Below are a number of links to posts addressing the recent Revoice conference that took place in St. Louis, MO. I commend them to your reading:

CREC Statement on Sexuality by Virgil Hurt, Presiding Minister of the CREC

Revoice: Sliding into Heresy by Dr. Peter Jones

A Time to Stand: Revoice and the Future of the PCA by Pastor Jon Payne

While Edmund Burke was writing in a specific context and to a specific subject in his Reflections on the Revolution in France, the following insight certainly imparts wisdom to the church in her ministry to the world (pastors and laymen alike), and rightly challenges the tendency toward a censorious spirit.

It is undoubtedly true, though it may seem paradoxical; but in general, those who are habitually employed in finding and displaying faults, are unqualified for the work of reformation: because their minds are not only unfurnished with patterns of the fair and good, but by habit they come to take no delight in the contemplation of those things. By hating vices too much, they come to love men too little. It is therefore not wonderful, that they should be indisposed and unable to serve them.

I have decided to simplify my thinking for the upcoming election, so perhaps this will be helpful to others. Paul writes in his first letter to Timothy: Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty (2:1-2, emphasis added). I am going to vote for the candidates on the local, state, and national levels that I believe will afford the best opportunity for that kind of life to be lived. I would encourage you to do the same (if you choose to vote), and then be at peace with your decisions, trusting the Lord with the outcomes.

Today’s news headlines are overwhelming, depressing, and anxiety-inducing. Heeding Paul’s admonition for our anxieties to drive us to pray (Phil. 4:6), let us do so:

O God, who art the Hope of all the ends of the earth, the God of the spirits of all flesh: We beseech Thee to hear our humble intercessions for all races and kindreds of men, that Thou wilt turn their hearts unto Thyself. Remove from our minds hatred, prejudice, and contempt for those who are not of our own race or color, class or creed; that, departing form everything that estranges and divides, we may by Thee be brought into unity of spirit, in the bond of peace. Amen.

And,

Almighty God, from whom all thoughts of truth and peace proceed: Kindle, we pray Thee, in the hearts of all men, the true love of peace, and guide with Thy pure and peaceable wisdom those who take counsel for the nations of the earth; that in tranquility Thy kingdom may go forward, till the earth be filled with the knowledge of Thy love; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

From The Book of Common Worship

At St. Mark we sing the Psalms, and within the last year have started chanting them. The Psalms are a regular part of the weekly liturgy, and should be for all churches. The Psalms are God’s prayer book; they are the Psalms of Jesus our king, and although Jesus taught the disciples to pray when they asked, surely the Psalms themselves tutor God’s people in the life of prayer. The church is taught a wider range of emotions in prayer than they might otherwise pray, as well as bolder and deeper petitions. This being true, the Psalms are also valuable for the daily life of the believer. The habit on Sunday should carry over into the habits of the other days of the week.

Several years ago, a fellow pastor and friend recommended Reading the Psalms with Luther as a helpful tool for learning to chant the Psalms. I obtained a copy, and began to incorporate chanting the Psalms as part of my morning prayers. On more than one occasion I have been thankful for the Lord’s perfect timing on what He has taught me to pray, and the choice words that have been a boon to my soul.

The current events and news of recent days have been weighing heavily, raising questions about the future, and causing a measure of unrest in my spirit. This morning Psalm 37 was the next one to be chanted. The first three verses were immediately apt:

Fret not yourself because of evildoers;
be not envious of wrongdoers!
For they will soon fade like the grass
and wither like the green herb.
Trust in the Lord, and do good;
dwell in the land and befriend faithfulness.

Within moments my faith was reminded of a faith-full outlook, what it is called to pursue, and my heart was lifted. I realize this experience is not only limited to believers and the Psalms, and can be known when reading other portions of God’s word, but the Psalms uniquely serve the praying-life of God’s people.

Lord, teach us to chant, and so teach us to pray.

The scepter of the wicked will not remain over the land allotted to the righteous, for then the righteous might us their hands to do evil. – Psalm 125:3

“…we are here warned that the the guardianship of God does not secure us from being sometimes exercised with the cross and afflictions, and that therefore the faithful ought not to promise themselves a delicate and easy life in this world, it being enough for them not to be abandoned of God when they stand in need of his help. Their heavenly father, it is true, loves them most tenderly, but he will have them awakened by the cross, lest they should give themselves too much to the pleasures of the flesh. If, therefore, we embrace this doctrine, although we may happen to be oppressed by the tyranny of the wicked, we will wait patiently till God either break their sceptre, or shake it out of their hands. It is a sore temptation to see the wicked exercising cruelty in the heritage of the Lord, and the faithful lying extended beneath their feet; but as God does not without just reason thus humble his people, they should comfort themselves from the consideration suggested in the text.

“God, from his willingness to bear with our weakness, moderates our adversities. Although, then, we may not possess in ourselves a sufficient amount of fortitude and constancy to enable us to persevere in our duty for a single moment, yet let this sentiment be present to our minds, That God will take care that, broken as we may be by afflictions, we shall not forsake his service.” – John Calvin

For the sake of the house of the LORD our God, I will seek your prosperity – Psalm 122:9

“If the salvation of our brothers is regarded by us as an object of importance, if religion is with us a matter of heart-work, we ought, at the same time, as much as in us lies, to take an interest in the prosperity of the Church. Whence it follows, that such as are indifferent about her condition, are no less cruel than impious; for she is ‘the pillar and foundation of truth,’ the inevitable consequence of her destruction must be the extinction of true piety. If the body is destroyed, how can each of the members fail to be involved in destruction? Further, this passage teaches us, that the Church is not an empty title, but must be sought for where the true religion prevails.” – John Calvin

If they shall have no dominion over me, then I shall be without spot, and I shall be cleansed from great sin. – Psalm 19:13

“It was because of this vice, because of this enormous sin of pride, that God came in humility. This enormous sin, this monstrous disease of souls, was the very thing which brought the almighty Physician down from heaven, humbled Him even to taking the form of a slave, exposed Him to ignominy, hung Him upon the tree, that by the saving strength of so potent a remedy this tumor might be healed. And now finally let man blush to be proud, for whose sake God has become humble.” – St. Augustine

In the foreword to his book, Planetary Service, Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy observed:

Every religion is characterized solely by its type of sacrifice. There are all sorts of human sacrifices, as well as sacrifices of animals, of money, of time, and of sanity. And the only religion which would be appropriate for all of mankind would require that we sacrifice part of ourselves. This is therefore the only binding religion which has a future. A religion demanding human sacrifices a la Hitler, must disappear.

I have a brother who is three years older than me. On the day that I was born, Dr. Green declared to my mother, “It’s another boy.” Earlier today I watched this video clip in which a similar announcement is made, but in a completely different context. Instead of the celebration of a birth, it is the devilish declaration of a medical assistant staring at the parts of a tiny, dismembered corpse in an over-sized petri dish.

I recently celebrated my forty-second birthday, which means that I was born in 1973, the same year that Roe v. Wade was passed. To state it coarsely, “I survived Roe v. Wade.” This is not to imply that my parents considered abortion, because that thought never entered their minds, but for over a generation a war has been waged against the womb. Dr. Ginde’s ironically dark statement about baby parts being “war-torn” in the video clip is gruesomely true.

I have a son who is three years old. He is another boy in this world, but not just another boy. He has a name, a delightful personality, and real relationships with family and friends. He is known. He is known by his mother, siblings, and me, and he knows us. Even more, he knows and is known by Jesus his Savior and King. My son has a soul.

I can’t help but wonder what the boy in the petri dish would have been like; his looks, his personality. He wasn’t just another boy either. He was/is a person; created to be known, to live life, to be loved, and, quite possibly, be a means for propagating more life. Who might have he married? What might have he named his son had one been born to him? The boy was fearfully and wonderfully made (Ps. 139:14) in the image of God (Gen. 1:26), and he, too, has a soul – as do millions of other boys and girls who have been aborted. May God have mercy upon him. May God have mercy upon them all.

Whether you are a new father to a daughter or have years of experience in that role, Strong Father’s, Strong Daughters by Meg Meeker is a valuable read that I cannot recommend highly enough. Drawing together the experience she gained in twenty years as a pediatric and adolescent doctor, thorough research, and a foundationally biblical perspective, Dr. Meeker provides comprehensive and straightforward insights regarding the relationship between a father and daughter as she expounds upon “The Ten Secrets That Every Father Should Know.” I read Strong Fathers last year, and immediately began to interact with and view my daughter in a more understanding way, and am planning to read it again this summer for a “refresher course.” In a day and age when so many different influences compete for a daughter’s attention, the most important is her father’s, and it is time well spent to learn how to more effectively become that primary influence in her life.

“Worldly government has laws which extend no farther than to life and property and what is external upon earth. For over the soul God can and will let no one rule but Himself. Therefore, where temporal power presumes to prescribe laws for the soul, it encroaches upon God’s government and only misleads and destroys the souls.”

“But the thoughts and intents of the heart can be known to no one but God; therefore it is useless and impossible to command or compel any one by force to believe one thing or another… Since, then, belief or unbelief is a matter of every one’s conscience, and since this is no lessening of the secular power, the latter should be content and attend to its own affairs and permit men to believe one thing or another, as they are able and willing, and constrain no one by force… Hence arise the well-known saying, found also in Augustine, ‘No one can or ought to be constrained to believe.”

“If then your prince or temporal lord commands you to…believe this or that, or commands you to give up certain books, you should say, It does not befit Lucifer to sit by the side of God. Dear Lord, I owe you obedience with life and goods; command me within the limits of your power on earth, and I will obey. But if you command me to believe, and to put away books, I will not obey; for in this case you are a tyrant and overreach yourself, and command where you have neither right nor power, etc. Should he take your property for this, and punish such disobedience, blessed are you. Thank God that you are worthy to suffer for the sake of the divine Word, and let him rave, fool that he is [1 Pet. 4:14; 16; Acts 5:41]. He will meet his judge. For I tell you, if you do not resist him, but give way. and let him take your faith or your books, you have really denied God.”

– excerpts from Martin Luther’s Secular Authority

Though private prayer be a brave design,
Yet public hath more promises, more love:
And love’s a weight to hearts, to eyes a sign.
We all are but cold suitors; let us move
Where it is warmest. Leave thy six and seven;
Pray with the most: for where most pray, is heaven.

– George Herbert, The Church-Porch, 67.

“Christian man, learn to comfort yourself in God’s gracious dealing toward the Church. That which is so dear to your Master, should it not also be supremely precious to you? Although your path be dark, can you not cheer your heart with the triumphs of His cross and the spread of His truth? Our own personal troubles are forgotten while we look not only upon what God has done and is doing for Zion, but on the glorious things He will yet do for His Church. Try this approach, O believer, whenever you are sad of heart and in heaviness of spirit: Forget yourself and your little concerns, and seek the welfare and prosperity of Zion. When you kneel in prayer to God, limit not your petition to the narrow circle of your own life, tried though it be, but send out your longing prayers for the church’s prosperity. ‘Pray for the peace of Jerusalem,’ and your own soul shall be refreshed.” – Charles H. Spurgeon

Matthew 5:45: “For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on just and the unjust.”

Romans 2:4-5: “despising the riches of His goodness and long-suffering, after their hardness and impenitent heart, treasure up unto themselves wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to every man according to his deeds.”

In The City of God, Book I, Chapter 8: “Of the Advantages and Disadvantages Which Often Indiscriminately Accrue to Good and Wicked Men,” Augustine builds his argument from the texts noted above, and writes, “nevertheless does the patience of God still invite the wicked to repentance, even as the scourge of God educates the good to patience….But as for the good things of this life, and its ills, God has willed that these should be common to both; that we might not too eagerly covet the things which wicked men are seen equally to enjoy, nor shrink with an unseemly fear from the ills which even good men often suffer…. For the good man is neither uplifted with the good things of time, nor broken by its ills; but the wicked man, because he is corrupted by this world’s happiness, feels himself punished by unhappiness…. Wherefore, though good and bad men suffer alike, we must not suppose that there is no difference between the men themselves, because there is no difference in what they both suffer. For even in the likeness of the sufferings, there remains an unlikeness in the sufferers; and though exposed to the same anguish, virtue and vice are not the same thing….And thus it is that in the same affliction the wicked detest God and blaspheme, while the good pray and praise. So material a difference does it make, not what ills are suffered, but what kind of man suffers them.”

His heart is steady; he will not be afraid, until he looks in triumph on his enemies. – Psalm 112:8 (ESV).

John Calvin writes regarding this verse: “Genuine stability is that which the prophet here describes, and which consists in reposing with unshaken confidence in God. A sense of calamities, while it alarms and disconcerts the faithful, does not make them faint-hearted, because it does not shake their faith, by which they are rendered bold and steadfast. In a word, they are not insensible to their trials, but the confidence which they place in God enables them to rise above all the cares of the present life. Thus they preserve calmness and composedness of mind, and wait patiently till the fit season arrives for taking vengeance upon the reprobate.”

Last night I had the pleasure of hearing Peter Leithart give an informal lecture related to his latest book, Gratitude: An Intellectual History. During his overview of Shakespeare’s play, Coriolanus (which is referenced in the book), Dr. Leithart made the point that ingratitude creates isolation. This struck me as especially profound given that Adam’s fall in the garden can rightfully be traced to his ingratitude, which immediately resulted in isolation. Isolation from God. Isolation from Eve. Isolation from the creation that he was called to rule over and serve. Granted, the isolation was not absolute, but the isolating barrier of sin significantly complicated his relationships and calling. Ingratitude resulted in isolation for Adam, and it results in isolation for you and me today. How much of our sin is fundamentally a result of ingratitude?

The Scriptures are replete with admonitions to thanksgiving. Heavy doses are given in the Psalms and Epistles. Paul exhorts the Ephesians to be giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ (5:20). This is not Paul calling believers to an unrealistic spirituality, but to the essence of spirituality. Thanksgiving is the most basic particle of the spiritual air that we are to breathe, and as it fills our lungs and readily falls from our mouths, it will keep us from a host of sins. If you find yourself in a constant state of frustration and irritability with your spouse and children, and you just want to be “alone” (read: “isolated”), then there is a good chance that you need to give thanks to the Lord for the spouse and children He has given you. What event or circumstance (for which you should be thankful, according to Paul) would you blame for your anger? When your child is ungrateful, or refuses to say “Thank you” to their sibling that has just done them a kindness, he or she is isolating themselves. Ingratitude creates isolation. Gratitude creates true fellowship and community. Take some time to examine your sins, and trace them to their core. You will likely find ingratitude at the root.

I am thoroughly enjoying Meg Meeker’s Strong Father, Strong Daughters. It is insightful, challenging, and encouraging, and I highly recommend it to fathers of daughters, regardless of their age. So, if you’re a new dad of a daughter, read this book. If you have years of experience fathering a daughter, you will still find this to be an edifying read.

I have been tweeting a few quotes over the past weeks as I have made my way through this book, but here is one that exceeds 140 characters, but is well worth sharing. In the chapter “Be the Man You Want Her to Marry,” Dr. Meeker makes this point:

You want your daughter to live freely, without fear. So show her how. Be the man you want her to marry, because chances are excellent that when she is mature, she will look for you (albeit subconsciously) in another another man. If you haven’t a clue what a good father looks like, look around and find someone who is doing it well. Then watch him, learn from him, mimic him. As you practice, you will change your daughter’s life. She will absorb who you are. And one day, she will turn around and reward you with a son-in-law you can respect.

Marc Yoder makes some excellent points in this post.

Yesterday I had just finished my workout and gone upstairs when Noah (2 yrs. old) insisted that we play “dig dirts.” I was thinking a shower took first priority, and almost told him that I would play with him after getting cleaned up, but, thankfully, acquiesced. We got out the big board with roads painted on it that was a Christmas present from his older brothers, and laid it on the carpet in the living room. Noah trooped to the den and returned with his clear, plastic container of tractors and road construction machines. The scooping and dumping began. A short while later, Noah went back to the den again, this time returning with his matching container of Legos, all of which he readily dumped out onto the board. He instructed me to make a tractor, so I did. Then he asked me to build another one, so I did again. As we were playing, Noah looked up and simply said, “I wuv you, Daddy.” I told him I loved him too, and gave him a kiss. Then he intently looked up at me again and said, “Big sqweeze?” I replied, “I would love a big squeeze.” Wrapping his arms around my neck, he made the groaning noise that comes with giving a big squeeze. Then it was back to Legos and tractors and dig dirts.

Now, I had not had a particularly hard day, but I was physically and emotionally weary, and things were weighing on my mind (as is often the case for any pastor). Noah’s unsolicited “I wuv you, Daddy” was a “word fitly spoken” (Prov. 25:11). They were “gracious words” that “are like a honeycomb, sweetness to the soul and health to the body” (Prov. 16;24). It quickly occurred to me that had I not stopped to play with him the moment would not have happened at all. What began as an ordinary playtime that any father and son could have shared, became an extraordinary occasion for God’s kindness. The Lord knew what I needed, and He orchestrated the instant with precision. Sometimes help comes unexpectedly. And sometimes love comes in little packages.

In light of the 41st Anniversary of Roe v Wade, and the 56 million babies that have been murdered during that time, it seems fairly natural to ask what happens to baby boys and girls when their life is aborted. As a Biblical-Calvinist-Reformed-Presbyterian-Predestinarian-Total Depravity Believing Christian, the first answer that comes to mind is, “I do not know for sure. Those are the secret things that belong to God,” as Deuteronomy 29:29 states: The secret things belong to the Lord our God....That is true enough, but then the next part of that verse declares, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. So what does God’s word further reveal? In Romans 5 Paul says, where sin increased, grace abounded all the more. I know there is a context in which that verse is given, but I simply want us to consider the nature and character of God that underlies those words. God’s favor, His grace is greater than sin. And that being true, then can we not rightly have the expectation that in the awful increase of sin that is abortion, that grace abounds more still? Surely God’s forgiving grace in the Lord Jesus Christ has come to those who are repentant of their participation in abortion in some form or fashion. If there is grace for those who knowingly murdered, can we not also conclude that there is grace for the tiny victims of murder? Now, understand and remember that I am a proponent of the doctrine of total depravity. I believe Psalm 51:5 is true. I also believe Psalm 139:13-16, and I believe that the Holy Spirit can be at work in the womb (cf. Isaiah 44:2; Jeremiah 1:5; Job 10:11; Matthew 1:18), though I can hardly explain it. So, to ask the question again, “Do aborted baby boys and girls go to heaven?” I do not know for sure, but I would not be surprised if they did, because there is a wideness to God’s mercy, for where sin increases, grace abounds all the more.

Pretty cool. A student’s answer in relation to John 10:15: “I lay down my life for the sheep” referenced Abel as tending flocks. I don’t think I’ve ever thought about Abel in Good Shepherd terms before, but it certainly makes sense. He was also a shepherd who laid down his life, though not willingly. Jesus is the Greater Abel, and not only in the terms conveyed in Hebrews 12:24. Cain murders Abel his brother. Jesus is put to death by his “brothers,” the Jews, via the Romans. BUT the significant difference is articulated by Jesus in John 10:17-18: For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. ¹⁸ No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.

“We give thanks to Thee, O Lord, for all saints and servants of Thine, who have done justly, loved mercy, and walked humbly with their God. For all the high and holy ones, who have wrought wonders and been shining lights in the world, we thank Thee. For all the meek and lowly ones, who have earnestly sought Thee in darkness, and held fast their faith in trial, and done good unto all men as they had opportunity, we thank Thee. Especially for those men and women we have known and loved, who by their patient obedience and self-denial, steadfast hope and helpfulness in trouble, have shown the same mind that was in Christ Jesus, we bless Thy holy name. As they have comforted and upheld our souls, grant us grace to follow in their steps, and at last to share with them in the inheritance of the saints in light; through Jesus Christ our Savior. Amen.” – Book of Common Worship

A quote from Martin Luther:

In sleep all weariness is laid aside and we become cheerful again, and rise in the morning fresh and well. So shall we awake from our graves in the last day as though we had only slept at night, and bathe our eyes and rise fresh and well. Heaven and earth will be renewed, and we who believe shall be everywhere at home.

Autumn has fallen
And soon all the leaves
Let go and take flight
From the limbs of the trees.
Burnt-hued acrobats,
Spinning and swirling,
Balance on breezes,
Twisting and twirling.
Upon the earth’s floor,
By true expertise,
Alighting at last
With the greatest of ease.

“Denial of self is the key to the solution of numerous practical questions which perplex the sober-minded believer of today. A right understanding of this basic biblical demand would silence a host of errors regarding evangelism, sanctification, and practical living” – Walter J. Chantry, The Shadow of the Cross: Studies in Self-Denial

The conclusion from today’s sermon:

“Deprived of wine at the Lord’s table, it is no wonder that we fight our battles so timidly, no wonder we stay so nerdy and are constantly plagued by bullies. Wine emboldens the soldier for battle, and wine also flows at the victory celebration that follows. Those who devoured their enemies would devour a victory feast. This is the feast we enjoy: the Lord has aimed His arrows…at all our enemies, at the greatest enemies – sin and death – and has driven them from the field. He makes us boisterous with wine, and He makes us flourish with grain and new wine” (Peter Leithart, Blessed Are the Hungry, 111).

Brothers and sisters, as we engage in ongoing battles, as our faith is tested and tried, as the Lord calls us to fight, to defend, to advance at whatever position He has placed us on the battle-front, isn’t the sign of wine precisely what our faith needs? To be made boisterous for the fight? To see and taste the victory that has already been won, and the rest that awaits when the war is over at last? To take up the cup of the King who reigns at this very moment is to declare His Lordship over all. It is to declare, however poorly faith may see it at the present, that Jesus governs all that come to pass, and is working out all things for the purposes of His kingdom.

And perhaps in the midst of the battle you lose sight of that reality, of that truth. Perhaps in the constant onslaught of headlines of what rulers of nations are conspiring, and how the church is being persecuted as result, it’s hard to see and believe that Jesus is ruling as the King of Kings, as the Emperor over the whole world. Your faith may be challenged in precisely those ways, and perhaps with every new headline you read, there’s a twinge of fear that you sense, wondering what’s going to happen, wondering what the state of the world or even our country is going to be like for your children or grandchildren in the coming years.

When your faith feels small, when it feels weak, and maybe you feel somewhat ashamed to admit your anxiety, then there’s no better place for you to be right now, than to be reminded of what is true, and to receive courage for what lies ahead. See what a gracious King we serve and follow. See what a merciful Savior is ours who invites us week after week to the rest at His table; to this table where His victory is proclaimed, and where we are made boisterous with the wine that He gives.

Your King bids you to come. So come and rejoice and be glad with Him here.

Come, drink with Jesus who serves the best wine.

Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing is a modern spin on the classic Shakespeare play. On the whole his stylish interpretation is highly entertaining, driven by Shakespeare’s witty dialogue and a capable cast (many of whom have appeared in Whedon’s other works). I especially enjoyed the characters of Beatrice (played by Amy Acker) and Claudio (played by Fran Kranz). How can you not be engaged by Beatrice’s rapier wit? And the facial expressions Kranz brought to Claudio’s character were as impressive to me as his delivery of the dialogue.

(SPOILER ALERT)

However, there is one glaring problem with Whedon’s Much Ado: the opening scene. The movie begins with what is clearly the end of a one night stand between Beatrice and Benedick (played by Alex Denisof). Though “modern,” Whedon’s choice to give Benedick and Beatrice a history causes significant dissonance for the remainder of the film. When Benedick is later led to believe that Beatrice loves him, one of the three attributes that he extols of her during a soliloquy is that she is “virtuous.” Why would that matter to him since he’s already slept with her? Further, the tension that is created between Claudio and the object of his affection, Hero (played by Jillian Morgese), is directly related to her sexual purity. Why should her purity matter in a world of promiscuity, as Whedon portrays? He holds fairly true to Shakespeare’s dialogue, and would have been foolish not to, but the climax of the movie (brilliantly acted) loses some of its power because of the contemporary context Whedon attempts to infuse. So, if you’re a fan of Shakespeare and/or Whedon, definitely see this film. You’ll probably enjoy 95% of it. Shakespeare’s mastery still shines through despite Whedon’s lack of virtue.

Gina Delfonzo of the The Atlantic wrote this excellent review.

A couple of years ago the writings of Patricia McKillip were recommended by Jeffrey Overstreet. I began with The Alphabet of Thorn, then read The Book of Atrix Wolfe, and am presently reading The Bards of Bone Plain. McKillip is a beautiful writer, and masterfully weaves the power of story and words into her own stories. The very subject she is creatively exploring she is also creatively employing, setting off the reader’s imagination to wonder about words.

In the following excerpt, from Chapter Seven of The Bards of Bone Plain, McKillip deftly describes the challenge of beginning to write.

He sat at a table in the school library later, thinking idly of the encounter, then of Jonah, and then ruthlessly clearing his head to think of nothing at all. He gazed intensely at a sheet of paper, breath suspended, a word on the quivering point of his pen poised and waiting to fall. Monoliths of books and manuscripts rose around him. All were crammed with words, words packed as solidly as bricks in a wall, armies of them marching endlessly on from one page to the next without pause. He forced the pen in his tight grip a hairsbreadth closer to the paper so that the word stubbornly clinging to it might yield finally, flow onto the vast emptiness. Point and paper met. Kissed. Froze.

He sat back, breath spilling abruptly out of him, the pen laden with unformed words dangling now over the floor in his lax fingers. How, he wondered incredulously, did all those books and papers come into existence? In what faceted jewel of amber secreted in what invisible compartment of what hidden casket did others find that one word to begin the sentence that layered itself into a paragraph, that built itself into a page, that went on to the next page, and on, and on?

Stumbled across some interesting parallels in Luke’s birth and resurrection narratives:

A. An angel of the Lord appears to announce the birth of Jesus to the shepherds, and they are filled with fear (2:8-11).
A’ Two men (angels) appear to the women at the tomb (announcing the resurrection) and the women are afraid (24 5-7).

B. The shepherds are given a sign of “a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger” (2:12).
B’ Peter sees the ‘sign’ of the “linen cloths by themselves” (24:12).

C. After the angel host departs, the shepherds go Bethlehem to “see this thing that has happened” (2:15), “with haste” (2:16).
C’ After hearing the women’s report, Peter runs to the tomb and sees the linen cloths by themselves (24:12).

D. The shepherds make known the saying that had been told them concerning the child (2:17).
D’ The women told the eleven and all the rest “all these things” (24:9).

E. The people who heard the shepherds “marveled” (2:18).
E’ Peter goes home “marveling at what had happened” (24:12).

You also have Mary specifically mentioned as treasuring up all these things and pondering them in her heart (2:19), and two Marys specifically mentioned as among those who announced the resurrection to the apostles (24:10).

The parallels and overlap of language are hardly accidental. Theologically, these parallels seem to indicate that the incarnation of Jesus foreshadows His resurrection. His first birth from the womb points forward to His second birth from the grave. This also means that you cannot have the Jesus of Christmas without the Jesus of Easter.

Alternate title to this post: “Oz the Great and Powerful…Not So Much.”

I have to admit that my expectations were probably a little bit higher than they should have been going into this movie, but the previews were tantalizing; Sam Raimi is the director (Spiderman trilogy); Rachel Weisz is in it; I’ve liked James Franco in other movies; and having enjoyed Alice’s most recent trip to Wonderland , I was especially looking forward to the re-imagination of the land of Oz. So, what was my overall reaction to the movie? General indifference. As Steven Greydanus puts it, “When I look at it, I believe this is Oz; it’s only the story, characters and dialogue that fall flat.”

Spoiler Warning!

The movie has some nice moments, and it doesn’t take long to realize that the movie is supposed to be fun. There’s plenty of humor when Oz (played by James Franco) is introduced, especially the interaction with his assistant Frank (played by Zach Braff). It’s clear that Raimi has respect for the 1939 classic, “The Wizard of Oz,” and there are plenty of hat tips in that regard. Starting the movie out in black and white, with the screen at a 4:3 ratio is one of them. As the moviegoer, once Oz arrives in the Land of Oz you know the screen will widen and reveal brilliant colors. Which it does. Later in the movie the Munchkins begin to sing, but Oz cuts of them off and tells them to “Take five.” It’s funny because you expect Munchkins to sing. So the movie has its moments, but they’re too few and far between to sustain it in the midst of its weak story and dialogue (as already noted). Rachel Weisz does well with her part. Mila Kunis is not convincing at all, and the only lasting impression of her is that she has a beautiful face (maybe that works because she’s later turned into the Wicked Witch of the West), but the delivery of her lines is empty. Also, her skipping down the yellow brick road seemed very out of place. Was I supposed to think of Dorothy from the 1939 film? I did, but the image didn’t fit.

Perhaps the greatest reason I was disappointed with the movie is because it flirted with a great idea, and then didn’t really do enough with it. The best scene in the movie is when Oz repairs the China Girls’ broken legs with super glue. In the context of the movie, you’re to think back upon the crippled girl that challenged Oz in Kansas to make her walk (both played by the actress Joey King). To the China Girl, Oz’s use of super glue is magical, and later on Oz comes to a semi-realization that he does possess a certain kind of “magic” through his scientific knowledge. The problem is, though, that neither Oz’s character development nor his dialogue really bring this out in such a way to make you believe that Oz sees the “magic” in his “ordinary” scientific knowledge. Perhaps it is expecting too much for Sam Raimi to channel “The Ethics of Elfland” from G.K. Chesterton’s Orthodoxy, but if Oz could have had an epiphany that Kansas was as magical as the Land of Oz, then that would have been something great… even powerful.

“Consciously or subconsciously Christians have accepted the whole ethos of our joyless and business-minded culture. They believe that the only way to be taken ‘seriously’ by the ‘serious’ – that is, by modern man – is to be serious, and, therefore, to reduce to a symbolic ‘minimum’ what in the past was so tremendously central in the life of the Church – the joy of a feast. The modern world has relegated joy to the category of ‘fun’ and ‘relaxation.’ It is justified and permissible on our ‘time off’; it is a concession, a compromise. And Christians have come to believe all this, or rather they have ceased to believe that the feast, the joy have something to do precisely with the ‘serious problems’ of life itself, and may even be the Christian answer to them.”

– Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the World, 53.

“To confess Christ as King means that the Kingdom He revealed and inaugurated is not only a Kingdom of some distant future, of the ‘beyond’ and thus never conflicting with or contradicting all our other earthly ‘kingdoms’ and loyalties. We belong to this Kingdom here and now, and we belong to it and serve it before all other ‘kingdoms.’ Our belonging, our loyalty to anything in ‘this world’ – be it State, nation, family, culture or any other ‘value’ – is valid only inasmuch as it does not contradict or mutilate our primary loyalty and ‘syntaxis’ to the Kingdom of Christ. In the light of that Kingdom no other loyalty is absolute, none can claim our unconditional obedience, none is the ‘lord’ of our life. To remember this is especially important now when not only the ‘world’ but even Christians themselves so often absolutize their earthly values – national, ethnic, political, cultural – making them the criterion of their Christian faith, rather than subordinating them to the only absolute oath: the one they took on the day of their Baptism, of their ‘enrollment’ in the ranks of those for whom Christ is the only King and Lord.”

– Alexander Schmemann, Of Water & The Spirit: A Liturgical Study of Baptism, 32.

“…there is no doubt that all pious folk throughout life, whenever they are troubled by a consciousness of their faults, may venture to remind themselves of their baptism, that from it they may be confirmed in assurance of that sole and perpetual cleansing which we have in Christ’s blood.” – Institutes of the Christian Religion, IV.XV.4

“When men want to play God…they can only impose their will over a large area by using implements of force and violence. To get a uniform culture, they have to impose it from above, and this works to nullify all local diversity. In a Biblical society, the larger government sets only general policy, and serves as a court of appeal; but in a humanistic state, the larger government sets all policy, specific as well as general, thus destroying local diversity, and there is no court of appeal because all local courts are manifestations of the central court.” – James B. Jordan, Judges: A Practical and Theological Commentary, 184-185.

From Lesslie Newbigin’s, The Gospel in a Pluralistic Society:

In discussions about the contemporary mission of the Church it is often said that the Church ought to address itself to the real questions which people are asking. That is to misunderstand the mission of Jesus and the mission of the Church. The world’s questions are not the questions that lead to life. What really needs to be said is that where the Church is faithful to its Lord, there the powers of the kingdom are present and people begin to ask the question to which the gospel is the answer. And that, I suppose, is why the letters of St. Paul contain so many exhortations to faithfulness but no exhortations to be active in mission (119).

This past Sunday’s sermon was on the death of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 27:45-56. As I mentioned, there are things that we cannot fully understand about the death of Jesus, but Matthew even includes those puzzling verses, “The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the holy ones who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many” (52-53). For more specifics about what Matthew is talking about, you will have to listen to the sermon, but I am convinced that Matthew wants us to compare this episode with an earlier one in his gospel.

In Matthew 8, after Jesus calmed the storm, we read in v. 28: “And when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men met him, coming out of the tombs….” What’s the implication? Before Jesus’ death, the only thing that comes out of tombs are demons, but now, with the death and resurrection of Jesus, saints, holy ones come out of tombs, because death can no longer contain them.

As this imagery settled in, I was immediately reminded of the account in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe when Aslan explains to Lucy how he can be alive again. She asks, “But what does it all mean?” “It means,” said Aslan, “that though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of Time. But if she could have looked a little further back, into the stillness and the darkness before Tim dawned, she would have read there a different incantation. She would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backwards.”

Indeed, and as Matthew would have us to see, because of the death of Jesus, because He willingly yielded up His spirit (27:50), the tombs that once produced demons, now produce saints. “Death is swallowed up in victory.” Matthew is giving us a picture, a foretaste of the greater resurrection yet to come, when all of the holy ones will be raised to enter into the holy city at last.

Matthew 27:45-56 recounts the death of Jesus. Going through the text, Matthew seems to make an intentional use of pairs, whether of words or themes. I am not entirely sure what Matthew’s underlying purpose might be for this, though my first guess is that it acts as a symbolic “double” witness, establishing the veracity of the event. Hard to know for sure, and perhaps further reading will give some other clues, but here it is for the time being. Sadly, some of the pairings get lost in English translations (including the ESV, referenced below), but I’ll do my best to make them clear.

land/earth – ge in Gk. (45, 51)
ninth hour (45, 46)
Jesus cried out with a loud voice (46, 50)
wait,yielded – aphiemi in Gk. (49, 50)
torn/split – σχίζω (v. 51, 2x – veil and rocks)
the earth shook – verb form / the earthquake – noun form (51, 54)
tombs (52, 53)
holy ones (saints)/holy city (52, 53)
raised – verb form /resurrection – noun form (52, 53)
soldiers keeping watch close by (54) versus women looking from afar (55) – different verbs are used.
2 Marys: Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph.
2 Mothers with two sons: Mary the mother of James and Joseph and the mother of the sons of Zebedee (James and John).

One other possible pair could be Jesus crying out in Aramaic/Hebrew, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” followed by the translation in the Greek, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

In preparing for Sunday’s sermon on Matthew 27:27-44, the following structure for the first section of the text emerged:

A. The soldiers took Jesus into the governor's headquarters (27).
 B. Jesus stripped of his garments and clothed in a scarlet robe (28).
 C. Jesus' head crowned with thorns (29a).
 D. The reed given (29b).
 E. The soldiers' mock obeisance: "Hail, King of the Jews!" (29d).
 D'. The reed taken (30b).
 C'. Jesus' head struck with the reed (30c).
 B'. Jesus stripped of the scarlet robe and clothed in his garments (31b,c).
A'. The soldiers led Jesus away to be crucified (31d).

Clearly the mock bowing and declaration of the soldiers is at the center of the text, and ironically declares the truth. The title “King of the Jews” is used three other times in Matthew’s Gospel. In 27:11, Pilate asks Jesus, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Placarded over Jesus on the cross was the sign which read, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews” (27:37). The other use of the title, interestingly enough, is found on the lips of the visiting Magi in Matthew 2, who arrive in Jerusalem asking, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews?” (2:2). At the beginning and end of Matthew’s Gospel, it is the Gentiles who are declaring Jesus as the “King of the Jews.” Also, whereas the soldiers bow down in mock worship, the Magi bow down in true worship. Further, the word translated “Hail” in 27:29 is the imperative form for the word “rejoice.” The wise men, upon departing from Jerusalem to go Bethlehem, “rejoiced greatly” when they saw the star (2:10). The same verb is used. These thematic and literary ties hint at a chiastic structure for all of Matthew’s Gospel, which others have explored, and certainly evidence the excellent manner in which Matthew, inspired by the Holy Spirit, penned the first gospel. Jesus is “the son of David” (1:1), He is the King of the Jews, even if it takes the Gentiles to proclaim it. And, subtly, Matthew would have us to imitate the Magi, and obey the solders’ command: “Rejoice! The King of the Jews.”

Douglas Jordan came up with the following structure of the Dark Knight Trilogy, and, since he doesn’t have a blog, he gave me permission to reproduce it here. Due to significant formatting issues, I had to insert the chiasm as a JPEG, so my apologies regarding the clarity and the ongoing formatting issues below it. I have also added a few further observations that Doug made as part of an online discussion of his proposed chiasm. Enjoy.

I missed an obvious entry. Between B & C, we have Gordon comforting Bruce after his parents die. Between C’ and B’, we have Batman referring to this event. Even have a flashback.

It’s no coincidence that there’s a prison at the beginning and end of the story, or that Batman’s trapped down a well (we even get a flashback to his childhood). His descent into the underground prison is clearly intended to mirror his ascent to the mountaintop. On the mountain, he learned Al Ghul had a wife. In the underground prison, he learns about Al Ghul’s child, and there’s a flashback to the mountaintop scene where he first learned about the wife. Also, a vision of Al Ghul approaches him in the prison, just like the living Al Ghul visited him in prison in the first film.

The flashback with Gordon putting his coat around Bruce is clearly intentional (in order to comfort Gordon, Batman reminds him of the way that Gordon once comforted him), and the inspiration caused by his parent’s death and Batman’s “death” mirror each other well.
I think it’s also
intentional that in both the first and third movie Wayne Enterprises technology falls into the wrong hands and threatens the city.

In the second movie, the contrast between Dent’s character at the beginning and end of the film is clearly intentional — that’s why in the final sequence Batman repeats the phrase that Dent said in the very early restaurant scene, “You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.” I suspect having the bat signal so near the beginning of the film and the end is also intentional.
The third movie makes it very clear that the turning point of Batman’s career is Rachel’s death.

My chiasm might be a bit too detailed, and probably works better at a higher level. For example, I find the parallel between Falcone’s insanity and Blake’s promotion to be a bit forced. 🙂

Anyway, one of Nolan’s mastered skills is flashbacks (every Nolan movie I’ve ever seen has a number of them), so at the end of his movies he wants us to be remembering what happened at the beginning, and I think he was very deliberate to do it for the trilogy as a whole in the latest film.

Just had another thought about the parallels between the dinner scene and the final scene of The Dark Knight:

Dent: When their enemies were at the gates the Romans would suspend democracy
and appoint one man to protect the city. lt wasn’t considered an honor,
it was a public service.

Rachel: Harvey, the last man that they appointed to protect the republic was named Caesar and he never gave up his power.

Dent: Okay, fine. You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

Caesar was one of three members of the First Triumvirate. I wonder if Nolan had this in mind with this exchange near the end of the film:

Batman: You don’t wanna hurt the boy, Harvey.

Dent: lt’s not about what I want, it’s about what’s fair! You thought we could be decent men
in an indecent time. But you were wrong. The world is cruel. And the only morality
in a cruel world is chance. Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair. His son’s got the same chance she had. Fifty-fifty.

Batman: What happened to Rachel wasn’t chance. We decided to act. We three.

“We three.” Another Triumvirate.

Today marks the Feast of the Holy Innocents, founded upon the bloody Christmas story recounted in Matthew’s Gospel:

Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called my son.”

Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men. Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah:
“A voice was heard in Ramah,
weeping and loud lamentation,
Rachel weeping for her children;
she refused to be comforted, because they are no more.” (2:13-18 ESV)

As documented in The Christian Almanac, “Virtually every culture in antiquity was stained with the blood of innocent children.” The Romans, Greeks, Persians, Chinese, Ancient Hindus and Arabs, Polynesians, and Primitive Canaanites all had various means and reasons for murdering (aborting) unwanted children. “Because they had been mired by the minions of sin and death it was as instinctive as the autumn harvest for them to summarily sabotage their own heritage. They saw nothing particularly cruel about despoiling the fruit of their wombs. It was woven into the very fabric of their culture. They believed that it was completely justifiable. They believed that it was just and good and right.

“The gospel therefore came into the world as a stern rebuke. God, who is the giver of life (Acts 17:25). the fountain of life (Psalm 36:9), and the defender of life (Psalm 27:1), not only sent us the message of life (Acts 5:20) and the words of life (John 6:68), He sent us the light of life as well (John 8:12). He sent us His only begotten Son – the life of the world (John 6:51) – to break the bonds of sin and death (1 Corinthians 15:54-56). For God so loved the world, that He sent His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life (John 3:16)” (758).

In Charles Dickens’ classic, A Christmas Carol, Ebeneezer Scrooge visits the Cratchit family with the Second Spirit, the Ghost of Christmas Present. Bob Cratchit and his son, Tiny Tim, have just returned from church on Christmas Day, and Mrs. Cratchit asks, “And how did little Tim behave?” “‘As good as gold,’ said Bob, ‘and better. Somehow, he gets thoughtful, sitting by himself so much, and thinks the strangest things you ever heard. He told me, coming home, that he hoped the people saw him in the church, because he was cripple, and it might be pleasant to them to remember upon Christmas Day who made lame beggars walk and blind men see.’”

To borrow from Tiny Tim, as we think about the children and adults murdered in Newtown, CT last week, it would be good to remember upon Christmas Day the Savior who was born to raise the dead and swallow up death in victory.

From John Calvin’s comments on Matthew 26:56: “While all things are mingled in confusion, and while the devil, by spreading darkness abroad, appears to overturn the whole order of the world, let us know that the providence of God shines above in heaven, to bring at length to order what is confused; and let us, therefore, learn to raise the eyes of faith to that calm sky.”

This Sunday is “Reformation Sunday” in Protestant circles, and one of the primary ways that we will celebrate the Holy Spirit’s work in the Church during this period is by the psalms and hymns that we will sing. Of course, Martin Luther is a central figure, not only for nailing his 95 Theses to the door of The Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, but also for the efforts that he made to reform the liturgy of the church, particularly the music. Famously he wrote “A Mighty Fortress Is our God,” which has become known as the “Battle Hymn of the Reformation.” While we probably think of the Lutheran chorales that emerged as being “slow, solemn, and heavy,” they were originally written “to be lively, energetic tunes, sung in unison with great enthusiasm” (Roff, Let Us Sing, 50). Of course, we’ll be singing the jazzy, rhythmic version of this great hymn.

Musical reformation was also central to the work of John Calvin, particularly in relation to the psalmody of the church. We’ll be singing “I Greet Thee, Who My Sure Redeemer Art,” an original hymn of the Strassburg Psalter which Calvin published in 1539 while ministering to the French refugees in that city. Later, when in Geneva, Switzerland, Louis Bourgeois joined Calvin, and acted as a composer and editor for the Genevan Psalter, which was completed in 1562. One of Bourgeois’ most famous tunes is RENDEZ A DIEU, which we will sing with the text of “Give Thanks unto the Lord, Jehovah” (based on parts of Psalm 118). Claude Goudimel would later add the harmonies to the Genevan Psalter, from which we will be singing Psalm 100, and the latter half of Psalm 68. If “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” is the “Battle Hymn of the Reformation,” then Psalm 68 is arguably the “Battle Psalm of the Reformation.” In a sermon on Psalm 68, Pastor Rob Rayburn provides the following context:

There is something to be said for singing this text to the same tune by which it has been known for centuries, for this is a psalm with a past! That, of course, can be said about all the psalms, as we have been making a point of saying week by week in our studies. All of them have their place in the history of Christian life and devotion through the ages. But it is particularly true of this psalm. Even before the Reformation, before anyone had begun to translate the Psalms into metrical verses and years before Matthäus Greiter had written his tune, this 68th psalm was chanted by Savonarola and his fellow Dominicans as they marched to the grand piazza of Florence where they were to meet their trial by fire. The year was 1497. The Italian Reformer’s preaching had been more than the corrupt Roman establishment could bear and they condemned the good man to death. And he met that death with the strength that only faith, and faith sustained by such a psalm as the 68th, can supply.

But, a few decades later, when the Reformation broke over the church the same psalm sustained the legions of Christians who were now exposed to suffering and persecution for advocating the return to a biblical faith. And the 68th played its great role in strengthening their faith as well. As I have told you before, the psalm became known, especially as a result of its use by the French Huguenots, as The Protestant Psalm of Battles. Listen to this from one scholar of the Calvinist Reformation, that is, in particular the Reformation in French and English speaking Europe.

‘The Calvinist Reformers were led by a militant aristocracy and financed by a wealthy bourgeoisie. They put up long and frequently successful battles. Yet the leadership and finance could not have won the day had the individual Calvinists not possessed, to quote Cromwell,‘a conscience of what they were doing.’ In many cases, they won their battles or retrieved those they had lost, not through generalship nor through greater economic power, but because of superior morale. In building up and maintaining this morale, the battle hymns of the Psalter played a conspicuous part.’ [W. Stanford Reid, The Battle Hymns of the Lord: Calvinist Psalmody of the Sixteenth Century, 36]

One of the Camisards, as the persecuted Protestants of the Cevennes (the hill country of southern France) were called, put it this way: ‘We flew when we heard the sound of the psalms, we flew as if with wings. We felt within us an animating ardour, a transporting desire. The feeling cannot be expressed in words. It is a thing that must have been felt to be known. However weary we might be, we thought no more of our fatigue, and grew light as soon as the psalms reached our ear.’ [In Ker, 96]

Well chief among the psalms that had that ennobling and nerving effect on the believers of the time was the 68th. I’ve told you before that the story goes that the authorities were so unnerved by the confident singing of Psalm 68 by the Protestant party that they outlawed it. Public singing has often been a means of carrying a message into the streets and stamping it upon the public consciousness (think of “We Shall Overcome” in the Civil Rights Movement). And so it was in the Reformation (STUDIES IN THE PSALMS No. 14 Psalm 68 April 18, 2004).

The reformation of music would continue, and in the 1600s notable hymn writers and composers such as Johann Cruger and Paul Gerhardt would supply the church with a treasure trove of hymns. Joachim Neander, “called the greatest of all German-Calvinist Reformed hymn writers,” is probably most famous for “Praise Ye the Lord, the Almighty” (101 Hymn Stories, Osbeck, 209). We will be singing “Wondrous King, All-Glorious,” for which he wrote the text and music.

I am looking forward to celebrating the Reformation, particularly through the musical heritage that we have received as a result. Come and join us.

The rake leans against the tree
Waiting for a pair of hands
To sweep fall’s confetti
Of oranges, yellows, and reds;
The sun’s frozen imprints.
Graceful embers tumbling
In the mischievous breeze,
Composing a burnished collage
Of winter’s prelude upon the ground;
Summer’s parade having passed.

Isaiah 65:17-19: For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be remembered or come into mind.
¹⁸ But be glad and rejoice forever in that which I create; for behold, I create Jerusalem to be a joy, and her people to be a gladness. ¹⁹ I will rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in my people; no more shall be heard in it the sound of weeping and the cry of distress.

Charles Spurgeon, in a sermon on the above text, stated, “Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, or anyone of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedications? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do no remember it.”

Last weekend I had the privilege and pleasure of attending Hutchmoot 2012. Putting the experience into words is no small feat, and any attempt on my part to do so would result in certain failure. The previous two Hutchmoots were wonderful in their own right, but I cannot remember being as utterly exhausted in the past as I was this year. (Based on Facebook posts, I wasn’t the only one dragging on Monday, taking catnaps, or falling asleep early that night). A sick two-year old and an eight-month old may have been contributing factors to being more tired going into Hutchmoot this year, but there is also a weariness that can come from trying to soak in so much truth, beauty, and goodness.

The sessions were rich, and though I wished I could have attended others (where’s a time-turner when you need one?), I am not sure how I could have absorbed much more. Having concerts three nights in a row was amazing, and Evie’s cooking was a partaking of her love and God’s love as manifest in the harvest of the earth and the fruit of the vine. But even more, the stories that I heard from fellow brothers and sisters amidst the fellowship shared around tables was, perhaps, the most encouraging aspect of the weekend. I heard of brothers doing a marvelous work for the poor in Modesto, CA. I heard of families seeking to be faithful in the churches where God has placed them, and their desire for their children to grow in their love and knowledge of the Savior. What I heard was testimony after testimony of believers endeavoring to be faithful to Jesus their king. And when I stepped back and thought about how spread out we Hutchmooters are, and how new or small our endeavors may appear to be, I could only be encouraged and conclude: “Aslan is on the move.”

I am teaching a Bible class at The Classical Academy in Franklin, and we are presently engaged in a study of Genesis. The students are keeping reading journals to coincide with their studies, and I encouraged them to look for repetitions of words or phrases; rhythms in the text, or changes in rhythm to the text. A common refrain over the first six days of creation as recorded in Genesis 1 is, “And there was evening and there was morning….” While we typically think of a day as moving from morning to evening, the biblical text (and Hebrew mind) reverses it. This order of evening to morning pictures the movement from darkness to light. This is hardly accidental, signifying the movement from Old Creation to New Creation. Israel was governed by a lunar calendar, which symbolically means the Old Covenant took place “at night.” Since Christ has come, that has changed. Paul mentions in Colossians 2:16-17: Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Jesus is the “light of the world” (Jn. 1:4-5, 9; 8:12); the bright morning star (Rev. 22:16);the sun of righteousness (Mal. 4:2), and was resurrected at the dawning of the day. We have moved from darkness to light. Paul exhorts the Thessalonian church, For you are all children of light, children of the day. We are not of the night or of the darkness. So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober.For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, are drunk at night. But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation (1 Thess. 5:5-8). As Christians living in the New Covenant we live in “the day.”

Now, back to my original point to my students about refrains and rhythms in the text. When we come to the seventh day of creation, notice what is said and what is not said: Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation (Gen. 2:1-3). What is missing in this recounting of the seventh day? The refrain of the previous six days, “And there was evening and there was morning….” There is no mention of evening or darkness. In other words, the seventh day, the Sabbath, is perpetually day. This points forward to the reality that has dawned in Christ, and to the future reality of the fullness of the New Heavens and the New Earth. The writer to the Hebrews instructs, “there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:9). This Sabbath is the Eternal Day when the glory of God and the Lamb are the source of light, and there will be no night (Rev. 21:23,25). It is when we will see His face, and night will be no more, and and we will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be our light, and we will reign forever and ever (Rev. 22:4-5). In that Day our work will be finished, the fullness of communion with our God and Savior will be realized, and we will enter into the royal rest with our King.

Jesus, in Matthew 22:44, quotes Psalm 110:1: The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet. John Calvin’s stated the following regarding Jesus’ words.

“The LORD said to my Lord. Here the Holy Spirit puts into the mouth of all the godly a song triumph, that they may boldly defy Satan and all the ungodly, and mock at their rage, when they endeavor to drive Christ from his throne. That they may not hesitate or tremble, when they perceive great emotions produced in the earth, they are commanded to place the holy and inviolable decree of God in opposition to all the exertions of adversaries. The meaning therefore is: whatever may be the madness of men, all that that they shall dare to contrive will be of no avail for destroying the kingdom of Christ, which has been set up, not by the will of men, but by the appointment of God, and therefore is supported by everlasting strength. Whenever this kingdom is violently attacked, let us call to remembrance this revelation from heaven; for undoubtedly this promise was put into the hand of Christ, that every believer may apply it to his own use. But God never changes or deceives, so as to retract what has once gone out of his mouth.

“Sit at my right hand. This phrase is used metaphorically for the second or next rank, which is occupied by God’s deputy. And therefore it signifies, to hold the highest government and power in the name of God, as we know that God has committed his authority to his only-begotten Son, so as to govern his Church by his agency. This mode of expression, therefore, does not denote any particular place, but, on the contrary, embraces heaven and earth under the government of Christ. And God declares that Christ will sit till his enemies be subdued, in order to inform us that his kingdom will remain invincible against every attack; not that, when his enemies have been subdued, he will be deprived of the power which had been granted to him, but that, while the whole multitude of his enemies shall be laid low, his power will remain forever unimpaired. In the meantime, it points out that condition of his kingdom which we perceive in the present day, that we may not be uneasy when we see it attacked on all sides.” –Commentaries, vol. 17, 69-70.

Noah

On Tuesday August 7th, a five-month old boy, Joel Gray, tragically died in the Nashville area. I can only begin to imagine the guilt and grief that the parents feel, given the gut-wrenching circumstances surrounding Joel’s death, and how hard it must be for them. I pray that, in ways beyond our understanding, the Lord will bring them a measure of peace. Joel was the youngest of four.

On Friday night, a few days later, Deborah and I were in our basement with our four children. We had come inside, after enjoying the unseasonably cooler temperatures and breeze of an August evening, to be treated to a makeshift play by our two oldest boys (8 and 7 years of age). Deborah was sitting on the floor with her back against a toy box/bench, with Noah (7 months old) on her right. He had his binker and a sizable stuffed animal to keep him occupied. I took a seat on the bench to Deborah’s left. The boys attempted to recruit their two-year-old sister for her part as the princess, and she was initially willing, but then when they turned the lights off to imitate a dark theater, she protested and eventually came and sat with Daddy. After about two scenes, which maybe took five or so minutes, it became clear the play needed a bit more planning, and maybe even a script, so I encouraged the boys to put a little more thought into it, and then present it to us again. It was time to get ready for bed and read anyway, so bringing the production to a halt was not a great tragedy.

What happened next I will never forget, and it is hard to describe how slowly time moved, and yet how quickly things happened, and how many thoughts raced through my head. I looked down, hearing Deborah cry out, as she lifted up Noah who was obviously choking. She raised him, arms up, thinking this would help and he would catch his breath again. A few seconds went by, but he was still choking, and his coughing became more restricted. His face reddened deeply and his body went limp. I moved down to the floor, and whether I took Noah from Deborah or she handed him to me I do not know. She was panicked, and, by now, Noah had even stopped coughing. In a flash, the reality of my son dying in my arms was tangible, and I knew the ambulance would never arrive in time. Thankfully, I remembered some of the training I had received years ago, and positioned Noah on his stomach on my left hand with his head pointing down. With my right hand I struck him on his back a few times, and, as I was doing so, remembered “finger sweep.” Deborah had dropped to her knees in front of me in silent and desperate prayer. Noah’s airway still seemed blocked. I sat him up, and reached my left index finger as far back into his throat as I could. Honestly, I do not know if I touched anything or not, but Deborah immediately recognized Noah was breathing again. He coughed a little, was drenched in sweat, and melted into his mother’s embrace. Shaking, sweating, still in the shock of the moment, eyes welling with tears, we thanked the Lord for sparing Noah’s life. As Deborah rocked him in her arms, he gurgled a bit, and soon was smiling as usual. I imagine the whole ordeal lasted all of sixty seconds. Maybe more, maybe less, but the fragility of life was so pronounced, so visible, so real. Death was so close, so very close, and was mercifully turned away just in time.

The Lord saved Noah’s life. I do not doubt that for a moment, and continue to be deeply grateful that He did. Deborah and I conversed and reflected later, trying to piece things together. We have absolutely no idea what Noah choked on. When Deborah set him down she did not see anything else there but the two items she gave him. And we were both right there next to him, and yet how perilously close Death came! The Lord who gives breath (Genesis 2:7; Acts 17:25) gave Noah breath again. Such moments compel faith to engage in self-examination; to be thankful; to seek the Lord’s face in prayer that He might use such moments to instruct and deepen faith. Moses prayed in Psalm 90:12: “teach us to number our days that we may get a heart of wisdom.” In Ecclesiastes, Solomon compares life in this world to a mere vapor, and throughout the Scriptures life is compared to a breath. I know that truth more profoundly now.

This past Tuesday, August 14th, Ford Tucker, the eighteen-year old son of CREC pastor Tim Tucker, was instantly killed in a highway collision. Ford’s trust was in Christ, and his father has faithfully expressed their grief in their loss, and and also their hope of the resurrection. How suddenly and jarringly did Death intrude! The lives of the Gray and Tucker families have been inexorably changed. I believe ours have as well, though in different measure. I cannot begin to fathom God’s ways in taking a five-month old boy on a Tuesday, but sparing a seven-month old on a Friday, or why one pastor’s son is spared, and another’s is translated into glory. “The secret things belong to the LORD our God” (Deuteronomy 29:29a). “But He is the unique one, and who can turn Him back? What He desires, that He does” (Job 23:13).

Saturday morning as Noah lay in our bed, and the morning sun was creeping around the edges of the curtains, I watched his stomach rise and fall, and listened to the steady sound of his rhythmic breathing…wonders to see and hear. A short while later, to feel his little hands grabbing my beard and nose, to see his bright smile, and hear the sounds of his grunts and laughter… gifts beyond measure.

I mourn with the Grays and the Tuckers, and pray that the God of all comfort will hold them fast. And taking a deep breath I am left to ponder the mystery and perplexity, and humbly confess, “The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD” (Job 1:21).

In reading Flannery O’Connor this summer in conjunction with an ongoing reading and discussion over on Jonathan Roger’s blog, I came across this especially poignant passage from The Artificial Nigger. Of course, it has more impact within the greater context of the story, but makes a certain impression in its own right, too.

Mr. Head stood very still and felt the action of mercy touch him again but this time he knew there were no words in the world that could name it. He understood that it grew out of agony, which is not denied to any man and which is given in strange ways to children. He understood it was all a man could carry into death to give his Maker and he suddenly burned with shame that he had so little of it to take with him. He stood appalled, judging himself with the thoroughness of God, while the action of mercy covered his pride like a flame and consumed it. He had never thought himself a great sinner before but he saw now that his true depravity had been hidden from him lest it cause him despair. He realized that he was forgiven for sins from the beginning of time, when he had conceived in his own heart the sin of Adam, until the present, when he had denied poor Nelson. He saw that no sin was too monstrous for him to claim as his own, and since God loved in proportion as He forgave, he felt ready at that instant to enter Paradise.

I had a mix of expectations when going to see Pixar’s newest film, Brave, this afternoon with my wife and oldest boys. An original story featuring a heroine was intriguing to me, given that Pixar had not done so to date, and to set it in Scotland looked even better. I stayed away from reviews that began to pop up at the end of last week, and tried to ignore Facebook statuses that might give something away. Still, sometimes one can’t help but hear murmurs, and what was coming back to me was that Brave‘s story was not as strong as some of Pixar’s past endeavors. I think that is a fair assessment. Now, this is not to say that Brave isn’t a good movie, because it is. Nor am I saying you shouldn’t see it, because I still recommend it. However, the captivating sense of the stories that you have in Toy Story 1, 2 or 3, The Incredibles, Up, or Wall-E (which are my favorite Pixar films, so I am admitting by bias) is missing with Brave. Maybe another way of saying it: this Pixar movie didn’t quite feel like a Pixar movie. It was missing that certain quality (a point Deborah readily made after the movie was over) that drew us to the first Pixar movies, and left us eager for more. I wanted that experience with Brave, but it just didn’t deliver. I don’t think anyone expected Cars 2 to be be amazing, and it wasn’t. It was entertaining, but not profound. So perhaps my expectations were too high, and Pixar’s past successes have set a standard that now makes it difficult for them to match. However, they’ve done it in the past, so why not again? I wanted Brave to be added to that list of favorites. I wanted to love the story, and from the beginning I thought I would, but pretty soon the mother-daughter conflict, paired with the sympathetic but bafoonish father caused me to think that this was just another telling of one of Hollywood’s usual mantras that they’ve been trying to cram down our throats for years. However, to its credit, Brave takes some unexpected twists and turns, and while the movie itself tries to tell you that it is about being brave enough to change your fate and destiny (blah blah blah), I think the story has a deeper point. The story is really about being brave enough to accept responsibility for your words and your actions, and the consequences they can bring. Brave makes that point profoundly, and is what really makes the movie. The animation is superb, particularly the impressive attention to detail given to Merida’s hair. That sounds almost funny to say, but it genuinely adds a certain visual richness and texture to the movie. Also, there’s an overhead shot of a ruined castle by the sea that will momentarily have you believing you are seeing footage of a real place. I laughed a lot, especially in the early going, and the movie ends on a strong note. Go and see it, and then let me know what you think.

I suppose it has been a busy couple of years, which can partly explain why I haven’t taken the time to post some of the stories we’ve discovered or particularly enjoy reading – or more correctly, the stories the children want to hear. So here are two that stand out in particular of late. The Seven Silly Eaters, written by Mary Ann Hoberman, and illustrated by Marla Frazee.

The story is inventive and rhythmic, and fun to read, and any mother will quickly relate to Mrs. Peters’ predicament – or at least the sense of it. But what we’ve come to especially enjoy are the beautifully drawn and detailed illustrations. (In fact, Marla Freeze’s work was so impressive, that it sent Deborah looking for more of her work). While the drawings reflect the written story, they also deepen the story with artful details, so be sure to take the time to carefully study the illustrations. We seem to pick up a new bit here and there with every reading.

Another story that has received numerous readings over the last couple of weeks is How to be a Baby By Me the Big Sister, written by Sally Lloyd-Jones, illustrated by Sue Heap.

Clever and witty, you will laugh out loud as the big sister informs her baby brother about what his life entails, and how hers contrasts by comparison. Viewing ordinary activities (such as eating, bathing, and riding in a car) through the eyes of the big sister proves to be a humorous endeavor. The colorful illustrations are bright and simple, another charming quality of the story, and be sure to keep an eye on the baby’s animal friends.

“HIGHLY ENTERTAINING.” That’s about the best way to describe The Avengers. Go see it on the big screen, and you will be glad that you did. While I would not say it is the best comic book movie I have ever seen (The Dark Night still holds that spot in my mind, and Batman Begins might be second on my list), it was an impressive weaving together of superheroes, featuring their skills and personalities in effective amounts. Perhaps the most enjoyable aspect of the movie was the witty dialogue, coupled with humorous moments. Certainly we have Joss Whedon (director and screenplay writer) to thank for that. (Remember how much you enjoyed the banter and one-liners in Firefly? The Avengers has some of that feel to it). And, really, that is the sense that a movie like this should have. This is a movie about comic book characters, after all, so there should inherently be an element of fun to it, and Whedon accomplishes that. The special effects and fight scenes are over the top in the right way for a movie featuring superheroes, gods, and humans with ridiculous skills. Again, go see the movie and ENJOY it.

SPOILER ALERT: Having unhesitatingly recommended the movie, here are a few ways in which I think it is lacking. First, if you haven’t seen the previous Marvel movies associated with the characters, especially Captain America or Thor, you’re going to be a little bit lost in the early going. Second, I would have liked a better story, on the whole. Given the source material, Whedon and company did a good job, but the story of John Carter is more intriguing and entertaining. Third, I couldn’t help but think that if they had just knocked off the top of Stark tower that it would have closed the portal. Yeah, I know it’s a comic book movie, etc. and aliens spilling into our world from another dimension is far-fetched to begin with, and maybe my practical solution would not have worked for some other reason, but I got hung up on that for about a minute or so until Iron Man saved the day. And related to this, Thor was a little bit underwhelming in the final fight. Seemed to me that he should have been as effective as Hulk against the giant, flying monster things. Nevertheless, go see it and have a grand time. Scenes and lines will stick with you, and you will ll inevitably talk about them with friends and family that have also seen the movie, which adds another level of fun to it as well. Oh, and Mark Ruffalo was a spot-on choice for Bruce Banner.

Judging by some of the recent headlines, you would be led to think that John Carter is a a great disappointment as a movie; that it is not worth seeing; and that people must be leaving movie theaters all over the United States wishing they could get their money back. Quite the opposite is true. Granted, John Carter is not a “great” movie, but it is a really good movie that is worth your time and money. As the bad press for the movie was emerging, I also started to hear of reports of others really liking the movie, particularly from those whose opinion I respect. That piqued my interest all the more. (Although I did not read this until after seeing the movie, Pete Peterson’s review over on The Rabbit Room is definitely worth the time, and makes the point far better than I will here as to why you should see John Carter.) Having watched all five seasons of the TV series, Friday Night Lights, I was interested to see how “Riggins” (Taylor Kitsch) performed in a feature film as the lead character, John Carter. I thought he did well, and was a good fit for the character. The lead female role of Dejah Thoris was played by Lynn Collins, who I was completely unfamiliar with, and I found her character quite interesting. It is not every day that you get a brilliant scientist- fierce warrior-beautiful princess all rolled into one! Sure there a few weak spots, but come on, it’s a movie, and the strengths of the movie outweigh them. There’s actually a story that gets developed and has some interesting characters, and you have to actually pay attention. Sure, there are some predictable spots, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing, and then there are other times when you are left guessing up until the last second. You might guess correctly, and other times you might be surprised. I loved the ending, and there was a scene in the middle of the movie that was one of the most powerful sixty or so seconds that I can remember in some time. When John Carter comes out on DVD I will definitely buy it, but hopefully will get another chance to see it on the big screen before then.

Finally got around to watching Hugo. On the whole, I liked it. Beautiful visually; well-acted; and actually had some character development. However, I thought it dragged somewhat, especially the first hour, so I wasn’t as engrossed by the film as I might have hoped or was even willing to be. This is a strange way to put this, but the parts of the movie that I liked I really liked. They made an impression. They made me pause and reflect, and I was drawn into the story. However, I don’t think these moments are enough to make this a great movie. Also, bear in mind, this is not really a “children’s” movie, despite how it is/was marketed. Yes, children are central characters, and there’s an element of adventure involved that is appealing to children, but don’t expect a movie along the lines of a Nanny McPhee. This “film” is much more serious. It has been interesting to see the varying reviews for Hugo, especially among friends and acquaintances, and the opinions have been rather polarized. People either think it is long and uninteresting or they love it. I suppose I land somewhere in between, and might be willing to watch it again. There’s nothing overtly objectionable in the content, and I will let my kids watch it, but won’t be surprised if they become disinterested in the early going.

A couple of weeks ago I was thinking about the relationship between obedience and trust. When my children obey the commands that they are given, I am all the more inclined to trust them. When they do not obey, that develops a certain level of distrust. Of course, we want to be able to trust our children, and it is important for them to learn to obey and develop that trust because it leads to greater maturity. As my children learn to obey and prove their trustworthiness, then I am necessarily going to entrust them with greater responsibilities, which inevitably leads to greater freedom. That might seem counter-intuitive at first, and to our sinful natures that is certainly the case. What child isn’t inclined to grab after freedom at the expense of responsibility? Surely adults have made the same error or committed the same sin in their Christian lives. Essentially, it is the sin of the garden all over again: grasping at something before the proper time. Nevertheless, in God’s economy obedience engenders trust, which leads to freedom, which is the fruit of maturity. Coming to a greater understanding of this reality and enabling our children to understand it is ever a challenge, but necessary for their growth in grace, and ours as well. The principle holds true between our Heavenly Father and us. As we obey, as we show ourselves to be faithful in what He has for us it will inevitably lead to Him entrusting us with more. While that might seem daunting from one perspective, maturity is the goal, even growing up to the “mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:13). So as we reflect on helping our children grasp these principles of obedience, trust, and freedom, let us also reflect on them as they relate to our relationship with our Father in Heaven; giving ourselves to glad obedience, even as patterned in Christ, the Mature Man.

“Who is this who was born in Bethlehem and now is steadfastly headed for Jerusalem? This is the one who by being crucified and raised will fulfill all that the scriptures have promised. Before the curtain goes up on the action of a dramatic opera, the orchestra plays an overture that hints at the musical themes to follow; so just before the opening of Lent, the transfiguration presents subtle clues to the content of the Forty Days of Devotion and Discipline and the Great Fifty Days of rejoicing that follow.” – Laurence Hull Stookey, Calendar: Christ’s Time for the Church, 137.

Remarks regarding Daniel 4: “The Church must seek to be Belteshazzars, men who have the ear of the secular rulers and are ready to help them. But they must speak as Daniels, bringing the Bible and the God of the Bible, and nothing less than these, not vague principles, before the minds of such rulers, however uncomfortable it may make the ruler.” – James B. Jordan (The Handwriting on the Wall: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 247)

February 2, the fortieth day of the nativity, commemorates the presentation of Jesus in the temple (Luke 2:22-40) in accord with the legislation of Leviticus 12:2-8 concerning the firstborn male. Central to this occasion are the two great worthies, Simeon and Anna, whose patient faith is rewarded by great joy. The attribution of Simeon that Jesus shall be a light for revelation to the Gentiles inspired the custom of having a ceremony of candles at the Mass on this day; candles to be used through the next year were blessed on this occasion, and the faithful were given lighted candles, in token of the light of Christ. Hence the observance has been called ‘Candlemas.’

That the day is commonly known as ‘Groundhog Day’ is more than a source of amusement; it is something of a testimony to the enduring power of superstition even among those who say Christ is their light. News reporters, who have no clue to what the Presentation of Jesus is about, rush to see a furry rodent emerge from hibernation as a presumed omen concerning when winter will end. May this be an indicator of the great difficulty with which the Great Exchange comes into our lives?

– Laurence Hull Stookey, Calendar: Christ’s Time for the Church

While a little bit of the overall context might not be grasped due to this quote coming toward the end of John Calvin’s instruction regarding angels in the Institutes, nevertheless his pastoral approach is readily understood. Under the heading, “God makes use of the angels, not for his own sake, but for ours,” Calvin writes,

[God] makes use of angels to comfort our weakness, that we may lack nothing at all that can raise up our minds to good hope, or confirm them in security. One thing, indeed, ought to be quite enough for us: that the Lord declares himself to be our protector. But when we see ourselves beset by so many perils, so many harmful things, so many kinds of enemies – such is our softness and frailty – we would sometimes be filled with trepidation or yield to despair if the Lord did not make us realize the presence of his grace according to our capacity. For this reason, he not only promises to take care of us, but tells us he has innumerable guardians whom he has bidden to look after our safety; that so long as we are hedged about by their defense and keeping, whatever perils may threaten, we have been placed beyond all chance of evil” (I.14.11).

Today marks the Fourth Sunday in Advent, and next Sunday is Christmas Day! There’s a certain excitement in the air, isn’t there? The children are off from school, and eagerly anticipating opening presents. Moms and dads are finishing up the last bits of shopping to be done, and getting things in order for a Christmas feast. By and large, that’s the experience of many people. However, this time of year often brings it’s share of sorrow and despair, too, doesn’t it? The lonely will feel acutely lonely, and the absence of loved ones lost will be keenly felt. I would imagine that such will be the case for R.C. Sproul, Jr. and his family, as this morning Denise, his wife, passed into glory. R.C.’s testimony of faith throughout his wife’s last battle with cancer has been commendable in every way, and surely the God of all comfort is his close companion now (2 Cor. 1:3-5). I can only begin to imagine the loss they will feel next week when the place at their Christmas feast that had been occupied by an adored wife and loving mother will be empty. This is not the dream of an Ebenezer Scrooge who sees an empty stool and crutch leaning against the wall, but the real reality for a husband and his children that their beloved will not be with them again in this life. As much as it may be difficult for us to admit, death is very much a part of the Christmas story. Matthew 2:16-18 is evidence enough, but the very fact that it was necessary for God to become man also indicates to us that the world was suffering in a state of death. Jesus came in order to reverse the world’s condition, to bring new life, new creation, to bring life out of death. And He accomplished that wonder through His death and resurrection, and that is cause for joy! “No more let sins and sorrows grow, Nor thorns infest the ground; He comes to make His blessings flow, Far as the curse is found.” Yes, that is marvelously true, and it is for faith to believe and rejoice in that truth, and yet there is still mourning in this life for the sins and sorrows that the curse and death still inflict upon us. That is the world in which we must live. Thankfully, that mourning is not without hope, even as R.C.’s own testimony today declares: “Denise, enjoying the blessed vision of our God and Father, is at home with the Lord. Cancer no longer afflicts her, and every tear has been dried away. The Queen of Orlando casts her crown at her Savior’s feet, and together, they dance.” It may be winter, and winter moments are an inevitable experience in our lives, but Christmas cannot be held back. The White Witch’s hold upon Narnia is growing weaker by the moment. Aslan is on the move. I cannot help but think that next Sunday Denise will declare, as did Father Christmas to the Pevensie children and Mr. and Mrs. Beaver, “A Merry Christmas! Long live the true King!” And so will R.C. and his children, albeit with tears in their eyes.

The other night around the dinner table I raised the question of comparison between Chesterton’s imagery of God’s “appetite for infancy” as expressed in “The Ethics of Elfland” in Orthodoxy, and the Bible’s clear teaching that maturity is the trajectory and goal for the believer, the church, and the world. How do those seemingly disparate pictures match up? How can they be synthesized? Are they supposed to be synthesized? Is my definition or understanding of maturity mistaken? (That’s likely, I suspect.) Today I read a terrific post by Jennifer Trafton Peterson over at The Rabbit Room. I really can’t commend it highly enough to you, so go read it, but I am going to steal a quote she cites from Madeleine L’Engle’s essay “The Door, the Key, the Road.” In distinguishing between childlike and childish, L’Engle writes,

A childish book, like a childish person, is limited, unspontaneous, closed in … But the childlike book, like the childlike person, breaks out of all boundaries. And joy is the key. Several years ago we took our children to Monticello, and I remember the feeling we all had of the fun Jefferson must have had with his experiments, his preposterous perpetual clock, for instance: what sheer, childlike delight it must have given him. Perhaps Lewis Carroll was really happy only when he was with children, especially when he was writing for them. Joy sparks the pages of Alice [in Wonderland], and how much more profound it is than most of his ponderous works for grownups… . But in the battering around of growing up the child gets hurt, and he puts on a shell of protection; he is frightened, and he slams doors. Real maturity lies in having the courage to open doors again, or, when they are pointed out, to go through them.

I especially love that last sentence.

None of us will ever get our minds around a God of play who is the Ancient of Days, and we should laugh in wonder at such a thought. And as we find ourselves in the season of Advent and looking to Christmas, let us remember that Wisdom became a child, and there was great joy in Heaven at that event. So great that it spilled over into our dimension, and was witnessed by shepherds and sheep! Let us imitate Heaven’s joy, and we will know something more of Heaven’s maturity and the courage it engenders.

We do not know all of the details of what was reported to Coach Joe Paterno on that fateful day in 2002, when then grad-assistant Mike McQueary told the head coach that he’d witnessed something. Based on the available information, though, it is not difficult to understand why JoePa is coming under so much scrutiny. In fact, in the statement that Paterno released this morning announcing his resignation at the end of the year, he admits that “[with] the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more.” This is a sad admission by a man who has always appeared to be directed more by principle than popular opinion, but it also raises the point that leaders are held to a higher standard. With positions of leadership comes greater responsibility, and the evidence (i.e. Paterno’s own admission) seems to indicate that Coach JoePa did not act accordingly.

Apparently, there are others who also share the fault. Athletic director Tim Curley and university vice president Gary Schultz have both left Penn State as result of the their involvement, or lack thereof, with the situation. Then there’s Mike McQueary who witnessed the aforementioned incident. Why didn’t he go to the police or be more proactive at the time about what he saw? Granted, he is not the face of Penn St., but what was he thinking that didn’t warrant immediately calling the police? (Here’s an interesting article that may shed some light.) Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan stated on Monday, “I don’t think I’ve ever been associated with a case with this type of eyewitness identification of sex acts taking place where the police weren’t called.” McQueary is culpable. So is Paterno, and all who had some knowledge of the matter (Joe Boylan doesn’t pull any punches in his editorial).

On Monday, Matt Millen, ESPN analyst and former player at Penn St., broke down in the middle of an interview and said, “if we can’t protect our kids, we, as a society, are pathetic.” I think Mr. Millen is saying far more than he may even realize. The simple fact of the matter is that our society does not promote the protection of our children. Rather, it promotes exposure and loss of innocence through a wide array of means. Consider still more, if a society is willing to kill children while they are still in the womb – the place of places that should be one of nurture, protection and security – doesn’t it necessarily follow that there will be those in such a society that will be willing to abuse children once they’re outside the womb? What happened at Penn State is a microcosm of America today. And while horror and outrage are understandable (even right) responses, a healthy dose of self-examination should not be neglected. Individuals and societies reap what they sow. Given the evidence, the results are hardly happy.

Our thanks to the folks over at the Brentwood Home Page for the write-up regarding our Fall Festival Sunday afternoon.

http://www.brentwoodhomepage.com/fall-fest-features-union-stations-ron-block-cms-6803#.TqLFu1qgKgA.facebook

This Sunday, October 23rd, 2:30-6:30 PM, St. Mark will be hosting its first Fall Festival. We are looking forward to enjoying good food and drink; beautiful, crisp autumn weather; fun games and activities; time spent with family and friends, and making new friends as well. And, if these weren’t enough reasons in and of themselves, we are also eager to enjoy the talents of special musical guest, Ron Block. I had the privilege of meeting Ron and getting acquainted with him last year at a conference here in Nashville (sponsored by the online community, The Rabbit Room). When the planning for our festival started taking shape, he was the first artist that came to my mind to invite, and he graciously accepted. Thankfully, despite being in the middle of a tour with Alison Krauss & Union Station, we were able to find a weekend when Ron was available. Ron is an avid fan of the writings of George MacDonald and C.S. Lewis, and I would invite you to read more about Ron’s musical career and Christian faith on his website: http://ronblock.com/ .

If you don’t already have plans on Sunday afternoon, please join us in Brentwood. If you already have plans, then change them, and join us just the same. You will be glad that you did.

In a letter to a young boy named Laurence, C.S. Lewis wrote: “Well, I can’t say that I have had a happy Easter, for I have lately got married and my wife is very, very ill. I am sure Aslan knows best and whether He leaves her with me or takes her to His own country, He will do what is right. But of course it makes me very sad. I am sure you and your mother will pray for us” (Letters to Children, 69, Touchstone).

“Send me, O Lord, into the tasks of this day with a rejoicing heart. Teach me to labor diligently, to eat and drink to Your glory, and to think and plan to the ends You have laid out before me. That I may be truly fitted for the day, remind me again of the mighty work of my Savior, Jesus Christ, who redeemed me and in whom my sin is forgiven and my place with You forever assured. Impress upon my heart this day that while there is nothing holy about my life, my speech or my faith without Your grace and mercy surrounding me, that with You I can faithfully help my neighbor and be of service to him. Teach me to look upon my life today as yet another opportunity to serve my fellowmen. Let me see in the routine of my daily tasks, in the need of my family and those who depend on me, in the want and struggle of the world about me, the good work You have prepared in advance for me to do. Grant that I be ready to forgive, earnest in rejoicing with those who are happy, quick in sympathy, and zealous in bearing the burdens of my fellowman, in Jesus’ name. Amen.” – Lutheran Book of Prayer

Eschatology is not simply how you think about the end of the world, but it is an articulation of faith. As a postmillennial, I believe that the new creation, that the redemption of the world has begun, and that everything is not going to Hell in a hand-basket. In fact, I would submit that you would be hard-pressed to read the Gospels and the Epistles and not come to any other conclusion. Jesus’ death and resurrection have set the world on this course, and this trajectory is at the very heart of the Gospel message. Nevertheless, sin and death still have a prominent existence in our lives. There are wicked people who perform violent acts and engage in despicable practices. You can hardly read the news headlines without getting depressed about all of the awful things that are going on around us everyday. And if you read them too much, then you might conclude that the world is decidedly getting worse, instead of better. I suppose there are times when that appears to be the case, and we may very well live in such a time, but let us go back to the statement made at the outset: eschatology is a matter of faith. Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1). To believe that the world is being redeemed is a matter of faith. To believe that the new creation has begun is a matter of faith. To believe that with each passing day God’s name is more hallowed, His kingdom has spread a little farther, and His will is being done, on earth as it is in Heaven, well, that is a matter of faith. And it has to be because the life of sight will come to a different conclusion, a conclusion not founded on the promises and word of God. Christ is victorious and He reigns over heaven and earth right now, and only faith can know it to be so.

I probably need to go see this movie a second time in order to give it a better review. That has been my experience with movies 5, 6, and 7.1. The first time through I am inevitably thinking about how it’s different from the book; critiquing, wishing they had said this or done that, or a specific character had expressed himself or herself in a more fitting manner, etc. That was the case with HP 7.2, but, thankfully, not as much as in the past installments. It has been a while since I have read the 7th book, otherwise this review would probably be more critical. So, by and large, the movie is… ” really good” (my words to my wife when she asked how it was). “Why the hesitation?” “Because I’m still thinking about it,” was my honest reply. And so I’m still thinking about it now, even as I write (or more properly, ramble). A few plot holes bugged me where a little bit of dialogue would have helped clarify or fill in said holes, but the liberties the movie takes with the storyline worked well overall. I am happy to say that Michael Gambon, at last, did reasonably well as Dumbledore. What a relief! Snape may have stolen the show, with Neville as a strong second. I know that visually it makes more sense for Hermione to stand between Ron and Harry, but I guess one can’t expect Hollywood to know that Harry is supposed to stand between Ron and Hermione (alchemy, you know). This is probably the best of the movies, though don’t waste your money on 3D. The battle scenes were intense, even graphic to a point, but not gratuitous (except for maybe the roasted goblin). They aptly convey the gravity of the conflict, and that is where this film excels. It sweeps you up into this all-out war between good and evil, an evil that must be resisted and fought to the death. And yet there are respites in the midst of the melee that are arguably the best moments of the film. In the end, I was profoundly reminded of Psalm 1:4: The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that that wind drives away.

Update: I failed to mention that I think Voldemort had the best lines in the movie. The intentional irony deserves a tip of the hat to the writers.

Overall, I’d give the movie a strong B+, maybe an A-, which could bump up to an A upon a second viewing.

The Auralia Thread comes to completion in Jeffrey Overstreet’s The Ale Boy’s Feast, resulting in a beautiful and intricate tapestry of life to be lived now, and life yet longed for. Through a host of characters and rich symbolism, Mr. Overstreet’s fantasy world once again provides greater insight into the world in which we live in a way that only a work of fiction can. There is a sacramental undercurrent to the story that is especially compelling, and a liturgical element that acts as a marker throughout the story, much the same way our lives take on a liturgical shape. While more meaningful in its context of the story, surely this description resonates with the worship experience of faith:

When one sang the Midnight Verse, the rest wove new harmonies. The song, once a simple promise of dawn’s approach, was now infused with an aching dissonance that spoke of weariness and loss, which only made the chords of its hopeful restrain stronger, opening up deep reservoirs of longing.

For the casual fantasy reader The Auralia Thread will not disappoint, and for the connoisseur Mr. Overstreet’s stories will be eagerly revisited to catch yet another glimpse of a world that is and will one day be.

I had heard good things about the movie “Super 8,” but was determined to like it simply because Joel Courtney plays a leading role. Who is Joel Courtney? A kid from Moscow, ID who is a member at a sister church. I don’t know Joel personally, but the simple fact that people I know know him is kind of cool (for an even better take on this, go here). I was eager to see how this young man did in his first acting gig, and he certainly didn’t disappoint. Joel was terrific. In fact, all of the kids did a great job in their respective roles, which really makes the movie. But the writing and story work well, too, so the cast had something to work with. There might be a couple of plot holes here and there, but they aren’t glaring. Or it could just be that I’m not smart enough to figure some details out the first time around (maybe I’ll have to go see it again). Comparisons have been made between this film and some of Steven Spielberg’s other works such as “E.T.” or “The Goonies.” I still remember seeing “E.T.” in the theater. I still remember how much I enjoyed “The Goonies” the first time I saw it on VHS. “Super 8” captures the essence that made these so enjoyable, and give us another rollicking tale of young kids who unwittingly stumble into an adventure that goes far beyond what they would have imagined. But the movie works precisely because the events are happening to imaginative kids, and so I’m willing to go on the adventure with them, and believe that they can do some extraordinary things. I’d be curious to know how many thirty-somethings (such as myself) enjoy this movie precisely because it reminds us of some of the movies that we imbibed in our formative movie years back in the 80s.

As to the movie itself, I don’t want to really give anything away. I will say that I liked the Romeo and Juliet theme that emerged; as well as the subtle Alice in Wonderland motif that seems to be there. For more astute movie connoisseurs (which I am not), they’ll probably catch references to some of Spielberg’s past works. This isn’t a movie for young kids. It’s PG-13 for a reason, so take that into account. I can’t imagine taking someone younger than 12 years old to see it. That being said, go and see “Super 8.” Simply go to enjoy the movie, because it’s a lot of fun. And go to enjoy Joel Courtney’s performance, because, at least for me, that alone makes the movie worth seeing.

Thanks to Toby Sumpter for drawing my attention to these posts by Nancy Wilson:

Standards

Loving the Standard

I’m guessing there are other parents out there who have a sense of the inevitable tension that comes when training your children. These are healthy reminders to keep the bigger picture in mind.

You have probably heard the news or seen the headline that Dr. Jack Kevorkian is dead. According to Ezekiel 18:23 the LORD takes “no pleasure in the death of the wicked.” That is profoundly true, and an amazing thing to consider when Dr. Kevorkian was a man whose actions opposed the Living God. Equally true are the word of David in Psalm 5: For you are not a God who delights in wickedness; evil may not dwell with you. The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers. You destroy those who speak lies; the LORD abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man (vv. 4-6). Clearly God has a way of dealing with His enemies, and He has profoundly done so through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In fact, God has defeated death by the death of Christ, and then vindicated His Son by the resurrection from the dead (see Romans 1:4). He is “‘the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ He is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Matthew 22:32) – ironically, Jack Kevorkian’s given name was Jacob. God is a God of life. He testified to be so at the creation of the world, and testifies to the same in the new creation begun in Christ. Dr. Kevorkian did not understand this. Or if he did, he chose to oppose it. Some might argue that suffering from a terminal illness really isn’t living, and I understand what they mean in such statement, but that is to divorce the discussion apart from the life of faith, which I’m not willing to do. Even as Jesus’ life involved suffering, invariably our lives will be marked by physical suffering, and perhaps most acutely as our days in this mortal life come to an end. But even those days, even that time is to be met by faith, a faith that rests in the life that is yet to come. The actions of Dr. Kevorkian’s life testified that this life is all there is; that there’s nothing but nothing once we breath our last in this world. Those whose God is the LORD know better. They know that “Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Corinthians 15:20). They know that those “in Christ shall be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:22). And even more, they know that Jesus is alive and reigns now, and the “he must reign until He has put all his enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:25-26). Yesterday marked Jesus’ ascension to His throne in Heaven forty days after His resurrection from the dead. Today Dr. Kevorkian died. I would imagine, that in some form or fashion, Jacob Kevorkian is aware that God is the God of the living, and has met the Living King.

About a month ago I posted a quote from The Pastor as Minor Poet, by M. Craig Barnes, which essentially described the thesis for the book. If you are not a pastor, this book isn’t for you – though some portions might be a helpful read for pastors’ wives (which I’ll speak to shortly). This would also be a good book for those looking to enter the ministry, because it provides a helpful perspective that can get lost or pushed to the edges in the midst of theological training and study. Honestly, though, I’m not sure an aspiring pastor would really appreciate what Pastor Barnes is conveying. Still it is worth reading for the novice even if he may get more out of it 5-10 years down the road after having gained some real life ministerial experience and perspective. While the book has a lot to offer in regard to the poetic approach to the ministry and what that looks like, I found the simple fact that here was a pastor approaching and articulating his ministry in this fashion to be an invigorating breath of clean air. It further confirmed convictions that I have regarding the ministry, but also helped me to maintain my sanity that I am not the only who thinks about the ministry in this fashion (l know that I’m not because where else would I have learned to think this way except from other pastors, but sometimes it can feel like it). So here is a pastor with years and years of experience who endeavors to have a poetic ministry in the midst of his congregation, and who understands the inherent struggles and challenges unique to such an approach. And herein lies how portions of the books can be helpful for ministers’ wives to read. Chapter 8, “The Subtext of the Poet” is one such section. There are too many good quotes to draw from, but consider these words from the beginning of the chapter:

Minor poets have to struggle for their poetry. It comes only as a prize bestowed upon those with the courage to keep returning to the wrestling between the holy words of the Bible and the day’s ordinary words. At the end of the day, it’s up to the parish poet to make holy sense of all these words.

This is what pastors really mean when they complain about the loneliness of their calling. No on can do this priestly work for them, or even with them. It is ironic that a profession that surrounds pastors with so many people leaves them alone with their own ponderings. And this is the part of the profession that is completely missed by everyone the pastor serves….

There is nothing hierarchical or elitist about this loneliest dimension of the job. To the contrary, pastor are never more servants of the church than when they’re alone with their thoughts about what God is doing in the lives of others. But they’re not really alone. Their souls are crowded with all who have made their way deep inside, And of course, there is also the nagging presence of the holy words that will not go away. This is how pastors love their congregations – they take them into their souls, where they carry on both sides of a conversation between the people and their God.

Barnes goes on in the chapter to expound the ways in which the pastor finds the poetic voices. He notes that there are times when the poets are only talking to themselves, or, more accurately, they “ponder experiences they cannot adequately describe.” For the pastor-poet this means he “is possessed by a burden to ask what God is up to in the lives of the lonely and the sick, as well as in the lives of those whose blessings are so abundant they cannot even count them.” The pastor comes alongside both, thinks on both circumstances and situations, and endeavors to speak to both:

No element of the minor poet’s job description is more crucial than this churning. The experiences, impressions, befuddlements, and penetrating words that are absorbed throughout the day have to turn over and over in the pastor’s soul, where they’re mixed together with the holy words of the Scriptures until at last the human subtext can be described with minor poetry.

So pastors’ wives, when your husband suddenly gets that far away look at the dinner table or in the car, and you ask him if there’s anything wrong, and he just shakes his head and says, “No, not really,” he may just be churning, mulling things over, trying to figure a few things out, and simply can’t put them into words. At least not yet.

The Monster in the Hollows is the third installment in Andrew Peterson’s “The Wingfeather Saga.” We are first introduced to Janner, Kalmar (a.k.a. Tink), and Leeli Igiby in the series opener, On the Edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness. The brothers and sister live in the small town of Glipwood with their mother, Nia, and their grandfather, Podo, and enjoy a relatively quiet life until they come into conflict with the dreaded Fangs of Dang. Their lives are suddenly filled with danger as they begin an adventure that leads to the children’s discovery of their true, royal identity: Janner is a Throne Warden, Tink is the High King, and Leeli the Song Maiden of the fallen kingdom of Anniera. Their father, Esben Wingfeather, was the High King of Anniera, and their mother his queen. The story continues in North! Or Be Eaten as the children embark upon a harrowing journey for the Ice Prairies, fleeing for their lives from the Fangs, who have discovered the children’s true identity and value to their leader, Gnag the Nameless. In the midst of indelible trials, Janner and Tink engage in deeper struggles with the responsibilities placed upon them by their new-found identities.

Hollows takes Janner, Kalmar, and Leeli’s journey of identity to a profoundly deeper level. What does it mean to be a song maiden, a throne warden, or even a king? Through the instruction they receive from their mother, their teachers at school, and the personal humiliation they must regularly endure, the children learn that their royal identity is a call to service and humility. In fact, the Wingfeathers acutely learn who they are through what they suffer (cf. Hebrews 5:8). Nia’s daily reminder, “Remember who you are,” acts as a refrain of one of the book’s central themes: the importance and power in a name defining identity. In many respects, herein lies the masterful way in which Mr. Peterson weaves the heart of the Gospel into his story. The Gospel of Mark is the story of Jesus, the Servant-King, the center of which is found in chapters 9 and 10. After Jesus foretells of his coming death and resurrection (9:30-32), He immediately tells them, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all” (v. 35). Then in chapter 10, after again foretelling of his coming suffering and death in Jerusalem, and subsequent resurrection, He teaches the disciples again what their calling entails after James and John’s request to be seated at Christ’s left and right in glory. Gathering all of the disciples to him, Jesus says,

“You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (vv. 42-45).

Hold that picture in place and consider one of the central exhortations of Paul’s letter to the Colossians. He calls believers to consider what Christ has accomplished (see 2:6-15), and to live according to their identity in Him (especially note 3:1-17). Essentially, Paul is saying, “Be who you are.” Furthermore, as kings (Revelation 1:6, 1 Corinthians 6:2), God’s people are called to a life of service and humility patterned in the life of Christ. The Monster in the Hollows vibrantly brings these themes to life, resonating in the soul.

The consensus of the Thacker home is that this is Mr. Peterson’s best story-telling yet. My simple proof is the two-plus hours my wife and boys sat in rapt attention last night. As long as my voice held out there was little doubt we would get through all seventeen chapters left in order to finish the book. “The Wingfeather Saga” is to be concluded in the fourth volume, The Warden and the Wolf King. Deborah initially vowed to be “mad” at Mr. Peterson that the last book wasn’t written yet, but has since changed her mind, so satisfying was Hollows. I hope that more children and parents will read The Wingfeather Saga, and for the discussions it will lead to as we endeavor to remember who we are, and instruct our children in the same.

Besides the new, adorable things that Evangeline (my almost 11 month-old daughter) did yesterday, the highlight of the day was, without a doubt, meeting Carrie Underwood at the Whole Foods in Green Hills. Even today it still doesn’t seem real, but it happened, and here is the story.

I was pulling out of the Whole Foods parking garage while talking to my wife on the phone. As I did so, I happened to see a blond-haired woman wearing a pink sweatshirt walking along the sidewalk toward the store entrance. I had a reasonably good look at her face, and said to Deborah, “I think I just saw Carrie Underwood.” She immediately encouraged me to go back into the store to make sure. I mumbled something about bad traffic (it was close to 5 PM, and if you’ve ever been in Green Hills at that time of day you know what I mean), but Deborah mentioned that “you might not get another chance,” or, “you’ll always wonder.” Then she asked, “Are you going to invite her to dinner?” To which I quickly replied, “No, I don’t think I’ll even talk to her.” Ending my call with Deborah, I was about to turn onto Hillsboro Road when Carpe Diem got the better of me, and I turned around. Back to the parking garage I went, quickly found a place, and re-entered the store. The pink sweatshirt was fairly easy to spot, so I got another glance somewhere in the produce section and was 99% sure it was Ms. Underwood. Now the challenge became to find a moment to speak to her when there were not a lot of other people around. I pretended to shop for about the next five minutes (it felt longer, maybe it was) looking for an opportunity. Finally, I made up my mind, walked around a corner and there she was. Immediately I said, “Excuse me. Carrie Underwood?” She said, “Yes,” with a slight I-would-rather-not-be-bothered expression, but was gracious nonetheless. I blathered something about being a big fan, and I am not sure what else. At some point I introduced myself and she extended her hand, and then I proceeded to tell her that my wife and I had always said that if we ever met her in person, we would invite her over for dinner. With a smile she asked, “Can you cook vegetarian?” I assured her that would not be a problem given our own family’s special dietary needs. I probably thanked her again, and then walked away. No sooner did I walk away than I realized she did not have a way of contacting me. So I quickly pulled out one of my cards, circled around to where she was in the frozen foods, and handed it to her saying, “This is my contact information.” She took the card, and I thanked her for allowing me to disturb her, which she said wasn’t a problem. That’s my story of meeting Carrie Underwood.

Now, as I reflected upon this last night during supper, I began to think upon on the providence of God, and all of the details that had to be just right for this meeting to take place. Before I shopped at Whole Foods, I went to Trader Joe’s. Before going to Trader Joe’s, I intended to get a haircut, but found out my regular barber was not at the shop, so I ended up going straight to Trader Joe’s from my house. The route that I took to get there; the delay of waiting on a worker to check on a product we had bought there in the past, but apparently no longer carry; seeing Jonathan Rogers in the Whole Foods Café after arriving there and speaking with him for a few minutes; and then the list of things I needed to purchase, and the time it took for me to procure them at Whole Foods. All of the minutes and seconds worked out so that as I was driving out of the parking garage there was Carrie Underwood. Of course, you can argue this to be the case for any event or encounter. For instance, finding a great parking space at the mall has more variables and factors than we can possibly imagine. Still more, if you had asked me who would be the one Nashville celebrity I would most like to meet, without a doubt, I would answer Carrie Underwood. Add to that the running tongue-in-cheek agreement between Deborah and me about inviting her over for dinner if we ever met her only adds another layer of satisfaction and enjoyment to the experience. So, believing in the providence of God, which I do, and knowing that He knows all of the variables involved (including Miss Underwood’s schedule that day), this “chance” meeting was perfectly orchestrated within the bounds of choices that were made and factors out of my control. There is mystery in such a reality, to be sure, but there is also reason for thanksgiving. The Lord “discerns my thoughts from afar” and is “acquainted with all my ways” (Psalm 139:2, 3), and that being true, meeting Carrie Underwood was hardly an accident.

And Miss Underwood, just in case you come across this post, please know that you and your husband have a standing invitation for dinner at our home.

Last week I had the privilege of attending a breakfast with some fellow pastors (and aspiring pastors) in the Nashville area. Reverend David Cassidy was a guest, speaking to the group on the topic “The Reading Life of the Pastor.” It was an excellent talk and conversation, and encouraging and challenging on a number of fronts. One of the overall impressions I was left with is that a pastor needs to have a “poetic” ministry. This jogged my mind to recall a book that I had picked up and started, but had set down and not returned to: The Pastor as Minor Poet, by M. Craig Barnes. In light of Pastor Cassidy’s talk, I have taken it up again, and came across this insightful remark. In setting forth the possible ways in which a pastor can be identified (such as shepherd, priest, ministers of Word and Sacrament), Mr. Barnes humbly suggests the image of the poet. He writes,

I present this not as the normative or even preferred image, but simply as another biblical description of the calling of those who have been blessed with a vision that allows them to explore, and express, the truth behind the reality. Poets see the despair and heartache as well as the beauty and miracle that lie just beneath the thin veneer of the ordinary, and they describe this in ways that are recognized not only in the mind, but more profoundly in the soul.

In a day in which people are so profoundly confused about fundamental identity issues, and are desperately trying to construct life as best they can, it is critically necessary for pastors to recover this poetic dimension of their ministries. What the congregation needs is not a strategist to help them form another plan for achieving a desired image of life, but a poet who looks beneath the desperation to recover the mystery of what it means to be made in God’s image (18-19).

Poets are visionaries. They can see the world at a deeper level, and help others to see that world, too. Surely pastors are called to the same. We live in a world still marred by sin, but Christ has come and redeemed the world. In so doing, He has given the Church a vision, not only for the future, but for the present. Therefore, it is for pastors take up the poetic mantle to help God’s people see the life which Christ bids them to live in Him.

In the quiet of Holy Saturday, I want to take a moment to reflect on the Lenten Season. From time to time I’ve thought that Lent might be more “effective” if it took place in the dreary days of winter. Somehow that would seem more appropriate, wouldn’t it? (Of course, I’m speaking as a resident in the Northern Hemisphere, which can’t be helped.) When creation in Middle Tennessee is waking up for spring; when the grass and trees are coming into their first brilliant greens of the year; when flowers are blooming and trees blossoming, it’s a greater challenge to meditate upon the suffering of Christ and the gravity of sin. Now, I know that Lent is more than that, but for the sake of discussion let’s be agreed that it’s at least that. Yet, upon further reflection, nature’s testimony of life couldn’t be more fitting. Lent wasn’t devised for the sake of itself, nor is it the end. After Lent comes Easter. After humiliation comes exaltation. After death comes resurrection. God’s creation knows that, and is simply pushing us ahead to the next chapter of the story, telling us that sin and death don’t have the last word. The cross inevitably leads to the empty tomb. Here in Tennessee, nature just can’t keep that truth quiet before Resurrection Sunday arrives. And I’m glad it can’t.

Roughly six months ago I read and posted a brief review of Marilynne Robinson’s Home. In it Ms. Robinson tells a different, but overlapping story with that of Gilead. Arguably, Gilead should be read first, since it was written first, and I now I wonder how my experience of Home might have been different had I read Gilead first. But I didn’t, and so until I decide to read them in the “correct” order I will simply be left to wonder. Quite honestly, I don’t think that my experience of either book was necessarily lessened. In fact, I think that my perception of Jack Boughton’s character in Home was more intense for not having read the insights provided about him by the Reverend Ames in Gilead. I was relieved to read them, as it softened Jack’s character in an unexpected way. However, Robinson’s first foray into the life of a family in the town of Gilead isn’t mainly about Jack Boughton, so much as it is about the aged Ames writing to his young son – a mixture of reminiscence, imparting of wisdom, and encouragement in faith. Still, Jack haunts the Reverend’s thoughts and words, and as Gilead provided me with new revelation about Jack, it did the same for Reverend Ames. Now, perhaps this only proves that I should have read Gilead first, and maybe it does, but it also occurs to me that this reveals the brilliance of what Ms. Robinson accomplishes in these two books. To be able to write about the same events, but from the different perspectives of various characters within the stories she crafted, and convincingly so, is quite remarkable. The pathos which the reader experiences is palpable and powerful.

While I found the story of Home to be more emotionally gripping, I underlined numerous passages in Gilead, which is something I don’t know that I’ve ever done before in a work of fiction. The truths imparted and the insights into the human condition are notable, but Robinson’s portrayal of the inner-life of a pastor was nothing short of revelatory. I suppose Marilynne Robinson’s literary achievement is evidenced by the fact that she won the Pulitzer Prize for Gilead. I suppose…though a prize, no matter how prestigious, can hardly compare to the indelible mark Ms. Robinson’s story leaves upon the reader.

Pastors Joe Thacker and Rich Lusk discuss St Mark Reformed Church’s upcoming Living as the Church Conference: “Mission: Its Meaning and Manifestation.” After listening to the podcast you can get more information and register for the conference HERE.

To listen without flash click HERE.

In J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Two Towers, the following conversation takes place between Frodo and Sam while resting from their arduous climb up the stairs of Cirith Ungol. The simple eloquence, the way in which we are reminded that we have a place in God’s story of the world is profound.

‘I don’t like anything here at all,’ said Frodo, ‘step or stone, breath or bone. Earth, air and water all seem accursed. But so our path is laid.’

‘Yes, that’s so,’ said Sam. ‘And we shouldn’t be here at all, if we’d known more about it before we started. But I suppose it’s often that way. The brave things in the old tales and songs, Mr. Frodo: adventures, as I used to call them. I used to think that they were things the wonderful folk of the stories went out and looked for, because they wanted them, because they were exciting and life was a bit dull, a kind of a sport, as you might say. But that’s not the way of it with the tales that really mattered, or the ones that stay in the mind. Folk seem to have been just landed in them, usually – their paths were laid that way, as you put it. But I expect they had lots of chances, like us, of turning back, only they didn’t. And if they had, we shouldn’t know, because they’d have been forgotten. We hear about those as just went on – and not all to a good end, mind you; at least not to what folk inside a story and not outside it call a good end. You know, coming home, and finding things all right, though not quite the same – like old Mr. Bilbo. But those aren’t always the best tales to hear, though they may be the best tales to get landed in! I wonder what sort of tale we’ve fallen into?’

‘I wonder,’ said Frodo. ‘But I don’t know. And that’s the way of a real tale. Take any one that you’re fond of. You may know, or guess, what kind of tale it is, happy-ending or sad-ending, but the people in it don’t know. And you don’t want them to.’

Thanks be to God that the happiest of endings awaits us (1 John 3:2).

Rich Bledsoe provides a fascinating historical and theological analysis of the principalities and powers on the Biblical Horizons Blog. While lengthy, they are well worth your time and consideration. Part 1 covers the period from the Early Church through the Reformation. Part 2 explores the implications for the current world climate of the East and West. One quotation Dr. Bledsoe cites, that is particularly interesting, comes the Academy of Chinese Social Sciences. In trying to discern why the West has been so successful to date, the Academy reached this conclusion:

We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West has been so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this.

(This quote can also be found here in a different report).

That is a stunning admission, but neither is it surprising. The Church is the salt of the earth and light of the world, and so wherever faithful Christians go, they are bound to have an impact upon the cultures, societies, and nations where God has placed them. Since Jesus taught the disciples to pray, “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven,” the Lord has been answering that prayer. We still enjoy the fruit and blessing of the answer to that prayer here in the West. And what an amazing thing it will be when the power of communism is toppled in China at last, and the Gospel of Christ’s Kingship is openly proclaimed.

In the Lord’s providence I was made aware of two articles today. The first, Parish Evangelism, is a brief summary of the ministerial approach of Thomas Chalmers in Scotland in the 1800s. Take a couple of minutes to read it, and I think you will be impressed with Chalmers’ vision for ministry, if you are not already familiar with it. The second article, Living Faithfully in the Hypercity is written by Jamison Galt, a pastor ministering in New York City. It is a fascinating read, especially in light of the Chalmers’ article, because of the fact that the approach Thomas Chalmers employed is very similar to the model that Pastor Galt is encouraging. (I would not be surprised to find out that Mr. Galt has some knowledge of Mr. Chalmers’ ministerial model.) Chalmers was about the parish, establishing and ministering to a local flock. Pastor Galt poses a challenging question, and then answers it in turn:

What will distinguish the work of urban Christians from the generational mass that is recently rediscovering the city and reversing post-war white-flight?

My answer: the local. Christians do not yet give sufficient attention to the importance of place— the hundreds of discrete neighbourhoods that compose a vast behemoth like New York City— nor to the shaping power their daily liturgies have upon particular communities. Considered in redemptive local impact, the creative and professional class is largely the invisible class. They’re not often found on the stoop, at block parties, volunteering for neighbourhood organizations. Too often they engage the city like medium-term tourists, even as their activity transforms it into a stay-cation destination hospitable only to the super-wealthy, hip, and educated, and that as a launching pad for somewhere else. They often overlook the means found in Jeremiah 29 for seeking the welfare of the city: build houses and live in them, plant gardens and eat their produce, get married and raise children there, do not decrease. Such activity requires local and long-term focus.

As St. Mark Reformed Church is endeavoring to be discerning and faithful to her calling in the city of Nashville, the importance of place is very real. There is an intentionality that must go into answering the question of “Where?” May the Lord grant us wisdom to answer that question.

Do not let the size of this little book fool you. It is packed with nuggets of wisdom that are presented with a humor and reality that makes for an engaging combination. While the target audience is primarily moms with young children, dads will also find this a profitable read, as well as parents with older children. Some of the principles espoused definitely apply to all stages of the child training adventure. So grab a copy and be ready to laugh, to be convicted, and to hear an empathetic voice about motherhood in the trenches.

Nashville and the Pacific Northwest may be close to polar opposites culturally, but this is worth a few minutes of your time. On the whole, I find this piece encouraging, , and am glad to hear some good things about some friends of ours.

http://www.booksandculture.com/articles/webexclusives/2011/february/sutton021111.html?paging=off

“Father of light, we praise You because You forgive iniquity and do not reward us according to our sins. What You promised to the fathers You have fulfilled in Your Son. As the east and the west can never come together, so remove our sins far from us, that they can be accounted to us no more, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our Savior. Amen.”

Taken from a collection of prayers.

I came across this great quote today regarding the end of Matthew 4 and the beginning of Matthew 5 leading up to Jesus’ “Sermon on the Mount.”

Before the crowds hear the Messiah’s word they are the object of his compassion and healing. Having done nothing, nothing at all, they are benefited. So grace comes before task, succour before demand, healing before imperative. The first act of the Messiah is not the imposition of his commandments, but the giving of himself. Today’s command presupposes yesterday’s gift (Davies & Allison, Matthew 1-7, International Critical Commentary, 427).

I came across these thought-provoking comments by S.G. De Graaf in volume three of his work Promise and Deliverance. The comparisons between Adam’s testing in the garden and Jesus’ testing in the wilderness are particularly insightful.

Adam was once our head. He was put to the test to determine whether he truly wished to devote his whole life to the Lord. Adam became unfaithful and rejected the Lord’s favor. When the Lord Jesus took Adam’s place as our Head (of the covenant), the temptation had to be renewed since satan was bent on destroying the covenant. In this temptation Christ not only had to show obedience but also had to justify and reconcile what Adam had ruined. Therefore the temptation came to Him under different circumstances than it had to Adam.

After Jesus had been baptized and anointed, the Holy Spirit led Him out into the desert to be tempted by the devil. The desert was quite a different place from the paradise in which Adam had lived. In Paradise everything testified to God’s favor and communion, while the desert betrayed that everything had been forsaken by God and man because of our sins. Everything had been in Adam’s favor, while Christ had everything against Him. Despite the isolation of that forsaken place, Jesus had to hold on to God.

I am finding these book recommendations/reviews more difficult to write. I simply want to say, “Read the book,” and for you to understand that I really mean it. As soon as I try to put into the words the things that I liked about the story, or the themes that especially stood out, it feels as though I’m trying to tear something away from the fabric that has been beautifully woven. I enjoyed Pete Peterson’s first installment of this two-part adventure, The Fiddler’s Gun. Fiddler’s Green is even better. This story will shock you; make you laugh; and possibly make you cry. It is unmistakably a story about redemption, but fashioned in such a way as to gradually carry the reader along like a vessel upon the sea. Perhaps what stands out to me the most is the character development that Mr. Peterson achieves in this work. Though fictitious, these are real people. These are people that you and I know. People that you and I are. And if what I’ve said doesn’t convince you, my wife loved it, too.

In a past post I introduced Dr. Ralph Wood’s excellent book, Literature and Theology, in which he examines upon a number of literary works, and their bearing on the Christian life. In his chapter on G.K. Chesterton’s The Ball and the Cross, Dr. Wood delves into the effects of the Enlightenment’s promotion of tolerance, and how the antidote is true Christian hospitality. Here is an excerpt that gets to the crux of his challenging thesis:

Hospitality of a Christian kind does not entail a smiling kind of niceness, a prim-and-proper etiquette, or even a gracious capacity for party giving. The word derives from hostis, a locution originally meaning not only “host” but also “stranger” and even “enemy.” Hospitality thus becomes a Christian practice and discipline, a fundamental responsibility regarding those who are alien and perhaps even antagonistic toward us. It requires, among other things, the willingness to welcome the gift that others represent – not the gift we expect or desire from them, but their often surprising and troubling gift, especially when others have convictions that are fundamentally hostile to ours. The word “tolerance,” by contrast, originally meant “to endure pain or hardship,” and it eventually came to signify “putting up with opinions and practices of others.” There is a decisive difference. Tolerance somewhat condescendingly declares that we will “put up with” others, even when their views and habits are noxious to us. Hospitality, by contrast, offers to “put them up” in the old-fashioned sense: we will make even our enemies our guests and thus our potential friends. Hospitality thus becomes an earthly analogy to the gospel itself. Just as we were once strangers and enemies whom God has patiently taken into his household (Rom. 5:10), so we must be willing to offer hospitality to those who are alien and hostile to us.

Hospitality must not be romanticized and idealized as a simply or easy practice. It does not mean, for example, that we draw no distinctions among competing truth claims, as the proponents of tolerance often profess to do. Such subtle inhospitality actually despairs of the truth. If all claims are true, then none is true. As Chesterton was fond of saying, “morality is very much like art: it consists of drawing a line somewhere.” Christian hospitality is willing to draw a line, but not to raise a bar that cannot be crossed. On the contrary, gospel hospitality is willing to hazard two radical risks regarding opponents. On the one hand, it must take them so seriously that not only can they recognize themselves in our representation of their own most basic convictions but also that we ourselves must be susceptible of conversion to their faith. Yet on the other hand, we are also called to demonstrate the case for Christianity so persuasively in both act and judgment that we help create the possibility of their conversion as well. In either case, we will not have merely tolerated each other: we will have exhibited the hospitality that eagerly engages the other (55-56).

Journey of the Magi
by T.S. Eliot

A cold coming we had of it,
Just the worst time of the year
For a journey, and such a long journey:
The ways deep and the weather sharp,
The very dead of winter.
And the camels galled, sore-footed, refractory,
Lying down in the melting snow.
There were times when we regretted
The summer palaces on slopes, the terraces,
And the silken girls bringing sherbet.
Then the camel men cursing and grumbling
And running away, and wanting their liquor and women,
And the night-fires going out, and the lack of shelters,
And the cities dirty and the towns unfriendly
And the villages dirty and charging high prices:
A hard time we had of it.
At the end we preferred to travel all night,
Sleeping in snatches,
With the voices singing in our ears, saying
That this was all folly.

Then at dawn we came down to a temperate valley,
Wet, below the snow line, smelling of vegetation;
With a running stream and a water mill beating the darkness,
And three trees on the low sky,
And an old white horse galloped away in the meadow.
Then we came to a tavern with vine-leaves over the lintel,
Six hands at an open door dicing for pieces of silver,
And feet kicking the empty wineskins.
But there was no information, and so we continued
And arrived at evening, not a moment too soon
Finding the place; it was (you may say) satisfactory.

All this was a long time ago, I remember,
And I would do it again, but set down
This set down
This: were we led all that way for
Birth or Death? There was a Birth, certainly,
We had evidence and no doubt. I had seen birth and death,
But had thought they were different; this Birth was
Hard and bitter agony for us, like Death, our death.
We returned to our places, these Kingdoms,
But no longer at ease here, in the old dispensation,
With an alien people clutching their gods.
I should be glad of another death.

I found this to be creative, tasteful, and moving.
No matching videos

In light of what is happening to Domenic Johansson and his family in Sweden, this prayer seems quite fitting.

“Lord, righteous and almighty God, remember Your weather-beaten and tempest-tossed Church on this earth. Restrain her enemies, destroy their wiles, and hinder their violence. Preserve Yours saving truth to us and our children, and grant us to praise You with a joyful heart, now in the Church militant and forever in the Church triumphant. Amen.”

(I have a feeling I’ve posted this prayer before (though my searches came up empty). Even if I have, it is a prayer that still needs to be prayed.)

Two Sundays ago I preached a sermon on Genesis 9:20-29, and was encouraged to write a summary of the exposition of the text. While such a text requires a great deal of context and nuance, and I might be more inclined for any interested parties to simply listen to the sermon, here’s the basic argumentation that I set forth.

The popular handling of the text is to lambaste Noah for his drunkenness, and to lament how even the most righteous of men are still sinners. Regarding this incident John Calvin wrote in his commentary on Genesis, “I rather suppose, that we are to learn from the drunkenness of Noah, what a filthy and detestable crime drunkenness is. The holy patriarch, though he had hitherto been a rare example of frugality and temperance, losing all self-possession, did, in a base and shameful manner, prostrate himself naked on the ground, so as to become a laughing-stock to all. Therefore with what care ought we to cultivate sobriety, lest anything like this, or even worse, should happen to us?” And that is basic presupposition we have when we read this account, cultivated from our early days in Sunday School. We start with a moralistic approach to the text, instead of a biblical-theological one.

However, a question that we do well to ask is, “Where is Noah condemned in the text?” Or for that matter, where is Noah condemned for his actions anywhere in Scripture? The simple fact of the matter is that the Bible doesn’t condemn Noah. That being the case, perhaps we should not be so quick to condemn him either. Granted, every English translation reads that Noah was drunk, and the Hebrew term can mean that. However, it is also a word that can be translated “merry” as we read in Genesis 43:33 when Joseph’s brothers return with Benjamin to Egypt. The last verse of the chapter reads, Portions were taken to them from Joseph’s table, but Benjamin’s portion was five times as much as any of theirs. And they drank and were merry with him. That is how we are to understand Noah’s drinking. In Psalm 104 we read that wine is given to gladden the heart of man (v. 15), and in Judges 9 we read about wine that cheers God and men (v. 13). Noah was not sinfully drunk, but had drunk to the point of merriness and sleepiness, and took a nap. After all, wine can have a soporific effect.

Now, another question that naturally comes to mind has to do with Noah’s nakedness. Again, the popular conception of the story is that Noah was so thoroughly drunk that he’d taken off his robes and was just passed out in his tent. However, upon closer examination, this view cannot sustained by the text either. We should not think that Noah was passed out naked in front of the opening of his tent, and Ham just happened to stroll by and finding it funny went and told his brothers. The language indicates that Noah was “in the midst of his tent.” And this would have been quite a sizable tent, and not like a tent we use to go camping. This was Noah’s house. He was in the midst of his home. Also notice that Ham had to go inside his father’s tent to see his nakedness because the text clearly tells us that Shem and Japheth were “outside” (v. 22). So, was it wrong for Noah to be naked in the privacy of his own tent, which acted as a covering for him? Not in the least. You can no more argue that his nakedness was sinful than you can that it is sinful for you to be naked in the privacy of your bedroom. So then, why was Noah naked? Because he was resting from his labors, and had removed his robe, his garment of authority. Basically, Noah was a king, and he had set aside his kingly duties for a time to enjoy the wine from his vineyard. In Leviticus 10 we see a similar pattern with the priests and Levites who were not to drink while they were serving in the tabernacle, as well as in the caution given regarding wine and kings in Proverbs 31:4-5. In other words, don’t drink on the job. Noah knows this, and so he’s off-duty when he drinks and takes a nap. This understanding of the text is further indicated by the fact that upon Ham’s telling his brothers about their father, Shem and Japheth take the garment with which to cover their father. The translations typically read “a garment,” but the definite article is there in the Hebrew, and for good reason. Ham was the one trespassing where he didn’t belong, and was making a play for his father’s authority when he took the robe, eliciting his brothers’ collusion in the rebellion. They would have nothing to do with it, and symbolically uphold Noah’s authority by placing the robe on their shoulders, and are sure not to behold their father’s nakedness. Noah wakes up from his nap, knows what his youngest son has done, and pronounces judgment (something kings do) for Ham’s sin. And notice that the judgment has to do with authority and submission, which further indicates the nature of Ham’s sin, i.e. the punishment fits the crime.

So, that’s the argument in a nutshell, and there are probably some spots where a bit more detail would be helpful, but I trust this will suffice for the moment. Also consider, that when Adam, Cain and the Sethites sinned earlier in Genesis, the text is clear about the judgment that God brought upon them as a result. Here, Noah is not judged for sin. Ham (via Canaan) is judged (and Noah is the one who pronounces the judgment!). Therefore, Noah is not at fault, and we probably owe him an apology.

(For more nuance and detail, I commend to you chapter 4 of James Jordan’s Primeval Saints, where I was first introduced to this perspective on Noah in detail. Admittedly, I was initially reticent to accept the position I’ve espoused above, but now having studied it in greater detail, I believe it is the most biblically consistent).

“It is the one great weakness of journalism as a picture of our modern existence, that it must be a picture made up entirely of exceptions. We announce on flaring posters that a man has fallen off a scaffolding. We do not announce on flaring posters that a man has not fallen off a scaffolding. Yet this latter fact is fundamentally more exciting, as indicating that the moving tower of terror and mystery, a man, is still abroad upon the earth. That the man has not fallen off a scaffolding is really more sensational; and it is also some thousand times more common. But journalism cannot reasonably be expected thus to insist upon the permanent miracles. Busy editors cannot be expected to put on their posters, ‘Mr. Wilkinson Still Safe,’ or ‘Mr. Jones, of Worthing, Not Dead Yet.’ They cannot announce the happiness of mankind at all. They cannot describe all the forks that are not stolen, or all the marriages that are not judiciously dissolved. Hence the complete picture they give of life is of necessity fallacious; the can only represent what is unusual. However democratic they may be, they are only concerned with the minority.”

– excerpt from G.K. Chesteron’s The Ball and the Cross.

“God of all grace, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who knows the enemies of Your Church and are able to thwart all their designs; protect us against all tyrants, heretics, and hypocrites. Hear our prayer and grant us to love Your Word, to promote Your honor upon the earth, and to continue in Your service always even to the end. Amen.”

You will certainly laugh. You might possibly cry. And undoubtedly you will find The Charlatan’s Boy speaking to your own heart and life. Jonathan Rogers’ latest novel is a story that combines charm, humor and insight in such a way as to make a unique impression upon the reader. You almost get the sense that you are listening to the yarn of an old, southern gentleman, while sipping sweet tea on the front porch. There is a certain flow that carries you along like a river; a purposeful meandering that allows you to take in those moments when you realize that you are hearing your own story. In the way that only good fiction can, Charlatan’s Boy is a clear window through which you are able to gaze upon your own existence. Who doesn’t want to belong? Who doesn’t give consideration to who they really are, to their true identity from time to time? Mr. Rogers explores these questions and themes, and even poses some witty insights on the subject of community. Of course, to even speak of the story in such categories is almost a disservice, so buy a copy and enjoy. It is a great read for the whole family.

This story is about life This story is about love. This story is about redemption. But I would imagine that this story is not quite like any story you have read before. Despite the familiar themes, they cut across one another in such a way so as to give the book a grainy texture that is refreshing and unique. “The Beginning” alone is worth the read, and is so poignantly written that you cannot help but be drawn into the story. Mind you, this is not a book for the faint of heart nor the immature, but it will resonate with the reader that is attuned to the fact that living in this world is neither simple nor easy. Set in Colonial America, author Pete Peterson has written a moving story in The Fiddler’s Gun. Buy a copy and get to reading. The sequel, Fiddler’s Green, will be released December 7th.

In this past Sunday’s sermon on Genesis 4:17-26, I made reference to a piece written by James Jordan entitled, The Enoch Factor. Here is that piece for your reading and consideration.

The Enoch Factor

by James B. Jordan

After Cain murdered Abel and was driven out of the land of Eden, we read that he had a son whom he named Enoch, and that he founded a city that he also named Enoch (Genesis 4:17). The city, we are told, was named for his son.

This was the first city ever built, but it will not be the last. The last city is the New Jerusalem, built by God the Father, and “named” for His Son. As Enoch was prince of the city of Enoch, so Christ is the Prince of the holy city.

The first city was built on the blood of a murdered brother. The last city is also built on the blood of a murdered younger brother, the Ultimate Younger Brother, Jesus Christ. Throughout the Bible we see younger brothers replacing older brothers because the older brother is unfaithful: Seth replaced Cain, Isaac replaced Ishmael, Jacob replaced Esau, Joseph replaced his brothers, David replaced his, etc. Jesus was the last Adam, the final younger brother, and His death is the foundation for the City of God.

Enoch did not plant a garden and then let it grow into a city. In this he was setting a course different from God’s. If we follow the history of the garden concept in the Bible, we find that Abraham and the patriarchs worshiped at oasis-sanctuaries characterized by altars, trees, and wells. Later, these elements were organized into a formal tent-centered sanctuary, the Tabernacle, as a place of worship. Still later, the Tabernacle grew into the Temple, and the Temple is set in a city, Jerusalem. In this way, God grows the city out of the garden. God grows a civilization up from the roots of agriculture.

Enoch started with a city. That means he started with a tyranny. The city becomes a place that conquers and enslaves the “peasants” and “serfs” of the agricultural countryside. Because the tyrant-city has no root it cannot last, but while it lasts it is brutal.

Enoch’s sin was like Adam’s. God had told Adam and Eve that every tree was for them to eat (Genesis 1:29). Thus, they could figure out that the forbidden tree was only temporarily forbidden. Their sin was that they would not wait for God’s permission. Similarly, Enoch was unwilling to work patiently and grow a city out of a garden. He jumped forward and tried to seize the final fruits of generations of labor: the glory of a city.

For a variety of reasons, the heathen often make more rapid initial cultural gains than do the righteous. The heathen are willing to enslave other people to work for them. The heathen don’t take one day in seven to rest. The heathen expend no psychological energy in repentance and striving against sin. Thus, the heathen get there first. This is what I call “the Enoch Factor.”

We see the Enoch Factor in Genesis 4. Not only did Cain build the first city, but his descendants became “fathers” (experts, teachers) of the sciences of animal husbandry, music, and metallurgy. The first poem in the Bible is put on the lips of a descendant of Cain (Genesis 4:20-24).

The Enoch Factor means that very often great advances in technique (not in philosophy) come from pagan sources. Usually the heathen get there first, and then the believers come after. Practically speaking, what does this mean?

First, it means that Christians must not be overwhelmed by the technological and artistic prowess of the heathen. In our society today, the best artists and technicians are almost never believers. We know from the Bible, however, that they have no root and will burn out. Our city is built more slowly, but it will endure forever. As history matures, Christianity will more and more become culturally dominant, and more and more we will see Christians “getting there first” in the arts and sciences.

Second, it means that Christians often must learn technique from the heathen. How foolish would it have been for Israelite herdsmen to refuse to manage their animals well, just because it was pagan Jabal who developed many fundamental techniques! And how sad if David had refused to learn music because Jubal got there first!

Now think about what this may mean. Often pietistic Christians are critical of their brethren in the arts because artistic Christians rub shoulders with degenerate heathen. Indeed, a Christian artist may have to apprentice himself to a degenerate heathen. Are we mature enough to support our Christian brethren in this?

The arts are very powerful, because art enhances belief by means of emotion. Thus, the Christian who studies with Jubal must be very careful and be sure to keep separate the study of technique from the adoption of a philosophical outlook. Still, greater is He that is in us than he that is in the world, and the Christian is called to take dominion in all areas of life. We can learn from the world, and should be bold to do so.

The proper context for study of the techniques of Enoch is the Church. We need the teaching and sacramental community of a local church as a support base, a garden, the whole time we are studying in the world. Apart from such a context, we run the danger of being sucked in by the philosophy of Enoch.

Originally published:

OPEN BOOK

Views & Reviews

No. 21 Copyright (c) 1994 Biblical Horizons May, 1994

Winner of the John Newbery Medal, Neil Gaiman’s The Graveyard Book is a carefully spun yarn with a beautiful melancholy about it. The beginning is nothing short of chilling, and that chill lingers upon the reader throughout as the story of Nobody Owens is told. The setting of the book is primarily a graveyard, which some might find disturbing. However, knowing that the story is loosely patterned after Kipling’s The Jungle Book is a helpful piece of information that allows the reader to grasp the overall progress and trajectory of Gaiman’s work. It is clear that Mr. Gaiman is masterful at his craft, and the ending of Graveyard leaves an impression that is slow to fade. Given his influences, I wonder what Mr. Gaiman’s outlook on eternity might be, but suspect he is a soul still searching for answers. Appreciating this piece, I look forward to exploring some of his other works.

Parental note: Due to the dark themes and images (including some of the illustrations ) I would not recommend The Graveyard Book for readers under the age of, say, ten. Younger children prone to nightmares will have plenty for their imaginations to dwell upon, so, unless you especially enjoy being awakened in the middle of the night or finding an extra 98.6 in bed with you, I would wait until you think your child can handle them.

After having Neil Gaiman’s Newbery-winning work, The Graveyard Book, recommended to me by a couple of different sources, I picked up a copy at the Hutchmoot in August. Although I am in the thick of this unique read, my curiosity about the author was sufficiently piqued, so I did some rummaging on his website. Under the FAQs his advice to authors was enlightening, but I found his influences particularly interesting.

Influences

Q: From what I gather the atmosphere of this book has a Tim Burton air to it. In fact, to me, and possibly me alone – though I doubt as much – you as a creator have a Tim Burton air in general. Have you been influenced, or inspired by him? Could you maybe list off some of the folks who have inspired you?
A: Tim Burton came along much too late to inspire me. I think the people who influence you probably did it before you were twenty – in my case the list would have to include C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Harlan Ellison, Lou Reed, R. A. Lafferty, E. Nesbit, David Bowie, Jim Henson, Roger Zelazny, Will Eisner, Dr Who (the Hartnell, Troughton and Pertwee incarnations), Jules Feiffer, Noel Langley, Ursula K. LeGuin, Michael Moorcock, Hope Mirrlees, Margaret Storey, Robert Heinlein, Al Stewart, Charles Addams and the people who did the black and white episodes of The Avengers… and that’s just for starters…

Q: What sparked your Myth interest?
A: I think it was always sparked reading the Roger Lancelyn Green Legends of the Norsemen and Legends of Ancient Egypt when I was seven certainly fanned the flames.

Q: What part of the day does most of your ideas come from?
A: Teatime.

Q: What was your favorite book when you were a child? What is your favorite children’s book now that you’re grown up?
A: When I was growing up… probably the Narnia books. Probably The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Now I’m grown up I’ve got to read the Narnia Books out loud twice, about a decade apart, and I still think they are astonishing, although I’m more aware of the things I don’t like about them. As a grown up, I think Richmal Crompton’s William books are better than I thought they were as a kid, and I loved them, most of them, as a kid.

Q: Do your imaginings ever get lost? I’m ashamed to admit I quit believing, but I guess the real question is: Do you ever have a story suggested to you by a piece of artwork (such as a painting, illustration, or sunset)?
A: I get stories from everywhere, and yes, artwork is one of those places. I wrote a number of stories inspired by Lisa Snellings statues, for example.

Q: Many of your books feature doors, walls, and other structures. Do you have a fondness for architecture? If so, what is your favorite city?
A: I think my favourite city is Venice. I like architecture when it evokes something interesting.

Q: Why do all your books contain scenes, in which you tell us about what they’re dreaming?
A: Because dreams are important.

The above is taken from Mr. Gaiman’s official website: http://www.mousecircus.com/faqs.aspx

Marilynne Robinson won the Pulitzer Prize for her novel Gilead, so for me to attempt to tell you what a marvelous writer she is, I find subtly amusing. But she is, and her book Home makes an impression that is difficult to compare to other books that I have read. How she is able to beautifully express such ordinary things of life is a wonder that can only be known in the experience of reading the story itself. How deftly she draws the reader in with the cords of life, family, home, and faith. In a word, this story is bittersweet, but beautifully and hauntingly so.

Perhaps Home strikes so deeply to my own soul because I have been a Presbyterian for practically my entire life; because I am a pastor; and because I have children (two sons and a daughter) whom I wonder about – what their futures hold, and what their faith will look like in the years to come. I also have many, many fond memories of the home in which I grew up, which includes baseball – the smell of a leather glove, the feel of a new ball, the sound of the ball striking the glove, and the simple pleasure of playing catch. Ms. Robinson’s depictions are not so foreign, and that is, perhaps, why this work has made such a deep impression. To say that this book is thoroughly enjoyable would be misleading. There are times when it is hard to read, and your soul aches, and yet you continue because the story is your own.

In his work Trees and Thorns, James Jordan raises the point, in relation to Genesis 3, that God did not immediately ask Adam whether or not he had disobeyed. Rather, that’s the third question that is asked. With the first question of “Where are you?”, God is essentially asking a question about relationship. Clearly it is estranged, since Adam is hiding from God among the trees. The second question, “Who told you that you were naked?”, is a question that relates to identity: Adam’s and God’s. God had made Adam naked, and he could not hide from the omniscient Creator. Then comes the the question to elicit a confession, “Have you eaten from the tree which I commanded you not eat?” Notice that the name of the tree is not specifically mentioned. Rather, the Lord describes the tree and couches the question in relation to Adam’s obedience or disobedience.

Setting the Lord’s approach to Adam before the eyes of our faith, I cannot help but wonder if there is not a pattern for our own confession displayed here. Certainly the bible has a lot more to say about the confession of sin, but what if we approach our own confession from the perspectives of relationship, identity, and obedience? This might sound overly simplistic, but what about approaching our children’s confession of sin this way, too? Instead of just asking them, “What’s your sin?” perhaps we would do well to ask them or remind them about their relationship to the Lord (and to you as a parent); their identity as a baptized believer and who God is; and then come to the matter of their disobedience. The Lord’s questions to Adam are asked in a context of remarkable grace and patience. God is there as Judge to be sure, but He is also there as Yahweh, the covenant-keeping God who does not fail, even when His people do. He is the Heavenly Father who will not abandon His first son, but who goes after him in order to restore him. Likewise, let our confession and the confession of our children be made in the same context of love and mercy.

Perhaps the greatest complement that can be paid to a piece of fiction is that it causes you to see your own world and reality in a new light and at a deeper level. Patricia McKillip arouses these senses in the beautifully written and captivating Alphabet of Thorn. I highly recommend it if you enjoy the magic and romance of fiction; that experience of getting swept up into another world vividly portrayed across the canvas of your imagination.

(One parental note: In my opinion, this is probably not suitable for readers younger than high school age).

Finally delving into Renee Girard’s I See Satan Fall Like Lightning. Only two chapters in, I am fairly confident I am missing quite a bit, as this is the kind of book you have to marinate in for a while. Nevertheless, I found this quote particularly thought-provoking:

The children repeat the crimes of their fathers precisely because they believe they are morally superior to them. This false difference is already the mimetic illusion of modern individualism, which represents the greatest resistance to the mimetic truth that is reenacted again and again in human relations. The paradox is that the resistance itself brings about the reenactment.

In past posts I have recommended children’s stories, and given a brief analysis of the content. On his new blog, Jonathan Rogers has written an excellent post that touches on the ways in which we can help our children understand a story and what it may be teaching them. Toward the end of the post he also mentions some specific stories that may be of interest to you. I commend it to you – and his other posts, too.

Recently, shots have been taken against Slavic Reformation Society (SRS), and some of the pastors and teachers associated with that ministry (these comments have been blogged, but I’m not going to dignify them by linking them here. If this is a mistake, feel free to tell me). Now, I am very biased toward SRS, since Pastor Blake Purcell is a personal friend, not only of mine, but of our entire congregation. This is the only mission work we are presently able to support, and they are regularly named in our corporate and private prayers. Blake and his family have given years and years of service in the former Soviet Union to promote the Gospel, and to serve the kingdom of Christ in that desolate land. And instead of applauding Blake, his family, and those pastors and teachers who are willing to make sacrifices, and even risk their lives for the cause of Christ, they have all come under criticism for their supposed perpetuation of another gospel – a claim that is flatly false. So, who argues like this? Who would take shots at faithful ministers of the gospel, and why?

In his excellent little book, In the Beginning. E.J. Young expounds upon Satan’s deception in Genesis 3, and provides some insights that are profoundly applicable to the situation I described above. He argues that Satan is impugning motives. “He sees that Eve is listening to him, and so he goes on to say: ‘For God knows that in the day that ye eat thereof, your eyes will be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.’ There is Satan’s reason. He is hitting below the belt, as it were. Satan works in that way. I do not think we can make a greater mistake than to assume that Satan comes with an objective argument.”

Think of what often happens in the churches in these days. We have controversy every now and then. We must needs have it, because it is the truth of God that is involved. But the tragedy of it all is that the doctrines in dispute cannot be brought out into the open and discussed objectively. There is always someone who introduces personalities and impugns the motives of the man who is taking a different position….

We must have honest discussion in the church. Failing that, the church is going to die. We have to be constantly considering the things of God, and we must expect differences of opinion. When you have that kind of controversy it can be carried on in love. We can respect one another, even though at times we may disagree with one another. We find that out as we go on. The same holds true of denominations. They do not agree on everything, but the remarkable thing to me has been that we can respect one another’s differences. We can differ in love, and we can realize that other people are good Christian people, even though we may not quite see everything as they do. We need to have that respect for one another which is based upon genuine Christian love, and which allows other people to have honest differences of opinion from yourself. When Christians can get along in that way, we have real Christian unity. I think that Christian unity is a fact. We see it wherever Christian people get together. When there are differences they are discussed in love, and we realize that each one is in earnest in trying to understand the Scriptures. There is real Christian unity because it is based on Christian love. But that is not the way the Devil fights, and we find very often that those who are on the side of the Devil use his tactics.

One of the greatest disgraces of the church of Christ – and this applies to the Protestant churches as well as to the Roman Catholic church – is the playing of politics in the church by ecclesiastical politicians. That type of person speaks whatever will gain the end that he desires. You can see it happening in church history. The burning of John Huss, for example, will serve to show what I have in mind. People will manoeuvre behind the scenes in order to suppress their opponents. It has been vividly brought home to me by the experiences I had in connection with the late Dr. J. Gresham Machen. Nobody would come right out in the open and answer his arguments, but they could smear his name. They could spread stories about him that were not true, and those stories are hard to live down. People are willing to believe the falsehood rather than the truth, and this is the way that Satan fights. Here is a good practical rule for us as Christians: when somebody says something derogatory to you about someone else, just forget it. Do not believe it. It may be true; it may not be true. Whatever you do, do not spread it; do not repeat it. Gossip is a terrible thing. At times I think it one of the worst of sins. You can destroy a person’s character by gossip, and Satan delights in that. This gossip simply eats at the bones of the another person and destroys him. It is easy to spread derogatory stories about a minister who is contending for the truth, because they take hold and they do a great deal of harm. You may for a time effectively stifle his witness, but if that man is contending for the truth earnestly, remember that the truth has a way of coming to the fore sooner or later. It is wonderful how God defends those who are on his side. Truth will prevail in the end. We must help those who are defending the truth by refusing to believe the stories that Satan spreads about them. All kinds of stories were spread about the late Dr. Machen. There was no truth in them, but people believed them. I say these things because in Genesis chapter three that is precisely the line that Satan is taking: ‘God knows that in the day ye eat thereof your eyes will be opened.’

Though published in 1976, Dr. Young’s words are prophetic, and certainly applicable to the climate of our day.

In this thorough post, Alastair Roberts provides a thoughtful exposition of the implications of gay marriage on society, and how the discussion of that subject should be broached. While somewhat lengthy, I commend the whole of the post to you.

Here are a few quotes that stood out in particular from my reading, with notations from the various article headings.

From The Public Nature of Heterosexual Marriage

The connection of heterosexual intercourse with procreation renders the existence of a sexual relationship between heterosexual partners a matter of public significance. The public recognition and celebration of the sexual character of the relationship between a married couple needs to be regarded in this light. Apart from gossip, prurient interest, and perhaps understanding the surface dynamics of relationships in which the partners are involved, why should society have an interest in the private act of sexual union that occurs between a couple? Why should the occurrence of this private sexual union be regarded as so important to the public recognition of the relationship that public recognition can frequently be withdrawn or denied in its absence? Precisely because the most private act of heterosexual marital union is an act which has potential consequences that are inescapably public.

From The Shifting Ethos of Marriage

Unlike traditional marriage, homosexual relationships are almost entirely oriented towards the present desires and emotions of the parties within the relationships. In contrast to the place of intercourse in marriage, which involves openness to the future gift of life and to all that that entails, the sexual intercourse in homosexual relationships is invariably and necessarily sterile and detached from the future. There is a significant disconnect and indeed tension to be observed between homosexual patterns of relationship and the notion that marriage involves making potentially costly sacrifices, limiting one’s pleasure, and forging lifelong commitments that may run radically contrary to the desires of both parties in the future. Such a notion only makes sense within a relationship that is structured in a manner that primarily serves the needs of people beyond the two partners.

Gay marriage accomplishes no movement from one generation to another. The union more or less terminates on the desires, emotions, and needs of the two partners. To establish gay marriage would be to institutionalize the close personal relationship model of marriage, which would hasten the rot of traditional marriage values. In particular, it would encourage the removal or compromising of those aspects of marriage culture and law that orient the union towards the needs of children, and others beyond the marriage partners. For those who enter into marriage as something that is about little more than the satisfaction of their desires and the public recognition of an emotional bond that they have with another person, the values of traditional marriage will be regarded as constricting….

It would be naïve to think that the gay rights movement, having achieved the status of marriage, will make peace with its traditional virtues of lifelong faithfulness and exclusiveness. The idea of marriage as an institution, with values, expectations, and requirements that transcend individuals is generally contrary to the gay marriage ideal and so the institution of marriage will be attacked, even while the privileges and honour accorded to its status are being enjoyed.

From The Breaking of Natural Bonds

If only on account of the differences between male and female sexuality, gay marriage will fuel attempts to undermine the necessity of fidelity and monogamy, and to push for easier and less costly divorce. This will weaken marriage for everyone; as history has shown, removing legal any other impediments to divorce hastens the collapse of marriages. Such a shift of values is very concerning….

Homosexual marriage does not provide for the natural bond between children and their biological parents. Perhaps the most significant consequence of this development will be the gradual detachment of children from their biological parents. As the conception of sex within marriage is increasingly conformed to the norm of an essentially sterile act, private and unregulated, shorn of responsibility or consequences, and marriage and the family come to be viewed as primarily legal constructs, the bond between marital sex and the family will come under threat in various ways.

From Homosexual Marriage and Tyranny

Gay marriage has been propagated chiefly by means of litigation and political pressure. Once we appreciate the manner in which gay marriage advocates seek to deny the normativity and superiority of the natural bonds enshrined in marriage, to claim as their right the same privileges that heterosexual married couples enjoy from the hand of nature, and to replace the normativity of a blood relations understanding of family with an understanding of family as a legal construct, we should be extremely worried. One requires some fairly big guns to wage the war against nature, which is one reason – though not, as we shall see, the only one – why sexual liberation from the natural order goes hand in hand with tyranny. Gay marriage can’t render itself public in the natural way that heterosexual marriage can, and so it must use the law and the state in order to achieve this….

Once the state has determined that a sexual relationship between a same sex couple is completely equal to a sexual relationship between an opposite sex couple, and ought not merely to be tolerated, but to be celebrated and privileged to exactly the same degree, where do we draw the line regarding the degree to which political agitators and litigious minorities can impose their vision upon society? When the state gives so little attention to the immense weight of millennia of tradition throughout human cultures and the order of nature in asserting the will of a vocal group upon society, we should all fear for our freedoms. When the state has arrogated to itself the right to define marriage and the family as it pleases, apart from reference to natural forms that it must recognize and uphold, have we not arrived at a position where the state regards society purely as its own creation, and thus subject to its domination, rather than as involving inviolable bonds and forms that pre-exist it?

If, rather than the laws surrounding marriage and family being ways to protect the substantive realities of blood relationships, marriage and family increasingly come to be regarded as legal constructs, detached from such underlying reality, the state gains increasing control over children and marriage is pushed into the private realm. Once we accept the normativity of a sterile understanding of sex, and a model of family increasingly detached from blood relationship, the state gains incredible power to reorder human society. As the recognition of the bonds connecting parents with their children are weakened, we give the state an ever-growing capacity to intervene in the upbringing of our children. When sex is no longer conceived of or engaged in as responsible behaviour that is open to potential consequences that may exert their effects for a very long period of time, any consequences that do arise will tend to become the responsibility of some other party, almost invariably the state. Where marriage and sexual intercourse within it are not entered into with a commitment to or expectation that one should be expected to shoulder the responsibilities attending conception and child-rearing, children will gradually come to be treated as if they were primarily wards of the state.

Gay marriages do not produce children, yet children are essential for the implementation of the vision of those who wish to maintain the equality of homosexual unions to heterosexual marriages. Homosexuals need access to children, both as badges that demonstrate the fact that their unions are completely equal to heterosexual marriages, and also as means by which to shape the society of the future. As homosexual relationships do not produce children, they must gain access to children by other means. The strong bond of blood that exists between parents and their children is a threat to homosexuals, as it limits their access to the next generation. Consequently lengths must be undertaken to undermine and weaken this bond.

State intervention is the primary means by which gay marriage advocates have pushed their agenda. In addition to using the power of government and the law to force people to accept their unions, government and the law are used to limit the rights of agencies and individuals to discriminate against them when it comes to such things as adoption. Gay marriage advocates won’t be satisfied with the fact that many adoption agencies will be happy to place children with gay couples; they must press to ensure that no agency can operate on the belief that a heterosexual married couple can offer things to a child that a homosexual couple never could. The powers of the legal system and the police powers of the State will be marshaled against any who might act on such a conviction. Convictions that arise from deep within our engagement with the world, our personal histories, and our cultural and human traditions are incredibly hard to eradicate. The belief that it is natural for a child to have a mother and a father, and that any departure from this norm is undesirable and not to be encouraged is one such belief.

The power of a belief is directly proportional to the degree of force and intrusive social engineering required to deprogramme it, which is why the doctrines of modern egalitarianism, feminism, and gay rights have needed to throw such great weight behind a movement of oppressive political correctness. Political correctness cannot easily tolerate and respect the existence of vocal public opposition. The more contrary to commonsense and natural reason a particular view is, the more rigorously its proponents will have to suppress any opposition. Permit the opposition clear public expression of its convictions and it is rendered vulnerable and exposed. The gay marriage position involves several claims that run strongly counter to commonsense – the parity of homoerotic desire and heteroerotic desire, the equality of homosexual forms of intercourse to penile-vaginal intercourse, the disconnection of sex from reproduction, the interchangeability of men and women, the dispensability of the roles of husband, wife, father, and mother, the family as primarily a legal construct, rather than a bond of blood, etc. For this reason, political intimidation, government propaganda, militant litigation, smear campaigns, vicious attempts to discredit opposition, and attacks on academic and press freedom have been and will always be primary weapons in the armoury of gay marriage advocates. All criticism or voicing of opinion that displeases the gay lobby can be labeled as intolerant and homophobic, and anyone who dares voice public opposition can expect to be targeted and hounded out of public office, academic respectability, or have their voice silenced by the media.

Although gay rights advocates can undoubtedly point to the manner in which the power of the state has been wielded against them in the past, my point here is that there is, by the very nature of things, a close natural alliance and affinity between soft totalitarianism and a movement that denies so forcefully convictions that have underlain human societies for most of history, and which relies upon government and the law to render itself public. The same natural alliance and affinity with oppressive state power does not exists in the case of heterosexual marriage.

Government and the law are also used as means to indoctrinate the youth. People that naturally have no children will seek to wrest control over the children of others in order to shape society according to their vision. It is for this reason that homosexuals who have no children of their own have an extremely high interest and desire to shape the education of other’s people children, and to limit the rights of parents to remove them from the desired indoctrination. It should not be a surprise to us that those who stand most opposed to the traditional structures surrounding reproduction in our society will often be the parties that invest the most effort in seeking to shape and control the education of our children and almost always the ones who are most in favour of limiting the control that parents have over their children’s curricula.

It has long been recognized that a strong family is the primary basis for a free society. However, a strong family is the greatest threat to the achievement of equality for homosexual relationships. Although it trumpets itself as a movement for sexual liberation, the gay marriage movement – and the gay rights movement more generally – will, by the very nature of the agenda that it seeks to advance, be one of the most powerful driving forces towards totalitarianism. Through state education and other means governments have already gone far in the direction of weakening the natural bond between children and parents in order to strengthen its grip on public society. Gay rights advocates provide governments with a natural and invaluable ally in this struggle against the natural bonds of the family, pushing towards the position when all children are regarded as essentially wards of the state…

The movement towards gay marriage is one of the movements within our society that is most antithetical to liberty. For this reason alone it must be firmly opposed. If homosexuals are to be the friends of liberty, they must recognize and submit to the extreme limitations that their refusal to engage in traditional marriage places upon their ability to form society and shape the minds of the future, to recognize that, by their very character, recognized or not, their relationships are largely powerless in the public realm. Of course, the naturally unenfranchised character of homosexual relationships will condemn homosexuals to a marginal and alienated status when compared to married couples (those of us who are single find ourselves in a similarly disadvantaged position, probably even more disadvantaged in certain respects).

From Conclusion

Society as a whole grows out of the union between a man and a woman. On account of its significance to society, and its preservation and deepening of natural bonds, this relationship should be encouraged and protected and set apart from all other forms of sexual relationship. Homosexual marriage is a state-sponsored parody of the real thing. While homosexuals must be accorded respect and dignity to no less of a degree than married persons, as a parody of the natural order of things, homosexual marriage merits not merely our political and social resistance, but also our moral repugnance and revulsion. For this reason, we must resist it without compromise, and firmly discriminate in favour of heterosexual marital union. On this upholding of this discrimination hangs much of our freedom.

“Since Adam was a priest, and priest of the garden, spiritual leader of humanity, the fact that he needed a wife means that clerical celibacy is Satanic to the core. If there is any kind of man who needs a wife, it is a clergy-man. A man is in a profound sense of “alone” unless he is married. Of course, God calls some men to be ‘alone’ all their lives, but this is not the normal calling, nor is it the normal situation for a parish minister. Such a man is ‘alone’ unless he is married. In this life, before the last day, God will not be our spouse, and He says we should have one. It is ‘not good’ if we don’t. He may call us to live a life that is ‘not good,’ and thus to undergo suffering for Him, but for the Church to require such a life is a great evil.” – James B. Jordan, Trees and Thorns

During our study of Proverbs 1:8-19 the other night, we were considering various applications of the text in our modern context. As you read through the text below, think about how applicable it is to abortion. The shedding of blood described here is coldly calculated.

[8] Hear, my son, your father’s instruction,
and forsake not your mother’s teaching,
[9] for they are a graceful garland for your head
and pendants for your neck.
[10] My son, if sinners entice you,
do not consent.
[11] If they say, “Come with us, let us lie in wait for blood;
let us ambush the innocent without reason;
[12] like Sheol let us swallow them alive,
and whole, like those who go down to the pit;
[13] we shall find all precious goods,
we shall fill our houses with plunder;
[14] throw in your lot among us;
we will all have one purse”—
[15] my son, do not walk in the way with them;
hold back your foot from their paths,
[16] for their feet run to evil,
and they make haste to shed blood.
[17] For in vain is a net spread
in the sight of any bird,
[18] but these men lie in wait for their own blood;
they set an ambush for their own lives.
[19] Such are the ways of everyone who is greedy for unjust gain;
it takes away the life of its possessors (ESV).

“The Church is the nursery of the Kingdom, and the principles we learn in the Church are to be carried forth in the transformation of family, state, and other institutions.” – James B. Jordan.

This quotation was brought to my attention a few weeks ago by Pastor Steve Jeffrey in London, England. It is taken from an essay written by David Field in 2007, which can be found here. The perspectives that Mr. Field encourages us to maintain are an important reminder of what ought to be the disposition of faith.

“Evangelical defeatism is a failure of Biblical perspective. After all, the risen Lord Jesus has been given all authority in heaven and on earth and has been made head over all things for the Church; he is the ruler of the kings of the earth and he is currently putting his enemies beneath his feet; he has presumably asked the Father for the nations as his inheritance and the ends of the earth as his possession – and so he will receive them. All nations will bow to Jesus and all kings will serve him and his kingdom will grow to become the largest plant in the garden with the nation-birds finding rest in its branches. His kingdom is the stone which crushed the kingdoms of men in Daniel 2 and which is growing to become a mountain-empire which fills the whole earth. He is the firstborn from among the dead and therefore it is right that in all things he has the first place. He has been highly exalted and not only will every knee bow to him but every knee should bow to him.

“Evangelical defeatism is a failure of historical perspective. After all, the statistics are out there. It took 1400 years for 1% of the world’s population to become Christians and then another 360 years for that to double to 2%. Another 170 years saw that grow from 2% to 4% and then, between 1960 and 1990 the proportion of the world’s population made up of Bible-believing Christians rose from 4% to 8%. Now, in 2007, one third of the world’s population confesses that Jesus is Lord and 11% of the world’s population are “evangelical” Christians. The evangelical church is growing twice as fast as Islam and three times as fast as the world’s population. South America is turning Protestant faster than Continental Europe did in the sixteenth century. South Koreans reckon that they can evangelize the whole of North Korea within five years once that country opens up. And then there’s the Chinese church consisting of tens of millions of Christians who have learned to pray, who have confidence in Scripture, who know about spiritual warfare, have been schooled in suffering and are qualified to rule. One day in the next century that Church – tens of millions of Christians trained to die – will be released into global mission and our prayers for the fall of Islam will be answered.”

Toy Story 3 is terrific. It has just the right amount of nods to the past two movies, while telling a fresh story with depth. I had heard that it was good and getting great reviews across the board, but really wondered if it would live up to the hype. Amazingly, it exceeded my expectations. It doesn’t take long to fall in with the familiar characters and enjoy the trademark humor, all the while wondering how it will turn out in the end. Instead of twisting aspects of what we enjoy from childhood, and turning everything upside down as in the Shrek movies, the Toy Story-Tellers cultivate that connection we have with our past by adding vintage touches of creativity and wit. Initially, I came away thinking, “This is the best of the three. This is my favorite”; only then to pause and remember how original Toy Story was when I first saw it. What a happy dilemma of attempting to choose a favorite. I suppose it isn’t so different from trying to choose a favorite toy. You really can’t. You have your reasons for enjoying them all.

“For the benefit of man, You, Father of mercies, instituted holy wedlock, and have promised Your blessing to every house in which dwells Your fear. Yes, even You sit at the fireside of them that love You, as at Your own hearth and home. Cause your peace to dwell under our roof, and bless the labor of our hands.” – Martin Luther

In his work Deep Exegesis, Peter Leithart draws comparisons to the listening of music and reading a given text. He writes, “We cannot take music in a moment, A chord gives us several notes at once, but a chord is not music, or not much music. To hear the simplest melody, we need to listen for at least a few seconds. And more complex pieces can take an hour or more to experience. Notes follow notes, measures follow measures, movements follow movements. Music is not the kind of art that allows us to ‘get to it, man.’ If we are going to listen to music at all, we have to give it time to unfold.

“Music, as I said, teaches patience, but that formulation is too intelluctualist, as if I am standing back, watching myself listen to music, and then concluding, ‘Ah, yes. I see that I am supposed to learn patience from the experience of listening to music.’ Much better to say that music trains us in patience. It trains us in moving through dissonance and tension toward resolution. It trains us in waiting for the climax, waiting for beauty to build and build. It trains us not to seize. Music trains us in good sex, sex that takes time” (52-53).

Dr. Leithart continues to make his case, describing the musicality of a text, particularly in that music and text share the quality of their meaning being unfolded over time. “Texts are musical in that they take time, and the time texts take is musical time. The time of music and the time of texts always involves reaching for the next moment. Music is always moving toward the next note, and we are always reading beyond the individual word. Each sentence compels us to move forward; each paragraph carries us along to the denouement” (53).

These realities have profound implications, particularly in relation to our hearing the biblical text. Given the instantaneous nature of our society, we must recognize the challenges that face us, as well as be aware of our tendencies. “We are often impatient with music, and we are impatient with texts. A writer lingers, and we want to grab him by the throat and say, ‘Get to the point, man!’ Evangelicals would reverently refrain from throttling an apostle, but the demand for practical Bible teaching often has this threatening subtext. ‘Don’t give me all these names, lists, genealogies, stories. Tell me what to do. Tell me about Jesus.’

“God in his infinite wisdom decided to give us the a book, a very long book, and not a portrait or an aphorism. God reveals himself in his image, Jesus, but we come to know that image by reading, and that takes time. God wants to transform us into the image of his image, and one of the key ways he does that is by leading us through the text. If we short-circuit that process by getting to the practical application, we are not going to be transformed in the ways God wants us to be transformed. ‘Get to the point’ will not do because part of the point is to lead us through the labyrinth of the text itself. There is treasure at the center of the labyrinth, but with texts, the journey is as important as the destination. ‘Get to the point, man’ is the slogan of the the liberal theologian; it is a demand for the kernel without the annoying distraction of the husky twists and turns of the text itself.

“We cannot get the meaning of a text without taking time. And as the text takes time, the meanings of earlier texts shift with the introduction of later texts. The meanings of the texts emerge through the time of reading” (55).

“According to Your mercy, You, O God, have established a covenant with us in Holy Baptism in which You have obligated Yourself to be our God and to forgive our sins for Christ’s sake. Thanks, everlasting thanks, be unto You [for] this gracious covenant. And now grant us grace to believe Your Word, and strength to persevere to the end, that we may adorn our profession in all things, through Jesus Christ. Amen.” – Martin Luther

Today marks the ascension of the Lord Jesus to His throne in Heaven where He reigns as the King of Kings. In Ephesians 4:1-16, Paul provides an interesting list of gifts given to the Church as a result of Christ’s ascension. He writes,

I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, ²with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, ³eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. ⁴There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— ⁵ one Lord, one faith, one baptism, ⁶ one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. ⁷But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift. ⁸Therefore it says,

“When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,
and he gave gifts to men.”

⁹(In saying, “He ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? ¹⁰He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.) ¹¹And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, ¹² to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, ¹³until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, ¹⁴so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. ¹⁵Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, ¹⁶ from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (ESV).

What did Jesus give? His grace. His favor. And that favor is particularly expressed through the giving of people to equip the saints and build up the church. (The gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost as a result of Christ’s ascension appears to underlie this section, particularly verses 3-7.) While Jesus may have bodily ascended, He has not left His Church without help in the form of flesh and blood.

Also note, in verse 8, that Paul quotes from Psalm 68. Meditate on the entirety of that psalm in the light of Christ’s passion, resurrection, and ascension, and it will take on a whole new depth of meaning, inspiring us to sing it all the more vigorously – even this Lord’s Day in our Ascension celebration.

“In his Word and in his Supper, the crucified and resurrected Christ is truly present now, even though his disciples on earth do not yet enjoy full, complete communion in his presence. Time cannot separate disciples from their risen Lord or from Easter’s promise of resurrection for them too. The church now lives in the eternal Sabbath rest of Easter Sunday. This is why the early Christians had an eschatological perspective on liturgical time, with Sunday as the eighth, eschatological day. The church’s liturgical calendar, which grew around Easter, helps foster this Christological view of time. Instead of marking off passing years according to the secular world’s clock, the church year ever revolves around Easter, returning to Easter each Sunday and moving from Easter toward the resurrection of all flesh. The past is never lost, since the entirety of salvation history is recapitulated every Lord’s Day, and indeed every single day, for the baptized already have been buried and raised with Christ (Rom. 6:3-4).” – Arthur Just

May 1^st & 2^nd in Nashville were interesting, to say the least, and as we have experienced a historic event, the overwhelming nature of what has taken place causes one to reflect and consider.

Starting reflection: “What is the Lord teaching us?” The Bible is clear that the Lord is in control of His creation, and that He governs the weather. There isn’t a drop of rain that doesn’t fall precisely where the Lord ordains for it to go; a single strike of lightning that doesn’t perfectly hit its mark; nor a tornado that doesn’t proceed upon its destined course. (For evidence see the Book of Job). And that being true, then it is perfectly natural to wonder why the Lord ordained for such catastrophic weather to strike so precisely over the course of two days. When viewing the radar pictures of the multiple storm systems that passed over, their path was amazingly uniform. Even more, when viewing the color-coated rainfall charts, there was a strip stretching over the city from the southwest to the northeast with the city of Nashville, seemingly, as the center of the bulls-eye. It wasn’t the impersonal Mother Nature wreaking havoc, or just an extreme case of misfortune behind the weather events of last weekend. Rather, it was the Almighty God, by the word of His power, orchestrating the minutest detail to perfection. For many, Christian and non-Christian alike, this is hard to accept. Some wonder, “Doesn’t that make God a sadist?” Or, “Why would a God who is supposed to be good, allow such awful things to happen?” In answer to the first, no, God is not sadistic. And in answer to the second, I don’t know exactly why God ordained these events to take place as they did. The Scriptures give us some general principles from which to view such happenings, and applying those principles to this situation is certainly appropriate, but we are compelled to admit that we are not God and cannot begin to plumb the depths of His mind. His ways are perfect, even if they are unfathomable. Just because a fifth grader can’t make sense of an algebra book, doesn’t invalidate algebra. That basic principle applies here.

But back to the original question of what the Lord might be teaching us, and some further reflection. Clearly, there isn’t an easy answer, and it’s astounding to consider that there isn’t a singular answer because the equation has far too many variables for us to comprehend. God knows the complete equation, and every answer to every aspect of the equation, but we are limited in our powers of discernment. What might be the answer for some may not be the answer for everyone, and what might be the right answer for one may be not be the right answer for another. Or it could be that more than one answer applies, which causes an even greater number of variables to be considered. It is possible that the Lord is choosing to bring judgment upon us, reminding us of our finitude, and we ought to humble ourselves before Him. That’s one possible reason for the torrential rain and flooding, and we do well to take note of it, examine our lives, repent of our sin, and cast ourselves upon the boundless mercy of Christ. (Consider Jesus’ reference to the 18 killed when the tower in Siloam fell as recorded in Luke 13). This is often a good place to start, but neither does this mean it is the only reason. At the beginning of chapter 9 of John’s Gospel we read, As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him” (ESV). Why did the Lord send the rains? That the works of God might be displayed. That’s another very biblical answer, and one with a myriad of applications. As the Church, as Christians have been coming to the aid of neighbors, friends, and total strangers, the works of God have been displayed. As families have lost their homes, and possibly loved ones, and yet they still give thanks to Jesus their Savior and trust Him still, the works of God are displayed. It is to declare with Job, “The LORD gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.” Others are grateful that the damage they suffered wasn’t as bad as it could have been, and this, too, is to display God’s work as thanks are given in and for all things.

There’s been a fair amount of speculation as to why Nashville hasn’t received as much national publicity about last weekend’s events as one might expect. One author suggests that it’s because there hasn’t been an abundance of looting or crime sprees, but neighbors helping one another because it is the right thing to do. I suppose selfless acts aren’t as glamorous as wicked ones, but that’s hardly surprising for an area of the country that has the Gospel of Christ so deeply ingrained in its culture. Wasn’t Jesus’ model of service patterned in the removing His outer garments, wrapping a towel around His waist, and washing His disciples’ feet (John 13)? Didn’t Jesus teach in the Parable of the Good Samaritan that the one who showed mercy was the one who loved his neighbor (Luke 10)? In such acts of service the Kingdom of God is displayed. As Jesus declared to His disciples, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” So let us consider the lack of publicity to be a compliment in disguise, and the mark of a society that, on a certain level, displays the kingdom of the living God that shall never be destroyed; the God who delivers and rescues; who works signs and wonders in heaven and on earth.

Due to the extreme weather conditions, this morning’s worship service has been canceled.

In his insightful work, Contending for the Faith, Ralph Wood writes, “H. Richard Niebuhr once said that it is much easier to declare what we oppose than what we propose, and yet that the latter is the far more important task. It’s easy enough to condemn and point out faults, but another thing entirely to remedy and to edify. Niebuhr was making a Christian no less than a common-sense claim. The Gospel is not fundamentally a word of negation, not even the negation of our own cultural sickness unto death. The Gospel is God’s vehement No to the No of humanity’s sinfulness, and thus God’s great glad Yes to his whole creation” (105).

As one who is both Reformed and Presbyterian, I find this to be an accurate critique of the very air which Reformed Presbyterians all too readily imbibe and then live out with inebriated fervor. We are so quick to critique, so ready to condemn the faults and errors of others as the self-appointed guardians of the Bible, that we end up neglecting the very Gospel we claim to defend. The truth which is to be adorned becomes smothered under a heavy blanket of censoriousness.

As one who has regretfully evidenced and experienced such a spirit, Niebuhr’s observation provides the remedy. As Reformed Presbyterian Christians, it is vitally important for us to be declaring who and what we are for, instead of so eagerly decrying those we believe to be in the wrong. Certainly there is a time and place for declaring error to be error, but what happens when that is your default disposition? You end up with curmudgeonly Christians who cannot see the wider world which God has made and redeemed.

Perhaps part of the problem that Reformed Presbys have is an inevitable result of the Reformation. After all, the likes of Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Knox were embroiled in a fight against ecclesiastical entities, and therefore had to declare wherein they disagreed with their opposition. That is our history. Furthermore, as those who have largely dieted upon Paul’s polemical epistles, is it any wonder, then, that we engage the argument with such ease? Not if we are honest.

Therefore, let us be giving ourselves all the more to the suppression of our critical spirit, and the cultivation of a humble one. Let us be about declaring Christ our King, and serving in the glorious new kingdom that has been inaugurated. For as we do so, I suspect we will be too busy being part of the solution to be delineating the shortcomings of others.

“The answer to the challenge of postmodernism is not to run back tearfully into the arms of modernism. It is to hear in postmodernity God’s judgment on the follies and failings, the sheer selfish arrogance, of modernity and to look and pray and work for the resurrection into God’s new world out beyond. We live at a great cultural turning point; Christian mission in the postmodern world must be the means of the church grasping the initiative and enabling our world to turn the corner in the right direction.

We must therefore get used to a mission that includes living the true Christian praxis. Christian praxis consists in the love of God in Christ being poured out in us and through us. If this is truly happening, it is not damaged by postmodern critique, the hermeneutic of suspicion. We must get used to telling the story of God, Israel, Jesus and the world as the true metanarrative, the story of healing and self-giving love. We must get used to living as those who have truly died and risen with Christ so that our self, having been thoroughly deconstructed, can be put back together, not by the agendas that the world presses upon us but by God’s Spirit.” – N.T. Wright, The Challenge of Jesus

Recently I have been listening to the lectures delivered by Randy Booth and Rich Lusk at last year’s Family Advance in Sandestin, FL, and cannot recommend them highly enough. They are excellent, and are well worth your consumption sooner than later. I would hope that all the families at St. Mark would take some time in the coming months to listen to them, as they so thoroughly define the identity and principles we are striving for as a congregation.

This Sunday is the beginning of Holy Week. Palm Sunday, also known as Passion Sunday, commemorates Jesus entry into Jerusalem. Most of our bibles label this portion of scripture as the “triumphal entry”, (a term we are accustomed to hearing) but really this is somewhat of a misnomer. The cries of “Hosanna” at the beginning of the week turn into cries of “Crucify him” by the end of the week. Jesus enters Jerusalem at last to suffer and die. The scene is full of irony. There is a sense in which Jesus is the King which the crowd proclaims, but His kingship does not meet the expectations of the day. A focus upon the humiliation of Christ and Golgotha is very appropriate, and rightly leads us to wonder over the generosity of God’s condescension in the face of human depravity, and the marvels of His grace in the redemption of rebellious humanity.

Maundy Thursday is the first day of the Triduum (pronounced TRID-oo-um). This is a Latin term simply meaning, “three days,” and consists of Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday. The word “Maundy” is derived from the Latin mandatum, meaning “mandate” or “command.” At the last supper Jesus gave the disciples a mandatum novum: a “new commandment I give to you, that you love one another” (John 13:34). Also during the upper room scene, Jesus washed the disciples feet and celebrated a meal with them. Foot-washing has long been practiced on Maundy Thursday in varying groups in the church, including the Brethren and Seventh Day Adventists. The climax of the worship on this day is the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. While it might seem to be appropriate for the Lord’s Supper on this evening to have somewhat of a somber tone, it is more accurate for the meal to be one of great celebration. Jesus establishes a new meal, and the essence of this meal is reflected in the table appearances He makes to his followers after the resurrection. Jesus is recognized in the breaking of the bread, so we read the resurrection back into the upper room. “We praise God for taking what might have been nothing more than a sad farewell of teacher and disciples and transforming it into a way of revealing the presence of the Risen One. We praise God for turning an occasion for mourning into an occasion of profound gratitude. On Holy Thursday the church lifts up the fist of faith and shakes it defiantly at every potential evildoer, saying, ‘We have this meal to strengthen and sustain us. It is the reliable promise of divine power and presence always in our midst. We will fear no evil, because our God submits to no destroyer, not even death. Thanks be to God for the gift of this meal!’ Only when we have shouted defiantly at the hosts of evil are we ready to confront them more directly; and so the Holy Thursday service proceeds to recall the passion of the Lord and thus to prepare for Friday” (Stookey, 95*).

Good Friday. What’s “good” about it? The term “Good Friday” may be a corruption of the English phrase “God’s Friday,” but can still be considered good because the events of the day are the working out and fulfillment of the perfect plan of God. It is certainly a day of great solemnity, but we should not treat it as a funeral service for Jesus. Although it is a time for serious contemplation of the saving work of Christ and what He has done for the Church and for us individually as believers, it also affords the opportunity to “consider how best we can present to the world the redemption of God, both by word and deed” (Stookey, 99-100*). The occasion of Calvary pictures the great condescension of the love of God, and not only for His people, but for all of creation. One of the services commonly associated with Good Friday is the Tenebrae, or Service of Darkness. Tenebrae, which means “darkness” or “shadows,” is a Holy Week Devotion dating back to at least the seventh or eighth century A.D. It is characterized by the successive extinguishing of candles as the service progresses, symbolizing the darkness that overcame the world as a result of the Crucifixion of our Lord.

Holy Saturday has been called The Great Vigil since antiquity. There a number of variations to this day and how it is celebrated. A service could begin is at dusk on Saturday, or before daybreak on Easter morning—hence the practice of sunrise services on Easter. Others hold the service at a later hour on Saturday, so that it ends after midnight on Sunday. The primary component is for the service begin in virtual darkness. Four basic parts are typically found in the celebration of this day. 1) Service of Light—candles are central, and, among many things, pictures the light leading out of the darkness in the history of Israel, and now in Christ. 2) Service of the Word—readings that cover the scope of salvation history from creation to the restoration of Israel from exile, and the major themes of Lent are revisited. 3) Baptism and Reaffirmation—typically adult converts, after having gone through Lent as a time of instruction and discipleship, would be baptized. All present would recite the Apostles’ Creed, reaffirming the faith into which they had also been baptized. 4) Eucharist—a joyful celebration of the Lord’s Supper, and for those who have fasted in preparation, a real “breaking fast” as they enjoy this meal prepared by the Risen Savior. The various components can constitute a single service, or be broken up into various services. The keeping of Holy Saturday has remained in Roman Catholic and Anglican churches, but is not as common among other churches. As mentioned already, an Easter sunrise service is derived from The Great Vigil.

*Laurence Hull Stookey, Calendar: Christ’s Time for the Church.

Jeffrey Overstreet has done it again. Raven’s Ladder, the third installment in The Auralia Thread, is another tale full of twists and turns that will keep you delightfully off-balance, but also reflective. Since fiction is often a more able and accurate mirror of reality, the grittier nature of this volume challenges you on a personal level, while also making astute cultural observations. As with Auralia’s Colors and Cyndere’s Midnight, Raven’s Ladder has that depth of quality that gives you the sense that there is more to this story than first meets the eye, inviting you to read it again. In keeping true to form, the tantalizing ending leaves you guessing as to how the threads of this adventure will be woven together at last in the final book, The Ale Boy’s Feast.

Posted this quote as a note on Facebook last year. However, having just come across it again, it is has left a fresh impression.

“It is usual to speak in a playfully apologetic tone about one’s adult enjoyment of what are called ‘children’s books’. I think the convention a silly one. No book is really worth reading at the age of ten which is not equally (and often far more) worth reading at the age of fifty – except, of course, books of information. The only imaginative works we ought to grow out of are those which it would have been better not to have read at all. A mature palate will probably not much care for creme de menthe: but it ought still to enjoy bread and butter and honey.” – C.S. Lewis, On Stories

After reading and hearing various reviews, yesterday I made my way to the $1.50 Theater to see Disney’s “The Princess and the Frog.” I have to admit that I went in expecting not to really care for the movie, and came away pleasantly surprised. It is a good story told well, and has enough plot twists to keep it from being predictable.

Parents should be well aware that the villain, Dr. Facilier (whose name is a clever derivation from the word facile, meaning “easily accomplished or attained,” or “shallow”) is a dark and sinister character, who calls upon his “friends on the other side.” These friends, manifest as voodoo heads and shadowy sprits, can be quite frightening for younger children, and is primarily why it will be a few years before my boys see this movie (the oldest is six). While some parents may be upset by the clear references to the occult, however, there isn’t any doubt that they are evil. Granted, Dr. Facilier’s initial singing performance is quite catchy and impressive, but that only adds to the lesson to be learned that sometimes evil can be very appealing (fitting perfectly with the temptation scene taking place). In the end Dr. Facilier reaps what he sows, and his demise (another darkly intense scene) is a profound picture of what happens to those who attempt to befriend and manipulate evil. To put it simply, the bad guy is really bad, and to have that clear demarcation in the story was oddly refreshing since so many movies attempt to blur the lines between good and evil.

Tiana, the heroine of the story, is worthy of emulation. Raised in a loving home by her father and mother, she is taught the importance of a good work ethic, but not to the exclusion of what matters more: love and family. Her development as a character comes to its climax when she realizes that she had forgotten her father’s instruction, and is able to overcome Dr. Facilier’s temptation as a result.

There are a number of other interesting images throughout the movie: light overcoming darkness; sacrificial death and love (evidenced even in the shallowest of characters); and a scene in which a star named “Evangeline” (which means “gospel”) is thanked by Naveen (the prince turned frog) for saving his life.

Perhaps one of the most interesting scenes is with Mama Odie in the middle of the swamp. Dressed in white (so you know she’s good), this blind, voodoo magician plays more the part of a Pentecostal (snake-handling?) preacher who challenges Tiana and Naveen to “Dig a Little Deeper” to discern between what they want and what they really need. While neither of them is able to correctly answer at the time, their growing relationship and influence on one another enables each of them to answer that question when it matters most. (Naveen’s rolling up his sleeve toward the end of the movie is a nice touch along these lines, too.)

The music doesn’t rise to the level of “The Little Mermaid” or “Beauty & the Beast,” but the jazz style is fun and quite fitting to the New Orleans setting. Also, clever one-liners and animation make for some subtle humor that adults are more likely to catch and enjoy. I do find it interesting that Caucasians are represented rather negatively throughout, even though the stereotypes are not completely unfounded. On the whole, The Princess and the Frog is an enjoyable movie that easily provides a number of proverbial discussion points with (older) kids.

In an effort to become better acquainted with the writings of George MacDonald, I decided to read his Phantastes, a work highly acclaimed by C.S. Lewis. I have to confess it was not what I was expecting, nor, shall I say, always an “enjoyable” read. At times the story felt quite cumbersome, and beyond my intellectual capabilities, but I could never dismiss Lewis’ words of praise. So on I trudged, and I am glad that I did. I will not pretend to have a thorough grasp of this work, because I do not. Nor do I think it is possible to really be able to comprehend MacDonald’s imagery simply after one reading. No, it is too dense for that. For all that was difficult, however, the overwhelming conclusion that I came to was that I need to read it again. Not necessarily tomorrow, mind you, but at a later time when I feel up for the challenge of a reflective fantasy, and can, perhaps, more greatly appreciate MacDonald’s genius.

That being said, I did notice a number of themes and patterns that emerged, and wish I had caught them sooner. Perhaps earlier awareness would have made the opaque sections clearer, but proving that out will have to await a second reading. So, what were some impressions?

• The prominence of mirrors and reflection. This is something I wish I had picked up on sooner, but for about the last 100 pages MacDonald made frequent use of this imagery.
• Anodos, the main character, goes through a number of “water ordeals” that almost have a baptismal/cleansing imagery about them.
• This is a “coming of age” story in many respects, and arguably of one coming to age through faith in Christ (based on the ending, which I will not disclose).
• Related to the point just mentioned, I almost wonder if MacDonald didn’t have Spenser’s The Fairie Queene in mind as he wrote his story; in the sense that Anodos meets and is apprenticed by the Red Cross Knight.
• White is a very prominent color in the story, and there is an interesting Passover imagery (red marks on the door) later on that is significant.
• There seems to be a recapitulation of the story within the story that MacDonald uses to provide the reader with clues about where his story is going, and its overall purpose.

Readily admitting my limited observations, I would gladly welcome further insights on this work If you have some, please share them.

Last night our family finished North! or Be Eaten, by Andrew Peterson. What an adventure! It is the second installment in “The Wingfeather Saga,” and has a very different feel from the first book in the series, On the Edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness. While enjoyable in its own right, Dark Sea bears the weight of setting the stage for the saga, and may not overly impress readers the first time through. However, it is well worth it in order to continue the story in North! Mr. Peterson’s weaving of the tale keeps readers on the edge of their seat throughout the entire book, making it hard to stop – even pushing back bedtime for our two boys on quite a few nights as a result. The development of the characters, and the reader’s ability to connect with them is a mark of the depth of Mr. Peterson’s story-telling abilities, and has one family eagerly anticipating the next chapter in the adventure.

“To the sinners who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus….” That’s not how Paul begins his letter to the Ephesian churches, is it? No, it is not. He does not address his epistle “to the sinners in Ephesus,” but to “the saints who are in Ephesus.” And that being the case, how might that be instructive to pastors in speaking to their congregations?

Now, as a pastor, I realize that the church is full of sinners (being one of those sinners myself), and this excursus is by no means an attempt to soft peddle sin as not being a big deal. Sin is a big deal, and it is never to be treated lightly. However, how might Paul’s addressing the Ephesians churches in this way teach pastors about the disposition they ought to have toward those they are called to shepherd? Does he view them first as saints? Or as sinners? Based on Paul’s example here, and virtually every epistle he wrote, the overwhelming evidence is to view the church as comprised of saints.

At first glance, this might appear to be a splitting of hairs or an unnecessary distinction, but let us consider for a few moments what the implications might be of each perspective. First, if my fundamental view of the church is that it is full of sinners, then what are my expectations going to be of the congregation? What is my default thinking going to be? I am going to expect problems, and view people as the source of potential problems, won’t I? However, if I view the congregation as saints, then (hopefully) I am viewing them as a redeemed people, a people with a new identity in Christ. Isn’t that also how Paul argues in his letters? Doesn’t he first remind the people of who they are in Christ, and then address their sin and shortcomings?

Consider Paul’s argumentation in Colossians. In 3:1-4, he writes, If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. ² Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. ³For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. ⁴When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. That is where he begins.

Then, in 3:5-10, he exhorts them, Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. ⁶ On account of these the wrath of God is coming. ⁷ In these you too once walked, when you were living in them. ⁸But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth. ⁹ Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices ¹⁰and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator (ESV).

So, again, the perspective of viewing the congregation fundamentally as saints does not neglect addressing sin. Rather, it gives even more weight to the exhortation of living according to the renewed image in Christ.

By way of analogy, how should a father view his children? As little sinners who are a constant project and source of irritation? Or as those in whom he takes pleasure and cares for? These two dispositions will result in very different environments in the home. The latter disposition does not negate discipline, but actually creates an environment in which discipline can thrive. Likewise, in the church, when the pastor views the congregation first and foremost according to who they are in Christ, he is going to speak to them (particularly in his preaching) from that vantage point. This is Paul’s example, and, as it is followed, may it result in the same as the apostle desired: a people who more fully understand their identity in Christ; a people who know themselves to be saints.

This is a link to Jeff Meyer’s blog with a must-read brief written by Rob Rayburn. The brief is simply outstanding, especially if you are familiar with some of the theological “discussions” that have been taking place within the PCA over the past seven years.

In a country that continues to lose its moral bearings, is it any wonder that it is increasingly more difficult to distinguish between those who really need help and those who do not?

In the years I lived and worked in Chattanooga, I cannot begin to recount all of the times that I was approached by someone on the street asking for money. On one occasion, a man in an wheelchair popped a wheelie and ended up tipping over backwards. I quickly went over to ask him if he was okay, thinking he could have hit his head on the pavement. He rolled over onto his knees, looked up at me and asked for money. A friend who was with him promptly smacked him on the head.

On another occasion, a friend of mine and I were coming out of the movies and were approached by a fellow named “Kevin Smith.” We listened to his story, and decided to give him a ride to the Salvation Army. They would not take him in, and when we planned to leave him there he got a bit upset. Finally, we agreed to drop him off at a restaurant, and gave him a few bucks for something to eat. My friend invited him to church, and over to his house for a meal on Sunday after church. He offered to pick him up, and told him where to be and at what time. He never showed. Some years later, “Kevin Smith” approached me while I was on a lunch break. He did not recognize me, and before he could begin his story I simply said, “I don’t have any money for you.” He walked away without a word.

The other night I was on my way home from a meeting, and coming around the exit ramp noticed a man standing outside of his car trying to waive someone down. I pulled over and rolled down the passenger-side window, and, boy, was he happy to see me. I am not going to attempt to recount everything he said, but his basic claim was that he needed money for gas, and TDOT would be there in about 20 minutes with a gas can. Shortly after I gave him some money, he drove away.

Many of you will recall that the final episodes of the TV sitcom Seinfeld were centered around an incident when Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer all witness a car-jacking, and make no attempt to come to the victim’s aid. Shortly thereafter, they are arrested for not adhering to the newly passed “Good Samaritan Law.” Their indifference (and the history of their indifference) becomes the focal point of the story, allowing for clip after clip from previous seasons to be shown again. Their self-centered lives ultimately prove to be their undoing, and the last laugh is on them. What an interesting cultural commentary upon our society this provides, and how ironic that our societal decline is even evidenced by those claiming to need the help of a Good Samaritan.

To fully grasp the comments below you should probably read 2 Kings 3. However, if you choose not to, here is a brief synopsis.

In 2 Kings 3, the “good guys” (Jehoram, king of Israel, Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and the king of Edom) are about to totally wipe out the “bad guys” (Mesha, king of Moab, and the Moabites). But at the moment of imminent victory we read this surprise ending: When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him 700 swordsmen to breakthrough, opposite the king of Edom, but they could not. Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place and offered him for an ascension offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel. And they withdrew from him and returned to their own land (vv. 26-27).

In his commentary, where this episode is explained in greater detail, Peter Leithart offers the following:

This unnerving story reveals something of God’s ways with humanity in general. What is God up to in history or in the specific history of our individual lives? That is often difficult to answer, and frequently, just when we think we have a sense of what God is doing, he turns things inside out and upside down and does something else. He is a living God, and that means he is the God of surprise endings. He does this not because he takes malicious delight in toying with us, nor does he trap us to guffaw over the resulting pratfalls. The God of surprises is wholly righteous, wholly good, wholly just, wholly love, wholly light without a shadow of turning. He is faithful with the faithful, but the faithful throughout the centuries testify that God is a God of surprises. God surprises us because we have only the slightest grasp of what is actually going on in history or in our lives. God surprises us because he is doing far, far more than we can imagine, and his plans are far bigger that we can perceive. God surprises us with roadblocks and obstacles because he wants us to grow up from complaining, sentimental childish Jehorams into mature adults, into the image of Jesus, who learns obedience by what he suffers” (182).

Another gem from Peter Leithart’s commentary on 1 & 2 Kings. Regarding the story of 2 Kings 16, he writes:

The account of Ahaz raises another challenge to contemporary Christian practice. For a variety of reasons, Christian worship in many contemporary churches has adopted liturgical styles from the worlds of entertainment or advertising. When success depends on copying the latest methods, the church’ apparently staid traditionalism, its claim to be the object of God’s special favor, its claims to be the Eden of God, the holy mountain, the house of the living God, can look quaint if not downright proud.

Better to adjust our worship and our language to the dominant cultural power, it is thought, than to keep up the arrogant pretense that we enjoy a special status. In adapting itself to the world, the church is departing from the pattern or model that should govern its worship. Only when the church follows the [model] of heavenly worship does water flow from the temple to the world. If the church adopts the [model] of Damascus, then the nations are on their own, and no water will flow to renew the parched land. Soon such a church will cease to have any purpose of being; ultimately, it will no longer be (248).

Currently reading Ralph C. Wood’s, Literature and Theology. A gem of a book.

An excerpt from the introduction:

Christianity is a supremely story-centered and story-borne religion. Christians are called to center their lives around the singular story of God’s ordering and reordering of the world. It is not surprising that, as a story-telling people, Christians would have followed the example of their Jewish forebears in being a People of the Book. Though it has many other qualities, the Bible is first and last the narrative of God’s people, the recounting of His dealings not only with Jews and Christians but with all the other peoples as well, from the original Creation until the final End. Nor is it any wonder that a people whose lives are sustainted by the Grand Drama of God’s work in the world should have produced yet more stories and books of their own. This little book of mine is an attempt to relate some of these later stories and books to the One Great Story and Book.

Beginning where a Christian’s life begins in the Church – at baptism, Dr. Wood delves into the baptismal imagery of “The River” by the ever-provocative Flannery O’Connor. He moves on to consider vocation through the lens of Walker Percy’s The Moviegoer, and the matter of compansionship via J.R.R. Tolien’s The Lord of the Rings. Further, the works of T.S. Eliot, G.K Chesterton, C.S. Lewis, and Walter Miller are brought to bear on other aspects of the Christian life. Hardly a work for pastors or theologians only, Dr. Wood’s collection of essays are engaging, challenging, and thoroughly edifying for a wide range of readers.

Horace Doss was buried today in an Alabama countryside. He was a beloved husband, father, granddaddy, and great-granddaddy. Cancer overtook him suddenly, and he died on August 25, 2009 at 1:30 PM. Surrounded by his children and their spouses, he opened his eyes wide, looked around the room one last time, smiled, and breathed his last in this earthly life. He was a man whose faith was firmly fixed upon the Lord Jesus Christ, and the fruit of that faith is evident in the legacy he leaves behind in a believing wife, believing children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. Mr. Doss steadfastly served the Lord, and during his years of Gospel ministry he even baptized his granddaughter, Denise, who is a member of St. Mark – a moment with her grandfather she will always cherish.

On the same day of Horace Doss’ death, Senator Ted Kennedy also succumbed to cancer. Likely, you have read the reports, or seen the coverage on various news stations recounting Kennedy’s legacy. He was known as the “Liberal Lion” – a political appellation which is ironically fitting. According to a recent Time magazine article, Senator Kennedy was a man of quiet Catholic faith and prayer. While I am not willing to discount that the Lord uses Obadiahs for the purposes of His kingdom (see 1 Kings 18), it does not appear that the Liberal Lion qualifies for such status. Dated August 3, 1971, Ted Kennedy closed a letter with the following statement:

When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception (emphasis added).

Mr. Kennedy’s pro-abortion voting record indicates that his conviction on the responsibility to children from the moment of conception did not last.

Tomorrow the coverage of the Senator’s funeral will be extensive, likely complete with aerial views. I doubt that Mr. Doss’ funeral today received as much fanfare in the press, if any at all, and suspect the procession was not followed by a helicopter. But who was the greater man? The one who leaves behind a legacy of death? Or the one who leaves behind a legacy of life? I never met Senator Ted Kennedy, nor did I ever have the privilege of meeting Horace Doss, but I look forward to meeting Mr. Doss in Glory.

I have to confess that I’ve found the media coverage of the deaths of Michael Jackson and Steve McNair a bit difficult to swallow at times. Basically I’m being told to overlook any of the glaring flaws either of them had, and simply focus on their contributions to society. Implicit in this: negative statements about these men are frowned upon.

At Steve McNair’s memorial service, Bishop Joseph W. Walker, III exhorted: “Drop your stone the next time you write about Steve McNair. Drop your stone the next time you text somebody. Drop your stone the next time you twitter. Drop your stone, those of you in the barbershops, the beauty shops. Those of you walking the streets on the corner, drop your stone.”

I assume the bishop’s comments stem from Jesus’ instruction in John 8:7: Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone…. If this assumption is correct, then I understand the bishop to be instructing his hearers that no one should judge Steve McNair in a negative light because all of us are sinners.

Well, there’s a modicum of truth in that, even as a sinner writes this post. However, does the fact that we are all sinners therefore mean that we are not to call sin “sin”? No, not at all, and Jesus wouldn’t have us to be so undiscerning. We are called to judge, but not to be hypocritical judges, keeping a healthy perspective on our own sin (see Matthew 7:1-5). We are to rightly view the sins of others, and be duly warned as a result (1 Corinthians 10:6-13).

Instead of telling everyone to drop their stones, why not take up Jesus’ words from Proverbs:

[The forbidden woman’s] feet go down to death; her steps follow the path to Sheol… Why should you be intoxicated, my son, with a forbidden woman and embrace the bosom of an adulteress? For a man’s ways are before the eyes of the LORD, and he ponders all his paths. The iniquities of the wicked ensnare him, and he is held fast in the cords of his sin. He dies for lack of discipline, and because of his great folly he is led astray (5:5, 20-23).

He who commits adultery lacks sense; he who does it destroys himself (6:32).

Sadly, Steve McNair fulfilled these words, and I can’t help but wonder that Bishop Walker would have been better served to instruct his listeners to learn from McNair’s folly. This isn’t to say that Steve McNair didn’t have many other fine qualities or that he didn’t significantly contribute to his community, for clearly he did. However, neither does this mean that we should pretend that his adultery was insignificant. It was significant, and it is significant to McNair. If he could return from the grave today, I have no doubt that he would tell us so. Is his adultery insignificant to his wife and children? Hardly. Then why are we to ignore it? And why should a minister of God’s word speak in such a way that encourages everyone to do so?

I suppose some would contend that it would be bad form, uncaring or unloving to speak plainly about Steve McNair’s adultery at his memorial service. Maybe so. Or maybe it is uncaring and unloving not to speak the truth to a society that needs to know that God will not be mocked, and that what a man sows he also reaps (Galatians 6:7).

Cyndere’s Midnight is the second book in the Auralia Thread by Jeffrey Overstreet, and is another thoroughly enjoyable read that I heartily recommend. The plot and pace of the book makes it difficult to put down, and you will probably find yourself wanting to sneak away to a quiet room in the house or a corner in a coffee shop in order to read undisturbed. As the story progresses from Auralia’s Colors, the obvious and subtle imagery Mr. Overstreet employs in Cyndere’s Midnight builds a delightful sense of anticipation and thoughtful reflection. Here is another bit of fiction that will not leave you disappointed.

For a recent book study at St. Mark, we read and discussed Charles Dickens’ classic, A Christmas Carol. With Advent just a couple of weeks away, I wondered how reading this tale might influence our thinking, and impact our Christmas celebrations. Time will tell, I suppose, but it dawned on me some days after the discussion what might be the most important contribution that A Christmas Carol can make to our present generation; an obvious fact that initially eluded my contemplations of the story. What is it? Pictures. Pictures of real, meaningful and unapologetic celebration. Celebration that has a purity and essence that we moderns have lost, and desperately need to regain.

G.K. Chesterton contended that Dickens “was not only English, but unconsciously historic. Upon him descended the real tradition of ‘Merry England,’ and not upon the pallid mediaevalists who thought they were reviving it. The Pre-Raphaelites, the Gothicists, the admirers of the Middle Ages, had in their subtlety and sadness the spirit of the present day. Dickens had in his buffoonery and bravery the spirit of the Middle Ages. He was much more mediaeval in his attacks on mediaevalism than they were in their defences of it….

“In fighting for Christmas he was fighting for the old European festival, Pagan and Christian, for that trinity of eating, drinking, and praying which to moderns appears irreverent, for the holy day which is really a holiday. He had himself the most babyish ideas about the past. He supposed the Middle Ages to have consisted of tournaments and torture-chambers, he supposed himself to be a brisk man of the manufacturing age, almost Utilitarian. But for all that he defended the mediaeval feast which was going out against the Utilitarianism which was coming in. He could only see all that was bad in mediaevalism, but he fought for all that was good in it. And he was all the more really in sympathy with the old strength and simplicity because he knew that it was good and did not know that it was old. He cared as little for mediaevilsm as the mediaevals did. He cared as much as they did for lustiness and virile laughter and sad tales of good lovers and pleasant tales of good livers… . He had no pleasure in looking on the dying Middle Ages. But he looked on the living Middle Ages, on a piece of the old uproarious superstition still unbroken; and he hailed it like a new religion. The Dickens character ate pudding to an extent at which the modern mediaevilists turned pale” (Charles Dickens, The Last of the Great Men).

It is precisely this ever-present spirit that sings to us throughout the carol. Who among is not drawn to the infectious, heart-felt joy of Scrooge’s nephew? Who among us would not thrill to throw ourselves to the dance with Old Fezziwig and his wife? Would we dare to be too serious, or claim we have not practiced enough? Who of us would not confess, with Dickens himself, the desire to be one of the children who “were not forty children conducting themselves like one, but every child conducting itself like forty?” And we have yet to mention the elaborate descriptions of food that can no more be supported on the page than the prize turkey by its legs. Can any of us approach the delight of the Cratchits in their goose, pudding, and each another? Would any of us venture not to join the revelry with Fred, his wife and their friends? Would we be too mature for their games? Or would we understand that “it is good to be children sometimes, and never better than at Christmas, when its mighty Founder was a child himself.”

We need these pictures, for they instruct us in the life to be lived. They give us glimpses of the life we have neglected, and need to restore. They are pictures of hearts that laugh, and know truly the meaning of “Merry Christmas!” Let us listen well to Dickens’ Carol, and hasten to join the song.

This is an insightful and challenging quote taken from Laurence Hull Stookey’s Eucharist: Christ’s Feast With the Church.

It is tragically ironic that for many earnest contemporary Christians, heaven is dismissed as something that distracts us from reshaping life on earth. In this view, heaven functions as an escape hatch, a refuge for those who refuse to deal with practical realities. This is a grievously debased understanding of heaven – and one alien to the New Testament teaching. For the first Christians, heaven was a hope to be instituted already on earth of the grace of God at work in the community of the faithful; for this reason the church perpetually prayed, ‘Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.’ The church still so prays without unceasing – but often uncomprehending of the meaning of the petition. These are no idle words spoken in between the affirmation of the holiness of God’s name and the petition for daily bread. They are instead a profound assertion of the coherence of divine righteousness and daily life.

The church that would proclaim true and enduring good news to the world necessarily first grasps the vision of the Great Feast in heaven and prays and labors endlessly for the effecting of feasts of love on earth, radiating from the Table of the Lord. ‘Labors endlessly’ does not imply we shall achieve this by human effort alone. Community is given by God, but it is never given magically or imposed upon the unwilling. Those who were compelled to come to the feast in Jesus parable (Luke 14) were not the ones who declined the invitation.

Laboring endlessly means, rather, this: So much in human nature seems to override commonality and to work for splintering that people of faith are called to resist deliberately and aggressively all inclination to isolate persons from persons, classes from classes, races from races, and nations from nation. Apart from conscious and courageous decisions to seek out and to extend community, nothing important or lasting is likely to happen. Just as the gracious God seeks us, luring us to a sumptuous banquet at a common board, so we are also called to embrace divinely given community by answering the invitation in order that God’s house may be filled – not merely by us, but by all whom God has made and longs to reunite in a feast perpetual.

This quote is taken from a sermon Charles Spurgeon preached on Psalm 90:17: Establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.

Do not have any fear of failure, beloved; if you really worked for God, you have worked for a cause that cannot know defeat. It may not win tomorrow, or the next day, but God can wait. Age comes upon us, but nothing shall ever make him decrepit; and through the course of ages, God can wait. I always feel, with regard to the causes in which we are engaged, when people tell us that we are in the minority, ‘Very well, we can be content to be in the minority at present, for the majority will be with us one day.’ We cannot doubt that when God is with us. Ay, and if we are alone with God, God makes majority enough for all true hearts. But even counting human heads, the truth shall yet have the majority. God can wait; he knows how to contrive gainsayers, and bring them round to his side. Our little plans come to an end in a few years; we cannot afford to bring them out unless they do; but God can let his capital lie idle for thousands of years if it is necessary. He is so rich that it does not impoverish him, and he will get his interest by-and-by.

In his commentary on 1&2 Kings, Peter Leithart makes the following observation in relation to 2 Kings 14, and the conflict between Amaziah, king of Judah, and Jehoash, king of Israel. I find it particularly challenging because you have to conclude that the Lord will even use the unrighteous to instruct the righteous. And that being true, healthy self-examination and a humbling of oneself before the Lord seems to be the right response of faith.

According to Deut. 28:7, those who keep covenant can expect victory in battle. Amaziah does right (2 Kgs. 14:3), while Jehoash does evil (13:11), yet when the two face each other in battle, evil defeats righteousness. Amaziah is a wise king who fears Yahweh, yet Jehoash is the one who tells a wisdom parable and gives sound counsel to his southern counterpart, warning that those who exalt themselves are debased (14:10). This chapter shows the same complexity of rewards and punishment that we find in other wisdom literature, most notably in Job and Ecclesiastes. Jesus was not the first to deny a one-to-one relation between righteousness and success (John 9:1-3). This is a constant theme of Scripture, and certainly by this point in 1-2 Kings, a reader will realize that God is not mechanical or predictable. Throughout the narrative, Yahweh has shown that he is free to show mercy where he pleases. He spares Ahab’s kingdom for a generation when Ahab repents, he extends life to Gentiles through the prophets Elijah and Elisha, he preserves and saves Israel despite its persistent idolatries. History does not falsify the promises of Deut. 28, but it does show the free sovereignty of Yahweh, especially his freedom to show mercy (239).

From time to time I hope to share some of the stories we’ve been reading to our boys. Deborah and I are always on the lookout for more good books to read to them (and enjoy ourselves). I hope you’ll share some of your favorites too. Here are a few that have stood out of late.

Mortimer’s First Garden, by Karma Wilson, is a very clever allegory of the “mustard seed theology” of the kingdom of God. The story moves from misunderstanding about the kingdom; to the beginning of the kingdom at the resurrection; to the perseverance of faith, culminating at last in feasting and rest.

The Book of Giant Stories, by David L. Harrison; illustrated by Philippe Fix. There are three short stories, the first of which we liked the best, but the illustrations are especially impressive.

The Water of Life is a Brother’s Grimm tale retold by Barbara Rogasky; illustrated by Trina Schart Hyman. Classic stuff. Hyman has also illustrated Margaret Hodges’ works Saint George and the Dragon and The Kitchen Knight, Lloyd Alexander’s The Fortune-Tellers, and scores of others.

This Sunday is Trinity Sunday. For further reading on the history and meaning of this occasion, I recommend the following: http://www.stpaulskingsville.org/trinity.htm

It is not unreasonable to suppose that the life of prayer will draw us into a genial camaraderie, so secure in God’s grace and confident in his beneficence that we are irresistibly carried along in the flow of the river of God, viewing everyone and everything with the cheeriest of feelings. But reason, at least reason inexperienced and untested in the life of prayer, isn’t the best guide in these matters. When we take the Psalms as our guide, we find that people who pray have a lot of enemies, and that they spend a lot of their praying time dealing with them.

Most of us would prefer it otherwise. We commonly indulge our preference by subjecting the Psalms to severe editing, cutting away any negativism that offends piety and disturbs the peace. The editing is usually unconscious, accomplished by the simple expedient of withdrawing the imagination and sliding over the offensive passages. Psalm 137 is on nearly everyone’s list for revision. Psalm 137 is the scandal of the Psalter.

– Eugene Peterson, Answering God: The Psalms as Tools for Prayer

This story is commendable on a number of levels.  http://www.rabbitroom.com/?p=5046

Last night I finished Jeffrey Overstreet’s book, Auralia’s Colors. It is an engaging, beautifully descriptive, and masterfully woven tale. This is a story with layers. In fact, I am finding myself tempted to pick it up and start over again to see what else I can glean from it’s pages. The climax and ending were not what I was expecting, so now I am left to impatiently await the arrival of the second book of the series in the mail, Cyndere’s Midnight. If you enjoy a bit of fiction, you will not be disappointed by Auralia’s Colors.

Perusing my old blog today and thought this quote from John Calvin was worth re-posting.

“But we must realize that at whatever time we are baptized, we are once for all washed and purged for our whole life.Therefore, as often as we fall away, we ought to recall the memory of our baptism and fortify our mind with it, that we may always be sure and confident of the forgiveness of sins. For, though baptism, administered only once, seemed to have passed, it was still not destroyed by subsequest sins. For Christ’s purity has been offered us in it; his purity ever flourishes; it is defiled by no spots, but buries and cleanses away all our defilements.

“Nevertheless, from this fact we ought not to take leave to sin in the future, as this has certainly not taught us to be so bold. Rather, this doctrine is only given to sinners who groan, wearied and oppressed by their own sins, in order that they may have something to lift them up and comfort them, so as not to plunge into confusion and despair” (Institutes,Book IV, XV, 3, emphasis added).

Today marks the fortieth day after Easter, the day our Lord ascended to His throne in Heaven. I suspect that we are not nearly as excited about today as we ought to be. Granted, we will be celebrating the ascension this coming Lord’s Day, but today marks an amazing moment in God’s saving work and in the history of the world.

Not to state the obvious, but when you stop and think about it, we have been moving to this day since Advent and Christmastide. Our liturgical year begins anticipating the coming of the Savior, and then rejoices in the God who came in the flesh of man to deliver the world from sin. We behold Jesus’ manifestation in Epiphany; mediate on His engagement in holy war through suffering, which culminates on the cross, in the Lenten season; and then resoundingly declare His victory over death and the grave at Easter. And this victory celebration, lasting more than one Sunday, finds its climax in the risen King’s ascension to His throne.

Jesus ascended to the glory from which He came signifying that He accomplished the will of His heavenly Father; that God’s plan of salvation was successful; and that the “earthly” phase of Jesus’ work was complete. This is reason for celebration. Although we might think it would have been better for Jesus to stay on the earth, Jesus himself says otherwise. Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you (John 16:7). Jesus is speaking of the giving of the Holy Spirit, evidence that the ascension has taken place. Quoting Psalm 68, Paul declares in Ephesians 4: When he ascended on high…he gave gifts to men. Our heavenly King has lavished upon the church what she needs to grow to maturity, to serve Him, to continue the kingdom work on earth, and chief among those gifts is the Holy Spirit. This is hardly a small thing! Hardly a meager gift! If Jesus had not ascended then He could only be in one place at a time, but the coming of the Holy Spirit dramatically changed that dynamic. As Laurence Hull Stookey notes, “the ascension is an affirmation that the Risen One is now bound by neither time nor space. Jesus of Nazareth dwelt some thirty years in a very small territory to the east of the Mediterranean. But through the power of the resurrection Christ is revealed as being present at all times and in all places. That presence is effected by the power of the Holy Spirit, which is nothing less than Christ filling all things.” So we celebrate the ascension, and eagerly anticipate Pentecost.

Finally, we need to realize that this world has been put back on course and the curse of sin undone. Paul declares that Jesus is the firstborn from the dead that in all things He may have the preeminence. For in Him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross (Col. 1:18-20). Jesus’ ascension has made a way for man to enter into God’s presence, even as we ascend each Lord’s Day to the very throne room where Jesus now sits. Further, Jesus’ ascension foreshadows the future to come. The promise of the new heavens and the new earth is sure because there is already resurrected dust of the earth in heaven. The old creation has been exalted and transformed, joined to the new creation begun in Christ Himself, culminating in the perfect joining of heaven and earth at the last. Therefore, in the ascension of Christ, we not only find assurance for the redemption of our souls, but also encouragement for the kingdom work that is our calling. We are joined to Christ. He is victorious. He has given us the Spirit, therefore our labors are not in vain.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control – Galatians 5:22

The last few weeks I have been meditating on how the fruit of the Spirit is instructive to the parenting of our children. Of course we want our children to bear this fruit as they mature in the faith, but how much more so should these attributes be the pattern for our own lives as we seek to nurture and train them? The aroma of our homes should be this fruit, and wherein we are lacking, let us pray for the Holy Spirit to provide what is needed. Pray that the Lord would increase your love, joy and peace in your children; pray that he would increase your patience, kindness and goodness toward them; pray for faithfulness, gentleness and self-control in your dealings with them. If you have yet to memorize the fruit of the Spirit, then do so, that it might be at the forefront of your mind and quick to your thoughts. Begin seeing your children through this lense, and you may never look at them quite the same way again.

How should Christians view life? From a Christian perspective, correct? Believers, above all others, should view the world – should see life – through a thoroughly biblical lens. Yet, if you were to ask ten different Christians what it means to think biblically, it would not be surprising to hear eleven different answers. So who is right and who is wrong?

Well, it could be that one is right and the other is wrong. It could be that neither are right and both are wrong. Or it could be that both are right and neither are wrong – even though both may contend the other to be wrong. Perhaps you think I am straying from my point about thinking biblically, and that I am espousing some form of relativism where truth is determined by each individual, so allow me to clarify.

Scripture is patently clear regarding God’s salvific work in the world through the Lord Jesus. In no way do I intend to cast doubt upon the fundamentals of biblical faith – such as are found in the Apostles’ Creed. Nor am I calling into question the rich heritage that we have in our various confessions and creeds. Certainly there are matters that would be deemed as “non-negotiable.” Nevertheless, we must develop a biblical understanding of how we are to live every day life. We must learn wisdom, which is not an easy task.

Wisdom can be simply defined as “skill in living,” to which all of Scripture directs us. However, we have also been given the Wisdom Literature, which consists of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. Each of these books points us to Christ, while also speaking to Christian experience. Job asks the question of why God does what He does, and answers that we are but men. The Song of Solomon speaks to married love, while the Psalms function as the emotions of God’s people and teach us to pray. Proverbs gives us principles of life in nugget form, and Ecclesiastes tells us that life does not make sense no matter how hard we try to figure it out. If we are to be those who live wisely, who live with skill, then we will meditate often in this portion of the Sacred Text, and be rightly challenged by the tensions that we find there. What do I mean?

In Proverbs 26:4 Solomon states, Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him. This seems to be fairly straightforward instruction as to how we are to deal with a fool. But what is it that he says in the very next verse? Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in His own eyes. Wait a second. Didn’t Solomon just say that we are not to answer a fool, and now he is saying we are? Which is it? Do we answer a fool or don’t we? The answer is yes… and yes. It takes discernment to determine when to answer and when not to answer. It takes wisdom.

Solomon is teaching us that life is not fashioned by cookie cutters. It is not about everything being nice and neat, with checklists to help us determine what we are to do in every given situation. No, Solomon takes the checklist, tears it into pieces, and throws it in the trash. We want simple answers and simple solutions. We want things to be black and white, making concessions for some gray. But that is not what the Bible teaches us. Life isn’t black and white and gray. Life is blue, green, yellow, red, purple, crimson, orange and violet. Life is to be lived in color.

Scripture sets forth principles of life, and those principles are the same for all believers. However, the application of those principles may vary widely between Christians. Sometimes you answer a fool according to his folly, and sometimes you do not. Sometimes what you determine for your life or the life of your family, based on biblical principles, may be the exact opposite of what another believer decides to do in his or her family. Both can be right, and both can be wrong for thinking they are really biblical and the other is not. So let us not relegate wisdom to a narrow and minimalist view of the world, but understand that God’s portrait for life has nuance and variation. He does not hesitate to dirty His brush with colors to create just the right shade, and neither should we.

Tomorrow is Pentecost, the third great festival of the Christian year. Although transformed by the Church since the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as recorded in Acts 2, Pentecost was originally celebrated by Israel. Along with Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles, Pentecost (also known as the “Feast of Weeks” or the “Feast of Harvest”) was one of the three annual festivals when all of the men of Israel were required to appear before Yahweh. The word “Pentecost” itself means “fifty days,” derived from the Greek used in Leviticus 23:15-16: You shall count seven full weeks from the day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave offering. You shall count fifty days to the day after the seventh Sabbath. Then you shall present a grain offering of new grain to the LORD (ESV, emphasis added). Fifty days prior to Pentecost was the beginning of Passover.

So Pentecost has been around for thousands of years, but what about its celebration in the Church since that momentous event recorded in Acts 2? Sources vary, but there appears to be ample evidence of a fifty-day festival season dating back to the end of the second century. Pentecost is considered “the oldest season of the Church’s year…. It is a fifty-day long Sunday – the Latin version of St. Athanasius’ letters actually calls it magna dominica, the great Sunday – and consequently neither fasting nor kneeling was allowed during it” (cited by Cobb in The Study of Liturgy, 463). By the fourth century the celebration of Pentecost began to take fuller shape. Pentecost and Ascension were initially celebrated on the same day, but then a separate Ascension feast emerged on the fortieth day. As a result, Pentecost focused upon the descent of the Holy Spirit for the constituting of the Church of God, and the fifty-day celebratory season was continued by some.

Based on the historical evidence, it is clear that Pentecost had a prominent place in the calendar of the Early Church, and that more than a single day. Pentecost needs to have greater significance to the Church today as well. Beginning at Pasch (Easter), this is to be a season of joy and triumph, a fifty-day Lord’s Day in which the resurrection and dominion of Christ are celebrated. We need to capture the spirit of the Early Church and so declare to the world, and the Church herself, that we have great cause for celebration. Jesus, the ascended King in Heaven, sent the Holy Spirit to make for Himself a new people and a new world. What better reason to have a party!

“It is usual to speak in a playfully apologetic tone about one’s adult enjoyment of what are called ‘children’s books’. I think the convention a silly one. No book is really worth reading at the age of ten which is not equally (and often far more) worth reading at the age of fifty – except, of course, books of information. The only imaginative works we ought to grow out of are those which it would have been better not to have read at all. A mature palate will probably not much care for creme de menthe: but it ought still to enjoy bread and butter and honey.” – C.S. Lewis, On Stories.

Is President Obama really this naive?

Addressing the National Prayer Breakfast, Obama spoke of how faith has often been a divisive tool, responsible for war and prejudice. But, he said, “there is no religion whose central tenet is hate. There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being,” and all religions teach people to love and care for one another. That is the common ground underlying his faith-based office, he said. (Source: AP).

Or, let’s come at it a different way. What God does he serve, given his support for abortion, which (to use his words) is “taking the life of an innocent human being”?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090205/pl_politico/18444

This is an amazing hymn.

Thankful for the providence of Psalm 2 in morning prayers.

Rejoicing that Christ is seated at God’s “right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and give him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.” – Eph. 1:20-23

Morning prayers of late have been in Psalm 119. I’ve been newly impressed with the primacy of God’s word; that it is light and life; that it is to be meditation of our hearts; and the source of wisdom and guidance. Having grown up in the Reformed tradition, attended Reformed schools and churches, and presently serving in a Reformed church, I’m deeply thankful for the primacy placed upon Scripture. I’m thankful too for the fresh reminders; the reacquainting with long held beliefs; and the delicious irony of the Word testifying of itself.

Now, off to John 1 for the upcoming Lord’s Day….

Grabbed a copy this morning and gave it a read. Enjoyable. Not for little kids, though. “The Warlock’s Hairy Heart” makes an interesting point, and also reminds me of Edgar Allan Poe. The subtle humor in the Dumbledore commentary is reminiscent of what made him such a beloved character in the HP books, as well as the wisdom he imparts.

I’ll be interested to see what the overall impression of folks will be. At various moments, I felt as though the story might be a bit “preachy,” something I didn’t sense with HP. The stories are clever, and only time will tell if they are classic.

“In one short phrase: We are being flooded with matter about which nobody gives a damn. But the really frightening part is that the attitude begins to rub off. No home can be built without that love of detail which is the hallmark of care, yet we seem to be getting less and less able to bother. People cannot be fed without detail, children cannot be taught manners without detail, wives cannot be kept happy without detail. But in our superspirituality, we expect that a handful of good intentions and a headful of bright ideas are quite enough to make a home. The truth is, though, that matter will break us unless we love it for itself and start paying some very careful attention to its demands. We are not angels; there are not disembodied intelligences in my household. We are all things here, from the raisins in the cake to the father at his table. For the likes of us there is no middle ground between care and catastrophe.” – Robert Farron Capon, Bed and Board.

“People admit it’s hard to pray. Yet they think it’s easy to make love. What nonsense. Neither is worth much when it is only the outcropping of intermittent enthusiasm. Both need to be done without ceasing; and that puts a premium on the minor manifestations. Obviously the sexual act itself is central. But the circle that is drawn around it consists of a thousand small passes and light touches. What they lack in moment they more than make up for by sheer weight of numbers, and it is a poor bed that sees only the grand piece of business that really arrives. It is precisely the unconsummated nonsense that makes the main absurdity fruitful. Sexual intercourse is indeed society (though often not too mutual), and it is certainly a comfort, when it goes well; but it is seldom much help unless its disastrousness is softened by a vast amount of incidental tenderness.” – Robert Farrar Capon, Bed and Board .

This is interesting, and worth the time to listen to in its entirety:

http://www.baylyblog.com/2008/10/barack-obama-rocks-xx-his-true-citizenship-remains-in-doubt.html

“…just
because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or
local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right…”

“The Christian is never to be motivated by a sense of his own honor, but rather by the honor of Christ. If pride was Satan’s original sin, humility and patient faith are the Christian’s primary duty.” – JBJ

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_Robert_Obama’s%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml

Somehow we managed
to bring back a new dog from our family reunion/vacation last week.
This little guy had clearly been on his own for a while, and latched on
to our whole gang. At first he was named “Marley.” Then we considered
“Mr. Weasley.” However, it looks like we’re going to call him
“Wizzer.” He wizzes around when he runs, and also seems to manage to
‘wiz’ on just about anything npt moving (he still needs to be fixed.)
So, here are some pics, and we’re open to finding him another home if
there are any takers (Sarah?).

“Truth becomes hard if it is not softened by love; love becomes soft if it is not strengthened by truth.” – John Stott

There is one body…

Regarding this verse, John Calvin stated:

“We are called to one inheritance and one life;
and hence it follows, that we cannot obtain eternal life without living in
mutual harmony in this world. One divine
invitation being addressed to all, they ought to be united in the same
profession of faith, and to render every kind of assistance to each other. Oh, were this thought deeply impressed upon
our minds, that we are subject to a law which no more permits the children of
God to differ among themselves than the kingdom of heaven to be divided, how
earnestly should we cultivate brotherly kindness!”

I’m guessing this will be the biggest seller of the year….

Should be a fun read.

In relation to Eph. 2:13: But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ, commentator Markus Barth notes: “Spilled blood speaks louder than a voice. If God hears the prayers of oral petition and intercession – how much more does he hear the cry of his beloved son, the Messiah! Blood augments the urgency of intercession” (299).

Adapted by Margaret Hodges
Illustrated by Trina Schart Hyman

Marvelous telling of this classic story.
Beautifully illustrated.
Grab a copy for your library.

Deborah and I went to see Prince Caspian this evening, and I liked the beginning fine, as well as the ending (except for the kiss). That leaves the “in between” which was exasperating. I hadn’t read any reviews beforehand, and had heard mixed reviews from friends. I wanted to like the movie, I really did. However, for me, the cons outweigh the pros, and I’d recommend Iron Man over Caspian in a heartbeat.

Pros:
– Lucy’s character portrayal remains relatively consistent. The young actress appears to have a real sense of the Lucy created by Lewis, and even conveys Lucy’s Narnian “instincts” (for lack of a better way of saying it.)

– Repicheep was fairly true to form, and thoroughly enjoyable. And though somewhat deviant from his written character, Trumpkin conveyed his doubts convincingly enough.

– Delving more into the Telmarine perspective was fun, and interesting for the most part. The betrayal at the end certainly had all of the necessary background (though perhaps too much time was spent on it, and not enough on some of the actual details of the real story).

– Caspian’s escape through a wardrobe was clever, and a nice piece of artistic license.

Cons:
– Aslan was virtually nonexistent, and to me this was a great disappointment. The best analogy I could come up with, is that it felt like trying to tell the story of the Gospel by excluding Jesus, or simply making him a minor character.

– Peter was abysmal. Just as in the first movie, Peter goes through an identity crisis. What’s with Hollywood doing this again and again? (Remember Aragorn in LOTR?) The lead/head man is ever reticent to embrace his role. Blech. Lewis (and Tolkien for that matter) wrote men who were noble. Peter is just barely noble by the end of the movie. Certainly he has his faults, and Lewis wrote him so, but by the end of the movie, I don’t want to be Peter (Edmund, maybe), nor would I want my boys to be him.

– The tension/struggle to lead between Caspian and Peter was too much to swallow. And running a close second was the underlying romantic “thing” between Caspian and Susan. When she kissed him at the end, it received a Bronx cheer from me, and an animated two thumbs down from Deborah.

– Caspian’s love for Old Narnia needed more developing. He strikes me as a hero without a cause for much of the movie, and then seems driven by revenge. He shows mercy in the end, but why should I believe he’d make that decision?

Perhaps a second viewing would make me less critical, but that will have to wait until the movie is released on DVD.

It isn’t for nothing that the Apostle Paul refers to believers as saints.

The Christian

Honor and happiness unite
To make the Christian’s name a praise;
How fair the scene, how clear the light,
That fills the remnant of His days!

A kingly character He bears,
No change His priestly office knows;
Unfading is the crown He wears,
His joys can never reach a close.

Adorn’d with glory from on high,
Salvation shines upon His face;
His robe is of the ethereal dye,
His steps are dignity and grace.

Inferior honors He disdains,
Nor stoops to take applause from earth;
The King of kings Himself maintains
The expenses of His heavenly birth.

The noblest creature seen below,
Ordain’d to fill a throne above;
God gives him all He can bestow,
His kingdom of eternal love!

My soul is ravished at the thought!
Methinks from earth I see Him rise!
Angels congratulate His lot,
And shout Him welcome to the skies.

– William Cowper

An interesting movie that didn’t get a great deal of attention when it was released, nor was it loved by critics. Having just watched it last night, it strikes me as one of those movies that has moments of brilliance, but isn’t quite as amazing as you want it to be. I’m suspicious that there’s more symbolism than first meets the eye, though. Toward the beginning of the movie, Evan says, “But I believe in music the way in which some people believe in fairy tales.” Later, he uses the phrase “once upon a time,” and the movie even has a wizard. The plot has its predictable points, but that didn’t detract from the
story, but only made me want a “fairy tale” ending all the more. I definitely recommend it, especially if you enjoy music.

Until yesterday, I wasn’t aware that raisins go in bathtubs.

This morning’s sunrise.

(Unfortunately, the others that I took came out ‘fuzzy.’ Can’t seem to keep that digital camera steady.)

Regarding trials, and faith’s view of them:

“Nothing so helps us to bear patiently the trials of life as an abiding conviction of the perfect wisdom by which everything around us is managed. Let us try to believe not only that all that happens to us is well done, but that it is done in the best manner, by the right instrument, and at the right time.”

“If Christians were allowed to choose their own course through life, they would never learn hundreds of lessons about Christ and His grace, which they are now taught in God’s ways.”

– J.C. Ryle

Found this on another blog. Too cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwMj3PJDxuo

The Valley of Vision is a collection of Puritan prayers & devotions. Within its pages you find expressions of the Christian life and walk that we are not as accustomed to in our modern day, but that is certainly an integral aspect of its beauty and benefit; stretching us to think and meditate more deeply upon our life in Christ. The selection “Continual Repentance” is a profound prayer of challenge and comfort, with the last bit saying so well what ought to be the disposition of our hearts:

Grant me to never lose sight of
the exceeding sinfulness of sin,
the exceeding righteousness of salvation,
the exceeding glory of Christ,
the exceeding beauty of holiness,
the exceeding wonder of grace.

bold galoshes investigate an icon
where dead anxiety can teach as rain
and inspire free color above rhythm
to paint music by symbol and form

Jonathan Barlow has written an excellent summary of the Federal Vision controversy/debate/mess on a blog given to discussing such issues. Thankfully, Jeff Meyers has posted Jon’s insights on his blog, making them more accessible.

http://jeffreyjmeyers.blogspot.com/2008/02/federal-vision-fiasco-in-nutshell.html

Not surprisingly, C.S. Lewis has an excellent quote on the Christian life. While stated in the context of living in in Atomic Age, the principles set forth address what is always to be true of the lives of believers in this world.

“If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes find us doing sensible and human things – praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing the children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts – not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that) but they need not dominate our minds.”

It will be interesting to hear the media’s take on this. Looks fascinating, though not surprising.

http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php

I came across this quote today in some reading from Where Resident Aliens Live, the companion volume by Hauerwas and Willimon. In the chapter, “Practice Discipleship”, they are commenting on the fact that “people often lie most readily in marriage exactly because they fear losing the intimacy they have achieved to that point… . That is why we Christians assert that marriages must be sustained by more fundamental practices than simply how they enrich the interpersonal relationship between two people. Marriage is subservient to discipleship. Our marriages are ultimately significant only as a means of supporting each of us in our ministry, including the ministries of childrearing, conversion of the young, protection of the old. We think marriage is a place where Christians are able to be truthful with one another because marriage is more determinative than their immediate feelings.
“Whether Christians in their marriages can be truthful depends on marriage not being isolated from the community. Christians are asked to have their marriages witnessed before before the whole community where that community can hold them to promises they made when they didn’t know what they were doing. How could you ever know what you were doing when you promised another to be faithful for a lifetime? But we know we can risk telling one another the truth, since the bond of marriage is more determinative than our personal satisfaction at any one time. That allows Christians to be married with joy” (85-86).

Came across this provocative quote today:

“The only advantage of the Church over against the world is that the Church knows the real situation of the world. Christians know what non-Christians do not… . It belongs to the Church to witness to the Dominion of Christ clearly, explicitly, and consciously.” – Karl Barth

Here’s a great sermon by Pastor Rich Lusk on marriage. Wonderfully foundational and well worth the time.

http://www.trinity-pres.net/audio/sermon07-07-08.mp3

After listening to the sermon, the accompanying notes are worth a perusal too.

http://www.trinity-pres.net/audio/070708sermonnotes.pdf

Much of what Rich has to say further confirms some thoughts I have had of late regarding the “liturgy of life.” In other words, there are patterns to life, habits that we pursue that affect us profoundly. Just as every worship service has liturgy, the question to be asked is whether or not it is good liturgy or bad liturgy. Analogously, what are the patterns of our lives? What are our habits? What does the liturgy of our lives reflect (how we speak, act, etc.)?

In a recent conversation with a friend, I mentioned that I think J.K. Rowling’s use of symbolism is deeper than she even realizes or intends at times. One such instance struck me recently when reading “The Wedding” chapter in Deathly Hallows. I’ve included the excerpt below, and when you read it, think of the way in which it pictures the ministry of the Church, the Bride of Christ to the world.

“A great collective sigh issued from the assembled witches and wizards as Monsieur Delacour and Fleur came walking up the aisle, Fleur gliding, Monsieur Delacour bouncing and beaming. Fleur was wearing a very simple white dress and seemed to be emitting a strong, silvery glow. While her radiance usually dimmed everyone else by comparison, today it beautified everybody it fell upon. Ginny and Gabrielle, both wearing golden dresses, looked even prettier than usual, and once Fleur had reached him, Bill did not look as though he had ever met Fenrir Greyback.”

Some friends sent this link to me:

http://www.doublesharpevideo.com/HomeSchool2/Homeschool2.html

Let’s hear it for a good sense of humor.

Awhile back I posted a couple of quotes from the book Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony by Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon. In the sequel, Where Residence Aliens Live: Exercises for Christian Practice, they make the following point that further bolsters my conviction of the importance of stories in the life of the church and the life of faith.

“We will tell even more stories, give more instances of fidelity, offer more examples of a church in which ordinary people are called to be saints. We have been blessed with much mail, wonderful testimonials and stories from those who have actually seen what we professors only describe. We offer these examples because we believe that the contemporary church suffers from a lack of political imagination. One reason why the church always focused upon the stories of the saints and the martyrs was to enlarge our imagination. No conversion or growth is possible without imagination” (20).

To illustrate this further, it is one thing to tell your sons to be courageous. It is another to echo the words of Bayard the Truthspeaker to Aidan Errolson in The Bark of the Bog Owl, when he instructs young Aidan, “Love goodness more than you fear evil.”

“Maker of the sun, He is made under the sun. In the Father He remains, from His mother He goes forth. Creator of heaven and earth, He was born on earth under heaven. Unspeakably wise, He is wisely speechless. Filling the world, He lies in a manger. Ruler of the stars, He nurses at His mother’s bosom. He is both great in the nature of God, and small in the form of a servant.”
– Augustine

As a relatively novice dad, this passage has new light shining on it. In meditating on these words, undoubtedly a framework for parenting, but especially for fathering, emerges. Here is a picture of our Heavenly Father’s dealing with me. Do I reflect that picture to the boys? What kind of representation of their Heavenly Father are they developing from their earthly father? Surely such a passage is encouraging to any believer. What a wonderful comfort it is to have a Heavenly Father who so patiently, kindly and gently deals with me. But too, what a needed admonition to reflect on whether or not such an understanding of a child’s frame is remembered in the daily plodding of life; whether or not the boys will be spurred to greater love and affection for their Heavenly Father in seeing and experiencing the love from their earthly one. Mercifully, He knows my frame.

“You have noted that we have posed the ethical dilemma in terms of church-world. Our use of the images of the church as a colony and Christians as resident aliens was meant to set this matter in stark contrast. From a Christian point of view, the world needs the church, not to help the world run more smoothly or to make the world a better and safer place for Christians to live. Rather, the world needs the church because, without the church, the world does not know who it is. The only way for the world to know that it is being redeemed is for the church to point to the Redeemer by being a redeemed people. The way for the world to know that it needs redeeming, that it is broken and fallen, is for the church to enable the world to strike hard against something which is an alternative to what the world offers.” – Resident Aliens, p. 94.

“You have a traitor there, Aslan,” said the Witch. Of course everyone present knew that she meant Edmund. But Edmund had got past thinking about himself after all he’d been through and after the talk he’d had that morning. He just went on looking at Aslan. It didn’t seem to matter what the Witch said…

Edmund was on the other side of Aslan, looking all the time at Aslan’s face. He felt a choking feeling and wondered if he ought to say something; but a moment later he felt that he was not expected to do anything except to wait, and do what he was told.

– from chapter 13, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

Blest pair of Sirens, pledges of heav’n’s joy,
Sphere-born harmonious sisters, Voice and Verse,
Wed your divine sounds, and mixed power employ
Dead things with inbreathed sense able to pierce,
And to our high-raised phantasy present
That undisturbe`d song of pure concent,
Aye sung before the sapphire-colored throne
To him that sits thereon,
With saintly shout and solemn jubilee,
Where the bright Seraphim in burning row
Their loud uplifted angel-trumpets blow,
And the Cherubic host in thousand quires
Touch their immortal harps of golden wires,
With those just spirits that wear victorious palms,
Hymns devout and holy psalms
Singing everlastingly;
That we on earth with undiscording voice
May rightly answer that melodious noise;
As once we did, till disproportioned sin
Jarred against Nature’s chime, and with harsh din
Broke the fair music that all creatures made
To their great Lord, whose love their motion swayed
In perfect diapason, whilst they stood
In first obedience and their state of good.
O may we soon again renew that song,
And keep in tune with heav’n, till God ere long
To his celestial consort us unite,
To live with him, and in in endless morn of light.

– John Milton

If the introduction is an indicator of what is to come, this should be a good read. Here’s a sample:
“After asking the Philippian church to ‘have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus’ (no small order for ordinary people), Paul tells this forlorn, struggling church, ‘God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure’ (2:13). In you. Then Paul reminds them, ‘Our commonwealth is in heaven’ (3:20).
“In the space of a few lines, Paul called the Philippians to be part of a quite spectacular journey – namely, to live and to die like Christ, to model our lives so closely upon Christ that they bear within themselves the very mind of Christ. Yet he also calls them to ‘rejoice’ (3:1), because in them, in their ordinary life together as a congregation, God is enjoying them as divine representatives in the world. Great demands, but also great joy, at the wonder, at the adventure of being the church.”

For all the saints, who from their labors rest,
Who Thee by faith before the world confessed,
Thy Name, O Jesus, be forever blessed.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

Thou wast their Rock, their Fortress and their Might;
Thou, Lord, their Captain in the well fought fight;
Thou, in the darkness drear, their one true Light.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

For the Apostles’ glorious company,
Who bearing forth the Cross o’er land and sea,
Shook all the mighty world, we sing to Thee:
Alleluia, Alleluia!

For the Evangelists, by whose blest word,
Like fourfold streams, the garden of the Lord,
Is fair and fruitful, be Thy Name adored.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

For Martyrs, who with rapture kindled eye,
Saw the bright crown descending from the sky,
And seeing, grasped it, Thee we glorify.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

O blest communion, fellowship divine!
We feebly struggle, they in glory shine;
All are one in Thee, for all are Thine.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

O may Thy soldiers, faithful, true and bold,
Fight as the saints who nobly fought of old,
And win with them the victor’s crown of gold.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

And when the strife is fierce, the warfare long,
Steals on the ear the distant triumph song,
And hearts are brave, again, and arms are strong.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

The golden evening brightens in the west;
Soon, soon to faithful warriors comes their rest;
Sweet is the calm of paradise the blessed.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

But lo! there breaks a yet more glorious day;
The saints triumphant rise in bright array;
The King of glory passes on His way.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

From earth’s wide bounds, from ocean’s farthest coast,
Through gates of pearl streams in the countless host,
And singing to Father, Son and Holy Ghost:
Alleluia, Alleluia!

Le jour des morts (All Saints Day) 1859

William Bouguereau

This morning Emilio wanted to hear the story of St. George and the Dragon, and it struck me how appropriate such a story is for today, Halloween.

The celebration of Halloween remains a debated point between Christians (not so unlike the rightness or wrongness of reading Harry Potter), but trusting we can learn from the past to inform the present, here’s an article well worth reading: http://www.biblicalhorizons.com/open-book/no-28-concerning-halloween/

For those of you who enjoy bluegrass, I highly recommend this album. I
heard their track “Redbird” sometime ago on the radio, and loved the
sound immediately. With Nickel Creek taking a hiatus, it is
refreshing to find some new “new grass” to listen to. For more info, and to listen to some of the songs from their album, checkout
their Myspace page: http://www.myspace.com/cadillacsky

It is a crisp morning. The sun and breeze are in the leaves, and there’s that scent in the air that let’s you know the long awaited time has finally arrived.

To further stir the emotions: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=southernfootball

This clip is about 9 minutes long, but it is worth watching all the way through. Pretty amazing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM

This is quite a clip. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oxTy7KIAaA

No sooner did I finish Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows that I wanted to start over and read it again. I won’t say anything further at this point, but a tip of the hat goes to John Granger and the alchemical connections he has made to Ms. Rowling’s work. John, thanks for providing a depth of understanding and enjoyment that I would have otherwise missed out on.

P.S. I think the chiasm theory definitely remains intact.

The following is a brief summary of a theory that I have been developing for the last couple of years,and in a few days time when Deathly Hallows arrives I will find out if my suspicions are correct. I have been bouncing this idea off of some fellow Potter fans, and while they might not be as convinced as I am, they have contributed knowingly (and sometimes unknowingly) to it.

So, what is this theory? Well, as the title of this post indicates, I believe that the Harry Potter books are written in the form of a chiasm. This simply means that they follow and ABCDCBA pattern. (For a fuller definition on chiasm/chiasmus go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiasmus)

This pattern for the entire series first dawned on me when reading Half-Blood Prince, and the letter that R.A.B. leaves in the locket. Did you notice it’s diamond shape? Why is it written in this fashion? Upon a second glance it seems that that the letter is in the shape of a chiasm.
Take a look:

To the Dark Lord [1]
I know I will be dead long before you read this [2]
but I want you to know that it was I who discovered your secret. [3]
I have stolen the real Horcrux and intend to destroy it as soon as I can. [4]
I face death in the hope that when you meet your match, [5]
you will be mortal once more. [6]
R.A.B. [7]

Lines 1 and 7 match, referring to names/initials; 2 and 6 refer to death and mortality; 3 and 5 reference defeating Voldemort, and 4 stands alone in the middle as a hinge point, and is a single declarative sentence.

As this structure emerged, further reflection led to the notion that the entire series is structured in this fashion. Notice the following:

Philosopher’s Stone

Chamber of Secrets

Prisoner of Azkaban

Goblet of Fire

Order of the Phoenix

Half-Blood Prince

Deathly Hallows

Let’s consider some evidence, and then make a few guesses about the last installment of the series based on this structure (andthis evidence is by no means exhaustive, but enough, I think, to support my case).

Chamber of Secrets & Half-Blood Prince:

Horcruxes; Injuries to Harry (Quidditch) Dobby in the hospital wing; prominence of Aragog; talk of closing Hogwarts; Dumbledore gone from the school; the Phoenix Song (also Goblet of Fire); the cabinet (which Nearly Headless Nick smashed and Draco fixed); Borgin and Burkes; Harry’s
encounters with Malfoy in B&B; prominence of Ginny Weasley; use of polyjuice potion (also Goblet of Fire which fits). Ginny’s condition described in Bk. 2, ch. 10 and Draco in Book 6; Harry’s late arrival to school, encountering Snape and missing the sorting; and Moaning Myrtle (also in Goblet of Fire).

Prisoner of Azkaban & Order of the Phoenix:

Azkaban breakouts; Harry receiving special lessons (patronus
by Lupin; occlumency by Snape); boggarts (also Goblet of Fire); the prominence
of Muggle news on TV; Aunt Marge blown up, and Uncle Vernon referencing it in
Order; threat of expulsion for underage wizardry, and Snape’s history with
 James.

Goblet of Fire acts as the center and has various connections to the books before and after,
but is also the turning point for the story to progress. As Dr. Peter Leithart has stated, “Frequently, corresponding sections of a chiastic text do not merely state the same thing twice; rather, the second of the pair builds on and expands the first” (A Son to Me, 273). This certainly appears to be the progression of the books.

Philosopher’s Stone & Deathly Hallows

At the end of Half-Blood Prince, Harry states in relation to returning to Godric’s Hollow, “For me, it started there, all of it.” Indeed it did, and so Harry is going back to the beginning. And, interestingly enough, the title of the last chapter of Goblet of Fire is “The Beginning.” This language fits perfectly with a chiastic structure. Yes, Harry is going back to the beginning, but he has also developed and progressed.

So, are there clues for Deathly Hallows in Philosopher’s Stone? I seem to recall JKR mentioning in an interview one time that she had to re-write the opening chapter of Philosopher’s Stone because it revealed too much. Further, the fact that the first chapter in Philosopher’s Stone
is entitled “The Boy Who Lived” makes me think that Harry will live, though there is quite a lot of speculation that he will die. After all, sacrificial death is also an important theme, but, then again, so is resurrection.

I suspect Mr. Olivander will appear again in Deathly Hallows, having had roles in Philosopher’s Stone and Goblet of Fire. (Has he been abducted by Voldemort so that the wand lock won’t occur again?) I also think dragons and/or dragon’s blood will factor into the final book (this
has already been confirmed by some of the cover art that has come out recently). Further, Hagrid first introduces himself to Harry as “the Keeper of the Keys.” This title has not been pursued or mentioned since. Perhaps that will change. In his book The Kingdom and the
Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church, Dr. Leithart states the following regarding the Keys of the Kingdom:

“On a superficial analysis, it might appear that the people with real power are the
ones with diversified portfolios, prestigious titles, spacious offices overlooking Central Park. A personal jet, a direct line to the president, a limousine – these are the symbols of
real power. Or so we think. Deeper reflection, however, reveals that real power belongs to the fellow with the most keys. Think about it. Where would we be without those fellows with the keys? Without them, prisons would be sieves, office waste baskets would never be
emptied, and the very theory of valet parking would be utterly nonsensical. Without the fellows with the keys, the world would crumble of its own weight. The man with the right keys can get into the right places, and he can also keep other people from getting into the
same places… Having the right key can be, we might say, the ‘key’ to success, as well as a reward of success. Keys are suitable symbols of authority” (104).

One final note about the chiasm theory is related to the alchemical connections that John Granger makes to the stories. I highly recommend his article in Touchstone, “The Alchemist’s Tale” (http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-09-034-f),
as well as “Harry Potter and the Alchemist’s Cell (which I originally found at Granger’s site http://hogwartsprofessor.com/ but am presently unable to locate); and his books Looking for God in Harry Potter and Unlocking Harry Potter (the latter of which I’ve started to read recently and greatly enjoying.) Granger contends that Harry is moving through the alchemical stages: black (nigredo), white (albedo) and red (rubedo).

If Granger is correct, I think alchemical
stages can be seen in the books in chiastic form:

Book 1 – Red

Book 2 – White

Book 3 – Black

Book 4 – contains all three

Book 5 – Black

Book 6 – White

Book 7 – Red

Granger also says that the red stage culminates with the philosopher’s stone. The philosopher’s stone was (obviously) in Book 1, and it was red. The white stage is a stage of purification which involves washings. In Chamber of Secrets and Half-Blood Prince significant events take place in water: Myrtles bathroom; the pipes; the underground cavern and lake that Dumbledore and Harry have to navigate. The black stage is, well, black. Sirius Black is constantly mentioned in Prisoner of Azkaban and who would argue that Order of the Phoenix is anything but black in its
 tone.

In regards to Goblet of Fire, I would contend that the Tri-Wizard Tournament contains all three stages. The first task was dragons, and Harry’s Hungarian Horntail was black. The second task took place in the lake; purification, washing – the white stage. The third task in the maze had stunning spells and red sparks from wands. Finally, the goal of all the alchemical stages is to produce gold, which is the color of the Tri-Wizard Cup. Although Deathly Hallows is red in the progression, the point of the stone is to produce life (gold). The cover art for Deathly Hallows seems to indicate this, as various shades of gold appear to be prominent. Also, in Philosopher’s Stone, after Harry awakes in the hospital wing after keeping the stone from Voldermort/Quirrell he sees gold. At first he thinks it is a snitch, but then, when more fully awake, realizes
the gold is Dumbledore’s spectacles.

In a nutshell that is the theory, and, even if I am proven mistaken at the end of the week, J.K. Rowling has certainly made reading her books an enjoyable experience on many levels.

There will be plenty of discussion in the ensuing days
regarding the passing of the committee report regarding the FV, NPP, etc., and
there are men far better qualified to speak to these matters than I (men still
in the PCA, no less). However, I am admittedly disappointed (though not
surprised) at yesterday’s outcome. I was able to listen to the debate
online, and believed the more compelling and logical arguments were made
against the report (and for adopting the substitute motion). However, the
debate seemed hardly relevant once the vote was cast against the substitute
motion, and then (what appeared to be) an overwhelming majority in support of the committee report. It made me wonder why the delegates even
spent their time speaking to the issues.

Perhaps a more efficient procedure would look something like this:
“Who has an opinion about this matter? Raise your card.”
If a majority raises their cards, then ask, “Whose opinion isn’t going to
change regardless of what is said over the next few minutes?”
If a majority raises their cards again, then it would save everyone a lot of
time to just go ahead and vote on the issue. On a practical level think
about what this would mean. It could potentially cut the overall length
of GA significantly by doing away with meaningless debate, thereby making it
more economical for the delegates in attendance and their churches.
Granted, this would probably violate parliamentary procedure on many levels,
but at least it would remove the guise that any serious debate
would really take place (perhaps this last gibe is unfair).

Now, I say the above somewhat jesting and somewhat seriously, but isn’t that
basically what took place? Even more, I
wonder if the thinking behind vote casting went along the lines of, “I wonder
how [fill in the blank with a prominent PCA figure] is voting, and I think I’ll
vote the same?” Granted, that may not be
an entirely incorrect way to vote, as there are men that we respect and trust
in such situations. Even more, why
wouldn’t the average delegate simply trust the members of the committee to have
done their job well, thereby presenting an accurate report? Another fair consideration, I think. But
if the above assessment is anywhere close to the truth, then where is the place
for any legitimate debate and discussion to take place? Apparently not in one of the places where it
should: General Assembly. Peter Leithart
(one of those PCA guys mentioned above) raises this same issue, and says it far
better: http://www.leithart.com/archives/003073.php

http://youarecephas.blogspot.com/2007/06/quick-note-pcas-response-to-new.html

I just came across this C.S. Lewis quote in some reading, and it resonates deeply (especially as I’m coming to the close of a study in the Gospel of John).

“Symbols are the natural speech of the soul, a language older and more universal than words.” – C.S. Lewis