the lyrics, it is not expressly children’s music. Perhaps this is a bit of a twist from Sole’s other music, at least the one I am most familiar with, That’s The Way My Story Goes. On that CD, I think it would be safe to classify the record as a children’s CD, but it is immensely enjoyable for adults as well.
Soles’ music is very enjoyable and he is a master at producing meaningful lyrics. His plan is to tell the story of the Bible. He often does this by telling Bible stories that are not taught in Sunday school. Or, he simply tells them from a novel perspective. With both methods, we get the story of the Bible AND we have to think about it. The ability to think is a much needed, and largely missing virtue, in Christian music today.
Consider Soles’ last stanza in the opening song, with God speaking to Cain.
Don’t despair, there is still tomorrow
I still care, though you’ve chosen sorrow.
But vengeance wears a wreath of pain.
And you shall bear it as the mark of Cain.
Cain, here, becomes a good representative of God’s people, even those who systematically and regularly reject Him. God is willing and able to punish, and He will do so. But we have the sense of reluctance in God to do this. He is patient and long-suffering, desiring his people to come to repentance. And thus, the Weight of Glory, it looms before all men, both the good and the bad, the just and the unjust.
The Weight of Glory continues with, Waiting for Me, an interesting story of Joseph rejoicing in God’s providence in providing a wife for him in the land of Egypt. Soles seems to really catch the spirit of Joseph portrayed in the Scriptures. He is really able to rejoice in God’s providence, even in the harsh past that brought him to God’s protection and provision in an ‘interim land’. A great line here as Joseph thinks back about his sojourn to Egypt. “I was seventeen when I left my home, Chained in a line for a land unknown.” Neither the music nor the rest of the lyrics of this song give any indication that Joseph is bitter about these circumstances. It is a joyful song about God’s provision.
In Shiloh, the Weight of Glory is presented as a duty to fulfill God’s plans. The people are in the Promised Land but they have not done all that they said they would do, nor what God had required them to do. They possessed some of the Land but not The Land. But even in this half-way obedience, which we see is disobedience, God calls them to Himself at Shiloh. In this song, Soles captures the sense of rest and relief and beauty that we have in God, His tabernacle and His rest. There is a great last line in this song, “Shiloh, If you love the Lord of Shiloh; your warfare will go well.” That is a sentiment seldom spoken today but one we would be well advised to get our minds around if we are to ever fully possess The Land.
Ahithophel has an eerie eastern sound to it, and I think, appropriately so, as Soles has woven together a couple of Bible stories that produce an unpleasant outcome in the life of David. This song sent me to do some Bible study, as I wondered where he got his source material for the opening stanza.
Ahithophel of Gilo, my counselor;
Your son Eliam, my mighty man;
Your granddaughter Bathsheba, my secret;
I sought not your counsel this time.
Okay, what’s my problem? I did not know that Ahithophel was Bath-sheba’s grandfather, nor that Eliam was also intertwined in the story, as her father and one of David’s mighty men. Remember that Uriah was a mighty man of David, as well. Folks, this is why you should pay attention to those genealogies that you like to skip over. There are many gems to be mined in those places! Soles speculates that Ahithophel deserted David partly due to his taking of Bath-sheba. The Scriptures do not make this clear but we do see these twisted family relationships causing these sorts of problems all the time in the world that we live in.
In Confession of a Fool, Soles offers up a humble look at oneself, as formerly a fool, and asking God to show mercy to those who still offer the confession of a fool, saying in their hearts that there is no God.
Crying is Wisdom in Proverbs 8, calling out to you. This is a beautiful song which calls us to the beauty of Wisdom’s banquet and to despise the bed of the harlot, where fools go, where death is found.
Make sure to look up all the Scripture references and read about the context of these songs. As I listened to What Are You Doing Here?, I turned to 1 Kings 19 and read the story of Elijah, as he was ready to perish from the earth. But God sent an angel and food and drink to save him from death. The music fit the story wonderfully.
The Weight of Glory breaks into the New Covenant with Jesus is Here! The hope and waiting is realized in this song of joyful celebration. “Prophets, priests, and kings, extend their welcoming, proclaiming to all who will hear, ‘Have no fear, Jesus is here!’”
Son is one of my favorite tracks on this album. It is simple, beautiful in poetry and music. The poetry is a string of mostly individual words, not much in the way of sentences. But the words paint the lovely story of Joseph and Mary and more; the story of redemption and hope in this new Son.
Blessed is the Beatitudes. This is not straight Scripture texts but for those of you who have enjoyed learning the Kings of Israel along with Soles, you will enjoy learning the Beatitudes with him, too.
What have I got if I gain everything but I lose You? is the refrain of Soul. It is a man talking to his soul. Great keyboards in this song.
Soles continues with the story of God as he marches through the New Testament, speaking of the life and trials of Christians, working for us the greater Weight of Glory all the time.
This Confidence in Me is about faith in God. This song, like so many songs on this disc, breathes of true humility. Soles is confident and hopeful but this confidence and hope are not derived from himself. He points us to God and His promises to find our confidence there. This is the Good News. This is another beautiful song and a fine way to end the record.
I suppose any decent review ought to give reservations. I have few and they pale in significance to the goodness of this album. It sounds a bit electric, synthesized to me. I prefer a simpler, acoustic, or shall I say, more natural?, sound. The tunes and the lyrics of many of these songs make me think of orchestras and strings and maybe brass, too, and I’d like to hear more of that sort of thing in the accompaniment. Maybe that is just not his sound or it is just too expensive to hire an orchestra.
I might also add that I was a bit unsteady about what I thought of this record on the first listen. I had agreed with Jamie to do a review, so he gave me the album. Thanks! It sort of hit me that I might not like it. And after the first listen, I wasn’t sure. But I have listened to the album several times now and like it very much and am looking forward to spinning it many more times. So, if the music is a bit different than what you expect from hearing Sole’s children’s albums, give it time and a few more spins and you will find that you like this CD very much.
You can purchase Weight of Glory on CD or download it in MP3 format at solmusic.ca.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Augustine Ain't God
As I have been working through the letters of Augustine, I have been very pleased to see how much truth of the Scriptures was settled so early on in the life of the Church. Some modern Christians try to harken back to those early fathers as if that was the pure Church from which no error emanated. While I think nearness to the apostles can provide clarity on many issues and practices, it by no means is a sure bet on being free from all error.
As Reformed Christians, we beleive in the idea that God will continue to reveal truth to His Church. This is not New Truth. We are not expecting new revelation in terms of a new Word from God. The Canon is complete. God has spoken. But we do intend to have a greater understanding of His Word as the Church marches triumphantly forward.
Reading Augustine has been encouraging for several reasons. One, that he got so much right. Two, the Reformers, and particularly John Calvin, went back to Augustine to find those things that were right that the Church had lost and needed to learn anew. And three, I am encouraged that those things that Augustine and the early church got wrong, are for the most part, clearly seen and articulated by Christ's Church today.
Two examples will suffice at this point.
The early church had a strange reverance for Virgins. Granted, this idea and practice grew out of a reverance for The Virgin Mary. But the veneration of virgins as holy women simply because of their virginity caused a heap of grief in the life of the church for many hundreds of years. It created a wrong view of marriage and sex, even advocating and encouraging celibate marriage relationships, led to the so-called celibate priesthood and eventually worked itself into full blown Mariolotry.
The second example is the early Church's teaching on unbaptized infants. Augustine states, "this one thing I profess as my deliberate conviction, that the opinion which is true (about the creation of souls) does not conflict with the most firm and well grounded artcle in the faith of the Church of Christ, that infant children, even when they are newly born, can be delivered from perdition in no other way than through the grace of Christ's name, which He has given in His sacraments."
He has been arguing that unbaptized babies go to perdition, even unbaptized babies of Christians. Some might call this a high view of the Sacraments. And, indeed it is. But it is also inconsistent with the testimony of Scripture, God's covenantal dealings with His people and Jesus's actions towards infants. I am not sure of the Roman Catholic position on this, currently. But the Universal position of the Protestant Church is that unbaptized children of believers are holy. The Reformed Church, since the time of the Reformation, has been unwilling to pronounce on the fate of unbaptized children of unbelievers. But has offered nothing but hope and solace to parents of children that die in utero or shortly after birth and before Baptism. This is good, right and Biblical.
So, I am thankful for Augustine. He was a truly amazing man and an incredible theologian. But I am also thankful that the Church of Christ has continued to grow in her Biblical and Theological understanding in these last 1600 years. And we look for even greater understanding of God's revelation to us in His Word in the next 1600 years!
As Reformed Christians, we beleive in the idea that God will continue to reveal truth to His Church. This is not New Truth. We are not expecting new revelation in terms of a new Word from God. The Canon is complete. God has spoken. But we do intend to have a greater understanding of His Word as the Church marches triumphantly forward.
Reading Augustine has been encouraging for several reasons. One, that he got so much right. Two, the Reformers, and particularly John Calvin, went back to Augustine to find those things that were right that the Church had lost and needed to learn anew. And three, I am encouraged that those things that Augustine and the early church got wrong, are for the most part, clearly seen and articulated by Christ's Church today.
Two examples will suffice at this point.
The early church had a strange reverance for Virgins. Granted, this idea and practice grew out of a reverance for The Virgin Mary. But the veneration of virgins as holy women simply because of their virginity caused a heap of grief in the life of the church for many hundreds of years. It created a wrong view of marriage and sex, even advocating and encouraging celibate marriage relationships, led to the so-called celibate priesthood and eventually worked itself into full blown Mariolotry.
The second example is the early Church's teaching on unbaptized infants. Augustine states, "this one thing I profess as my deliberate conviction, that the opinion which is true (about the creation of souls) does not conflict with the most firm and well grounded artcle in the faith of the Church of Christ, that infant children, even when they are newly born, can be delivered from perdition in no other way than through the grace of Christ's name, which He has given in His sacraments."
He has been arguing that unbaptized babies go to perdition, even unbaptized babies of Christians. Some might call this a high view of the Sacraments. And, indeed it is. But it is also inconsistent with the testimony of Scripture, God's covenantal dealings with His people and Jesus's actions towards infants. I am not sure of the Roman Catholic position on this, currently. But the Universal position of the Protestant Church is that unbaptized children of believers are holy. The Reformed Church, since the time of the Reformation, has been unwilling to pronounce on the fate of unbaptized children of unbelievers. But has offered nothing but hope and solace to parents of children that die in utero or shortly after birth and before Baptism. This is good, right and Biblical.
So, I am thankful for Augustine. He was a truly amazing man and an incredible theologian. But I am also thankful that the Church of Christ has continued to grow in her Biblical and Theological understanding in these last 1600 years. And we look for even greater understanding of God's revelation to us in His Word in the next 1600 years!
Monday, February 04, 2008
Augustine-On Prayer
A famous, pious, wealthy and noble lady named Proba once asked Augustine's advice on prayer. She was bothered by this comment from Paul in Romans, "Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."
She was very concerned about praying the wrong things because 'we know not what we should pray for as we ought. '
Augustine's advice to her may surprise you. He tells her to pray "for a happy life." Of course, he then gives an extended discourse on what really makes a life happy. He says, that "He, therefore, is truly happy who has all that he wishes to have, and wishes to have nothing which he ought not to wish."
We use the Lord's Prayer in our service and I am currently preaching my way through it. A couple of Augustine comments on the Lord's Prayer are particularly apt.
"--if we pray rightly, and as becomes our wants, we say nothing but what is already contained in the Lord's Prayer."
"And if you go over all the words of holy prayers (from Scripture), you will, I believe, find nothing which cannot be comprised and summed up in the petitions of the Lord's Prayer. Wherefore, in praying, we are free to use different words to any extent, but we must ask the same things; in this we have no choice." (emphasis mine)
She was very concerned about praying the wrong things because 'we know not what we should pray for as we ought. '
Augustine's advice to her may surprise you. He tells her to pray "for a happy life." Of course, he then gives an extended discourse on what really makes a life happy. He says, that "He, therefore, is truly happy who has all that he wishes to have, and wishes to have nothing which he ought not to wish."
We use the Lord's Prayer in our service and I am currently preaching my way through it. A couple of Augustine comments on the Lord's Prayer are particularly apt.
"--if we pray rightly, and as becomes our wants, we say nothing but what is already contained in the Lord's Prayer."
"And if you go over all the words of holy prayers (from Scripture), you will, I believe, find nothing which cannot be comprised and summed up in the petitions of the Lord's Prayer. Wherefore, in praying, we are free to use different words to any extent, but we must ask the same things; in this we have no choice." (emphasis mine)
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Augustine-on Cicero and Vanity
In 410 A.D., Dioscorus was taking a trip, apparently to Rome. He was nervous about what the Romans might ask him concerning their illustrious orators of the past, as well as the famous Greeks, but particularly Cicero. In order to prep himself, he wrote a hurried letter to St. Augustine with a long list of questions regarding Cicero's dialogues. He knew Augustine could help him save face in Rome.
Instead of answering Diascorus's question and relieving his fear of finding himself a fool for not knowing the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans, Augustine brutally takes him to task.
He says, "My question is: Why did you not say, "Any one who can make no reply ( about Cicero) will be proved to be illiterate and stupid, " but prefer to say, "He will be regarded as illiterate and stupid? Why, if not for this reason, that you yourself already understand well enough that the person who fails to answer such question is not in reality, but only in the opinion of some, illiterate and stupid?"
And here's the zinger!
"But I warn you that he who fears to be subjected to the edge of the pruning-hook by the tongues of such men is a sapless log, and is therefore not only regarded as illiterate and stupid, but is actually such, and proved to be so."
Instead of answering Diascorus's question and relieving his fear of finding himself a fool for not knowing the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans, Augustine brutally takes him to task.
He says, "My question is: Why did you not say, "Any one who can make no reply ( about Cicero) will be proved to be illiterate and stupid, " but prefer to say, "He will be regarded as illiterate and stupid? Why, if not for this reason, that you yourself already understand well enough that the person who fails to answer such question is not in reality, but only in the opinion of some, illiterate and stupid?"
And here's the zinger!
"But I warn you that he who fears to be subjected to the edge of the pruning-hook by the tongues of such men is a sapless log, and is therefore not only regarded as illiterate and stupid, but is actually such, and proved to be so."
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Augustine-Baptism of Faith
Letter 98, to Boniface.
Boniface asks "Why do we ask the parents questions about the child's belief when the child is obviously not capable of believing." The baptismal liturgy went something like this.
Minister: Does this child believe in God?
Parent: Yes, he believes.
Part of Augustine's answer is this, "...the answer is made that he turns himself to God because of the sacrament of conversion..."
And also, "Therefore an infant, although he is not yet a believer in the sense of having that faith which includes the consenting will of those who exercise it, nevertheless becomes a believer through the sacrament of faith."
So, in Augustine's thinking, baptism was the sacrament of conversion and made the infant a believer.
Boniface asks "Why do we ask the parents questions about the child's belief when the child is obviously not capable of believing." The baptismal liturgy went something like this.
Minister: Does this child believe in God?
Parent: Yes, he believes.
Part of Augustine's answer is this, "...the answer is made that he turns himself to God because of the sacrament of conversion..."
And also, "Therefore an infant, although he is not yet a believer in the sense of having that faith which includes the consenting will of those who exercise it, nevertheless becomes a believer through the sacrament of faith."
So, in Augustine's thinking, baptism was the sacrament of conversion and made the infant a believer.
Augustine
It is helpful to read the ancients, if for no other reason, than to see that our faith is also ancient. Furthermore, there is the wonderful aspect of its continuity. We have the wonderful privilege of reading the same Bible Augustine read over 1600 years ago.
One of the often overlooked realities of the reformation is that great saint, Augustine. Particularly in Calvin, the reformation took the form of simply returning to the doctrines and practice of the early church. Calvin quotes Augustine page after page. In Augustine's case, we are harkening back to around 400 A.D.
As I read through Augustine's letters, I have been repeatedly surprised and pleased to find great support for some of our most distinctive elements. By our, I mean, our denomination, the CREC, Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches.
I hope to give you a few more of his quotes as I get along. Augustine speaks of baptism in a most wonderful way, fully consistent with our views that children are full members of the church.
This one from Letter 98, to Boniface. Augustine is replying to a question from Boniface about whether Christian children are harmed when their parents offer sacrifices to idols when they are sick.
"To which I reply that, in the holy union of the parts of the body of Christ, so great is the virtue of that sacrament, namely, of baptism, which brings salvation, that so soon as he who owed his first birth to others, acting under impulse of natural instincts, has been made partaker of the second birth by others, acting under the impulse of spiritual desires, he cannot be thenceforward held under the bond of that sin in another to which he does not with his own will consent."
Augustine then argues that the child is not held guilty by the guilt of his parents offering sacrifice. But note what he does say in this paragraph. Baptism has great virtue, brings salvation and is the second birth. Perhaps we want to qualify these statements somewhat and Augustine himself does so in many places. But instead of running to the qualifications, and then believing the qualifications instead of the principle of the thing, we ought to take a moment to bask in the thing signified in baptism. We get the 'thing' as well as the symbol of the thing. What is it? Virtue, salvation, born again.
One of the often overlooked realities of the reformation is that great saint, Augustine. Particularly in Calvin, the reformation took the form of simply returning to the doctrines and practice of the early church. Calvin quotes Augustine page after page. In Augustine's case, we are harkening back to around 400 A.D.
As I read through Augustine's letters, I have been repeatedly surprised and pleased to find great support for some of our most distinctive elements. By our, I mean, our denomination, the CREC, Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches.
I hope to give you a few more of his quotes as I get along. Augustine speaks of baptism in a most wonderful way, fully consistent with our views that children are full members of the church.
This one from Letter 98, to Boniface. Augustine is replying to a question from Boniface about whether Christian children are harmed when their parents offer sacrifices to idols when they are sick.
"To which I reply that, in the holy union of the parts of the body of Christ, so great is the virtue of that sacrament, namely, of baptism, which brings salvation, that so soon as he who owed his first birth to others, acting under impulse of natural instincts, has been made partaker of the second birth by others, acting under the impulse of spiritual desires, he cannot be thenceforward held under the bond of that sin in another to which he does not with his own will consent."
Augustine then argues that the child is not held guilty by the guilt of his parents offering sacrifice. But note what he does say in this paragraph. Baptism has great virtue, brings salvation and is the second birth. Perhaps we want to qualify these statements somewhat and Augustine himself does so in many places. But instead of running to the qualifications, and then believing the qualifications instead of the principle of the thing, we ought to take a moment to bask in the thing signified in baptism. We get the 'thing' as well as the symbol of the thing. What is it? Virtue, salvation, born again.
Exhortation-God Sensitive Service
Today, we continue our sermon about the liturgy, our order of worship. We come here each Lord’s Day to gather with the saints and worship God. Many in the reformed tradition have realized that Sundays are for worshipping God. They are not to be seeker friendly entertainment hours that feed the self-esteem but do not reveal the glory of God. And I completely agree. We have drifted into times when we are so introspective that everything that goes on around us must somehow feed our own personal self-worth. And if it doesn’t, not only is it unhelpful, the talking heads tell us that it may even be evil.
But we are trying to find out who God is, what He desires, how we can be acceptable to Him, what pleases Him, and how our Sunday worship relates to all of this. So, the seeker sensitive mindset should not be ours. We should have a God sensitive mindset that governs what we do here and how we do it.
That being said, I do not want to disparage the humanistic aspect of corporate worship. We call our service, “The Lord’s Service.” The service belongs to Him, that is, our worship. And in that service, the Lord of Heaven and Earth, also serves us. He does not worship us but He does come to us and fulfill all of our needs. Not our ‘felt’ needs but our real and deep needs. And in this, we find that while we are not primarily seeking out our own desires, needs, and wishes here on the Lord’s Day, that they are all met anyway.
Furthermore, the more we pursue this course of seeking God first, the more we will find ourselves. This is a good picture of the life of the Christian paradox.
Seek ye first His kingdom, take up the cross and follow me, He who loses his life for my sake will find it.
So, while our paradigm in not one of seeker sensitivity, asking what they want and giving it to them, in our God-sensitivity, we find that God knows what we need and He gives it to us. In seeking His glory, we find our ultimate good.
But we are trying to find out who God is, what He desires, how we can be acceptable to Him, what pleases Him, and how our Sunday worship relates to all of this. So, the seeker sensitive mindset should not be ours. We should have a God sensitive mindset that governs what we do here and how we do it.
That being said, I do not want to disparage the humanistic aspect of corporate worship. We call our service, “The Lord’s Service.” The service belongs to Him, that is, our worship. And in that service, the Lord of Heaven and Earth, also serves us. He does not worship us but He does come to us and fulfill all of our needs. Not our ‘felt’ needs but our real and deep needs. And in this, we find that while we are not primarily seeking out our own desires, needs, and wishes here on the Lord’s Day, that they are all met anyway.
Furthermore, the more we pursue this course of seeking God first, the more we will find ourselves. This is a good picture of the life of the Christian paradox.
Seek ye first His kingdom, take up the cross and follow me, He who loses his life for my sake will find it.
So, while our paradigm in not one of seeker sensitivity, asking what they want and giving it to them, in our God-sensitivity, we find that God knows what we need and He gives it to us. In seeking His glory, we find our ultimate good.
Loving the Saints-Honesty is the Best Policy
Last Sunday in my communion meditation I said that an honest answer to why children are not allowed at the Lord’s Table is the belief that they are not welcome there. Specifically, that the reason is “that we think that Jesus does not like them that much.”
That statement may seem harsh and I did get some feedback from it. I want to make a bit of a clarification here. I am not saying that pastors and parents think bad thoughts about their own children. I strongly believe that pastors and parents think they are preventing harm coming to their children by keeping them away from the Table. It seems a strange thing to do to prevent harm but not if you think the cup is a potential curse for unworthy receivers.
I also grant that they have some good historical and even biblical reasons for doing so. I might add that I think that both their historical and biblical reasons are lacking. However, they are being faithful to what they think is the historical or biblical position. I am not asserting ill motives on their part.
However, if they are truly honest about their understanding of church history on this subject as well as their understanding of the Bible on this subject, it amounts to the fact that their children are not yet worthy recipients of the Table. As good Protestants, I hope they do not mean that worthy recipients merit God’s favor. What Protestants mean by worthy recipient is that they are objects of God’s favor. Since children are not welcome at the table, then they are therefore, by definition, NOT objects of God’s favor. I do not see how we can avoid this conclusion, no matter how we try to support a non- paedo-communion view from church history or even from the Bible.
Finally, we have to live with whatever the Bible teaches, even if it teaches that God does not like our kids that much until they reach a certain age. If that is what the Bible teaches, then I am prepared to alter my practice to conform to God’s standard. Thankfully, I have diverse Biblical teaching that explicitly tells me otherwise. God, the Father likes my children. Jesus does, too. And the Holy Spirit is willing to dwell with them on good terms. Not because they are good but because He is.
That statement may seem harsh and I did get some feedback from it. I want to make a bit of a clarification here. I am not saying that pastors and parents think bad thoughts about their own children. I strongly believe that pastors and parents think they are preventing harm coming to their children by keeping them away from the Table. It seems a strange thing to do to prevent harm but not if you think the cup is a potential curse for unworthy receivers.
I also grant that they have some good historical and even biblical reasons for doing so. I might add that I think that both their historical and biblical reasons are lacking. However, they are being faithful to what they think is the historical or biblical position. I am not asserting ill motives on their part.
However, if they are truly honest about their understanding of church history on this subject as well as their understanding of the Bible on this subject, it amounts to the fact that their children are not yet worthy recipients of the Table. As good Protestants, I hope they do not mean that worthy recipients merit God’s favor. What Protestants mean by worthy recipient is that they are objects of God’s favor. Since children are not welcome at the table, then they are therefore, by definition, NOT objects of God’s favor. I do not see how we can avoid this conclusion, no matter how we try to support a non- paedo-communion view from church history or even from the Bible.
Finally, we have to live with whatever the Bible teaches, even if it teaches that God does not like our kids that much until they reach a certain age. If that is what the Bible teaches, then I am prepared to alter my practice to conform to God’s standard. Thankfully, I have diverse Biblical teaching that explicitly tells me otherwise. God, the Father likes my children. Jesus does, too. And the Holy Spirit is willing to dwell with them on good terms. Not because they are good but because He is.
Communion Meditation-Jesus loves the little children
Jesus not only gives up his life for his people, He gives His life to His people. –Tim Gallant, The Case for Covenant Communion
Matt 19:13-15 13 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.
The kingdom of heaven belongs to the children. It is made up of such people. This is the exegetical meaning of Jesus’s statement here in Mathew. And as we have seen recently in our sermons on heaven and earth, Jesus is not talking about heaven, the afterlife, being for children (although it is). Nor, is He here talking about having a childlike faith or demeanor. He is saying that these children are in the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom that Jesus Himself inaugurated on earth. These children are His children and are in the kingdom. So, he lays hands on them and blesses them.
The more we practice paedocommunion and the more we study this issue in Scripture, the more I am astounded that we did not see it sooner and the more I am astounded that the church at large cannot see it now.
Jesus went out of His way to teach us to be like children and to teach us that little children, little carried children, infants and sucklings, ought to come to Him and do indeed belong to Him. To fail to see this is to fail to understand God, as Father, the way that we should. To not practice paedocommunion is to tell a very great lie about God, that He is dangerous in the wrong way, that unless we get things right, He is against us.
But the Scriptures teach us the opposite about God. He is Father, waiting on us to come to Him, eager to forgive, willing to overlook our faults because we are friends of Jesus, covered in His blood. A wrong view of the Lord’s Supper, paints God in a very different light. He is an austere judge, waiting to get us, not easily pacified, is perfectionistic, doesn’t really care if we are covered in Jesus’s blood. I grant that one may not be a paedocommunionist and still have basically right views about God. But, let’s be honest. The reason we won’t let our children come and eat Jesus’s food, is because we think Jesus does not really like them yet. But Jesus tells us, and you, very differently than that in Scripture. Let the children come unto me. I say, “Come to Jesus and eat, you and your children, believing in God’s promises to you and to them.”
Matt 19:13-15 13 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.
The kingdom of heaven belongs to the children. It is made up of such people. This is the exegetical meaning of Jesus’s statement here in Mathew. And as we have seen recently in our sermons on heaven and earth, Jesus is not talking about heaven, the afterlife, being for children (although it is). Nor, is He here talking about having a childlike faith or demeanor. He is saying that these children are in the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom that Jesus Himself inaugurated on earth. These children are His children and are in the kingdom. So, he lays hands on them and blesses them.
The more we practice paedocommunion and the more we study this issue in Scripture, the more I am astounded that we did not see it sooner and the more I am astounded that the church at large cannot see it now.
Jesus went out of His way to teach us to be like children and to teach us that little children, little carried children, infants and sucklings, ought to come to Him and do indeed belong to Him. To fail to see this is to fail to understand God, as Father, the way that we should. To not practice paedocommunion is to tell a very great lie about God, that He is dangerous in the wrong way, that unless we get things right, He is against us.
But the Scriptures teach us the opposite about God. He is Father, waiting on us to come to Him, eager to forgive, willing to overlook our faults because we are friends of Jesus, covered in His blood. A wrong view of the Lord’s Supper, paints God in a very different light. He is an austere judge, waiting to get us, not easily pacified, is perfectionistic, doesn’t really care if we are covered in Jesus’s blood. I grant that one may not be a paedocommunionist and still have basically right views about God. But, let’s be honest. The reason we won’t let our children come and eat Jesus’s food, is because we think Jesus does not really like them yet. But Jesus tells us, and you, very differently than that in Scripture. Let the children come unto me. I say, “Come to Jesus and eat, you and your children, believing in God’s promises to you and to them.”
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Education is Books
Well, maybe education is not simply books but it is quite clearly learning to read books. Learning to read involves more than just phonics. I am still learning how to read. But Carlyle's insight into how education has changed over the years is very helpful to us.
Have a look at any home school curriculum guide or brochure. The shear number of materials is mind boggling. I am very thankful that having another option in education has produced such a vast array, if not dizzying array of educational materials. This is a good thing.
However, many home schoolers lose the forest for the trees in the same way that their local government schools do or even their well-meaning Christian school does. The result is a frenetic approach to education that can be a detriment to real learning as well as to home and church life.
What is the goal of education?
Carlyle says this, "If we think of it, all a University, or final highest school can do for us, is still what the first school began doing,-- teach us to read. We learn to read, in various languages, in various sciences; we learn the alphabet and letters of all manner of Books. But the place where we are to get knowledge, even theoretic knowledge, is the Books themselves! It depends on what we read, after all manner of Professors have done their best for us. The true University of these days is a Collection of Books." (emphasis his)
Have a look at any home school curriculum guide or brochure. The shear number of materials is mind boggling. I am very thankful that having another option in education has produced such a vast array, if not dizzying array of educational materials. This is a good thing.
However, many home schoolers lose the forest for the trees in the same way that their local government schools do or even their well-meaning Christian school does. The result is a frenetic approach to education that can be a detriment to real learning as well as to home and church life.
What is the goal of education?
Carlyle says this, "If we think of it, all a University, or final highest school can do for us, is still what the first school began doing,-- teach us to read. We learn to read, in various languages, in various sciences; we learn the alphabet and letters of all manner of Books. But the place where we are to get knowledge, even theoretic knowledge, is the Books themselves! It depends on what we read, after all manner of Professors have done their best for us. The true University of these days is a Collection of Books." (emphasis his)
Sincerely
Motivated by the reading of Rory Stewart, I have been making my way through Thomas Carlyle's essays on heroes. They are very good. Some of his heroes may bother you but keep plowing through. He has some good things to say and in saying them, it becomes clear to one that our times have changed, that our ideas of heroes, or even the concept of real heroes, has dramatically changed.
Carlyle's preeminent virtue among all of his heroes is sincerity. He gives Mahomet, Rousseau and even Nitzsche high marks for being sincere. Part of this is certainly true. A man is nothing less than a rogue if he is not sincere. If he is manipulating people for anything less than his own sincere belief, then he ought not to be considered anybody's hero. I grant that much.
But what of the man who is sincerely wrong? And not wrong is some superficial triviality but wrong in the big things? Wrong in the pursuit of God? Wrong in the application of government? Wrong in the necessity of reformation or even of revolution?
Carlyle forgives much as long as the man possesses this great virtue of sincerity. Of course, we are those who stand on the truth of Scripture in the ultimate things. But Carlyle is driving at something other than that in these lectures. He is driving at what makes a great man great, whether famous or infamous. And to that end, his lectures are well worth reading.
Carlyle's preeminent virtue among all of his heroes is sincerity. He gives Mahomet, Rousseau and even Nitzsche high marks for being sincere. Part of this is certainly true. A man is nothing less than a rogue if he is not sincere. If he is manipulating people for anything less than his own sincere belief, then he ought not to be considered anybody's hero. I grant that much.
But what of the man who is sincerely wrong? And not wrong is some superficial triviality but wrong in the big things? Wrong in the pursuit of God? Wrong in the application of government? Wrong in the necessity of reformation or even of revolution?
Carlyle forgives much as long as the man possesses this great virtue of sincerity. Of course, we are those who stand on the truth of Scripture in the ultimate things. But Carlyle is driving at something other than that in these lectures. He is driving at what makes a great man great, whether famous or infamous. And to that end, his lectures are well worth reading.
Not Dead
It's been a while. I've not been idle. I promise. I hope that means that I have been busy but I fear that it really means that I have simply been too inefficient.
Our school year is off and running. Our church is doing well. The wind is blowing. The temperatures are falling and thanksgivings fill the air.
God is always good.
He has blessed me with a new schedule; one I hope will enable me to be more productive.
We'll see.
Projects purposed include finishing the running posts and doing some more work on the child rearing booklet.
Lord willing, those posts will be forthcoming.
Our school year is off and running. Our church is doing well. The wind is blowing. The temperatures are falling and thanksgivings fill the air.
God is always good.
He has blessed me with a new schedule; one I hope will enable me to be more productive.
We'll see.
Projects purposed include finishing the running posts and doing some more work on the child rearing booklet.
Lord willing, those posts will be forthcoming.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Exhortation-Loving God
We like to flatter ourselves that ourselves that our faith is believing and that believing somehow means simply hearing or assenting. But the Scriptures hold us to a much higher standard.
1 John 4:20-21 20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.
You cannot love God and hate your brother. Even here, we flatter ourselves, thinking that we do not have ill, seething feelings towards our brother. But hatred often does not look like ill, seething emotions or even words. Sometimes it comes out in calm or even flattering speech.
Some Christians so flatter themselves that if they SAY nice things then they must be nice. And if they are nice, then they must somehow be a disciple of Jesus. This is the ‘good people’ theory. They are just ‘good people’. But God does not allow for this kind of hypocrisy when the same lips that utter nice words in order to be heard by certain people also utter despising words to other people.
Also, when someone fancies themselves spiritual because they can write spiritual words, God is not mocked when that same person is attracted the world’s allurements, whether money, beautiful things, power, sex, prestige, honor at the world’s table, or many other sins. God sees. God knows. It is just that a hypocrite doesn’t really care if God sees or God knows. They are only playing their game for the eyes of watching men. This is why this person has a hard time being obedient when the restraints of coercive power are removed. When mother and father, husband, minister or friends stop applying the pressure to do what is right, they slip off into sinful behavior, proving what their heart was all along.
We are all prone to this kind of sin. I am not saying that we are all hypocrites but it is true that without God’s ordained means of grace and authority, we would be much more likely to fall into these kinds of sins. We need the authority of fathers and mothers, husbands, ministers and friends to keep us from following our sinful inclinations. These are God’s means of grace to us. But we also need to realize our own sinful inclinations, confess them and repent of them. So that, when we find ourselves free from any coercive powers, we then choose to do what is right because it is right, because it pleases the Lord, because we are following the Holy Spirit.
James 1:22 22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
Brothers and sisters, do not be deceived, love of God reveals itself in your behavior. That love is expressly revealed by loving your closest neighbors. If you want to measure how much you love God, all you have to do is see how you treat your wife or husband, your children, your parents. To the extent that you have not loved them well, you have not loved Him well. So, let us confess our lack of love of God for our lack of love for them that God may forgive us and enable us to love deeply, as Jesus loved, giving Himself a sacrifice for others.
1 John 4:20-21 20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.
You cannot love God and hate your brother. Even here, we flatter ourselves, thinking that we do not have ill, seething feelings towards our brother. But hatred often does not look like ill, seething emotions or even words. Sometimes it comes out in calm or even flattering speech.
Some Christians so flatter themselves that if they SAY nice things then they must be nice. And if they are nice, then they must somehow be a disciple of Jesus. This is the ‘good people’ theory. They are just ‘good people’. But God does not allow for this kind of hypocrisy when the same lips that utter nice words in order to be heard by certain people also utter despising words to other people.
Also, when someone fancies themselves spiritual because they can write spiritual words, God is not mocked when that same person is attracted the world’s allurements, whether money, beautiful things, power, sex, prestige, honor at the world’s table, or many other sins. God sees. God knows. It is just that a hypocrite doesn’t really care if God sees or God knows. They are only playing their game for the eyes of watching men. This is why this person has a hard time being obedient when the restraints of coercive power are removed. When mother and father, husband, minister or friends stop applying the pressure to do what is right, they slip off into sinful behavior, proving what their heart was all along.
We are all prone to this kind of sin. I am not saying that we are all hypocrites but it is true that without God’s ordained means of grace and authority, we would be much more likely to fall into these kinds of sins. We need the authority of fathers and mothers, husbands, ministers and friends to keep us from following our sinful inclinations. These are God’s means of grace to us. But we also need to realize our own sinful inclinations, confess them and repent of them. So that, when we find ourselves free from any coercive powers, we then choose to do what is right because it is right, because it pleases the Lord, because we are following the Holy Spirit.
James 1:22 22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
Brothers and sisters, do not be deceived, love of God reveals itself in your behavior. That love is expressly revealed by loving your closest neighbors. If you want to measure how much you love God, all you have to do is see how you treat your wife or husband, your children, your parents. To the extent that you have not loved them well, you have not loved Him well. So, let us confess our lack of love of God for our lack of love for them that God may forgive us and enable us to love deeply, as Jesus loved, giving Himself a sacrifice for others.
Communion Mediation-Head and Body
Lately, we have been talking a great deal about being in fellowship with the saints, serving them, loving them. It is what we emphasize repeatedly here at the Lord’s Table, Communion, the Eucharistic meal. We are to be in fellowship with God and with His people. The one loaf signifies not only the broken body of Jesus, broken for us, but also the body of Jesus shared communally with all of us. Our unity in Jesus is a reality. Jesus is the one loaf but we also are the one loaf. He is the head of the body, the church, but we are the body of Christ, the church. The one loaf represents Christ, head and body.
Now, something is powerfully wrong when there are divisions and strife in the body of Christ. What is supposed to be a unified body becomes a divided body. This is what was happening in Corinth when the apostle Paul warned that some of them were sick and even had died because of how they partook of the Lord’s Supper.
The supper is a wonderful gift to the church, a place and an action wherein we receive the thing signified in the sign. We receive Jesus as we eat and drink together. How shameful is it when we parcel Him out, only wanting certain portions of the body of Christ, receiving some and not others, maintaining bitterness, withholding forgiveness, thinking of oneself above others. These are the kinds of sins, the not discerning the Lord’s Body, that was a great problem in the Corinthian Church. They did not recognize that the gathered saints were the earthly manifestation of Christ with us. This is a very great sin and one that we ought not to make.
So, it is fitting that we look around, that we see who is here, that we rejoice with them for partaking in Jesus. It is good for us to let all pretenses go at this meal, to humble ourselves before the Lord as unworthy in ourselves to even be here. And yet rejoicing that He has invited the likes of us to partake of this great meal with Jesus. If we are humble this way, if we see this rightly, then it is easy for us to esteem others more highly than ourselves. When we do this, we have become like Jesus, which is the goal of our Christian faith, which is the great blessing of this meal.
Now, something is powerfully wrong when there are divisions and strife in the body of Christ. What is supposed to be a unified body becomes a divided body. This is what was happening in Corinth when the apostle Paul warned that some of them were sick and even had died because of how they partook of the Lord’s Supper.
The supper is a wonderful gift to the church, a place and an action wherein we receive the thing signified in the sign. We receive Jesus as we eat and drink together. How shameful is it when we parcel Him out, only wanting certain portions of the body of Christ, receiving some and not others, maintaining bitterness, withholding forgiveness, thinking of oneself above others. These are the kinds of sins, the not discerning the Lord’s Body, that was a great problem in the Corinthian Church. They did not recognize that the gathered saints were the earthly manifestation of Christ with us. This is a very great sin and one that we ought not to make.
So, it is fitting that we look around, that we see who is here, that we rejoice with them for partaking in Jesus. It is good for us to let all pretenses go at this meal, to humble ourselves before the Lord as unworthy in ourselves to even be here. And yet rejoicing that He has invited the likes of us to partake of this great meal with Jesus. If we are humble this way, if we see this rightly, then it is easy for us to esteem others more highly than ourselves. When we do this, we have become like Jesus, which is the goal of our Christian faith, which is the great blessing of this meal.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Communion Meditation-Spilt Wine
Spilt milk does not disinherit one from the family. In some families, spilt milk means no dinner. But that is to the shame of that sort of father.
What spilt milk ought to mean is that the child needs milk. They are little and the cup is too big, or they are have a hard time paying attention to all the details, or they are just too clumsy.
But even fathers spill milk, too. But they almost always do so with an excuse. “Oops, my fingers are all buttery from the corn.” Or, with a cross look at an adjacent and innocent child, “Who put my cup right there?”
My question to you is, “Who is causing schism at the family table when milk is spilt by a little toddler? The child or the angry father? It is manifestly NOT the child.
Spilt milk, spilt happily, displays the unity of the family. It displays the welcome of children and the maturity of mother and father, brothers and sisters. Instead of thinking, “I can’t believe Billy would disrespect our table that way!”, everyone should be thinking, with a smile on their face, “I remember when I used to do that almost every night.”
My wife mentioned to a visitor, how she loves to see the wine on the pages of our communion songs. She received a bit of a surprised look. I suppose Presbyterians ought not to spill their wine on the Psalter.
But we ought not to cry over spilt wine. In fact, we ought to laugh and remember when we were just babies and wine was something we had to get used to. We ought to remember when it was hard to hold it and hard to wait for everybody else. But then we learned to discern the Lord’s body. And when we saw them waiting, we waited, too, because we knew that we were of them. And we ought to remember the times we were cross at the spilt wine and had to repent because we caused a little one to stumble.
But Jesus is kind to us. He gives us bread. He gives us wine. He gives us each other. He gives us little children and He builds our faith to be like their’s. So, let us eat and drink, crumble and dribble, drop and spill, grow and mature, all to His glory.
What spilt milk ought to mean is that the child needs milk. They are little and the cup is too big, or they are have a hard time paying attention to all the details, or they are just too clumsy.
But even fathers spill milk, too. But they almost always do so with an excuse. “Oops, my fingers are all buttery from the corn.” Or, with a cross look at an adjacent and innocent child, “Who put my cup right there?”
My question to you is, “Who is causing schism at the family table when milk is spilt by a little toddler? The child or the angry father? It is manifestly NOT the child.
Spilt milk, spilt happily, displays the unity of the family. It displays the welcome of children and the maturity of mother and father, brothers and sisters. Instead of thinking, “I can’t believe Billy would disrespect our table that way!”, everyone should be thinking, with a smile on their face, “I remember when I used to do that almost every night.”
My wife mentioned to a visitor, how she loves to see the wine on the pages of our communion songs. She received a bit of a surprised look. I suppose Presbyterians ought not to spill their wine on the Psalter.
But we ought not to cry over spilt wine. In fact, we ought to laugh and remember when we were just babies and wine was something we had to get used to. We ought to remember when it was hard to hold it and hard to wait for everybody else. But then we learned to discern the Lord’s body. And when we saw them waiting, we waited, too, because we knew that we were of them. And we ought to remember the times we were cross at the spilt wine and had to repent because we caused a little one to stumble.
But Jesus is kind to us. He gives us bread. He gives us wine. He gives us each other. He gives us little children and He builds our faith to be like their’s. So, let us eat and drink, crumble and dribble, drop and spill, grow and mature, all to His glory.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Potter Putter
The other day, Leah and I were engrossed in our HP books. Our five year old Calvin was watching us, sort of sad at the loss of his playmates.
He disapparated.
After a while we hear Rebecca question him upstairs, "How do you like Harry Potter, Cal?"
"It's good, got throgh the first page at the Dursley's."
He started Harry Potter 1 to see if he can catch up with the family.
He disapparated.
After a while we hear Rebecca question him upstairs, "How do you like Harry Potter, Cal?"
"It's good, got throgh the first page at the Dursley's."
He started Harry Potter 1 to see if he can catch up with the family.
Harry Potter Pages-No Spoilers
Interesting tidbit.
Since last Friday, my family has read 4758 pages of Harry Potter 7, The Deathly Hallows.
Six of eight of us have finished the book. We are eagerly waiting on mom to finish so we can have an all out family discussion.
No spoiler here, it's good.
More to say in a week or two when you all should have finished reading the book.
Since last Friday, my family has read 4758 pages of Harry Potter 7, The Deathly Hallows.
Six of eight of us have finished the book. We are eagerly waiting on mom to finish so we can have an all out family discussion.
No spoiler here, it's good.
More to say in a week or two when you all should have finished reading the book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)