Reformation Redux
Naughty boys poring over a dusty old creed
Finding candle light bright in a flourescent age;
Pulsation high from reciting the crafted page;
Joy in the finding of a lost commonwealth deed.
Protected by the monarch from the papal state;
Casting off temperance, demanding cups of wine,
Seeing in the nihilistic chaos–design;
Freely choosing to do what was predestinate.
A letter to Rome canceling a trip to Rome;
Farel wrestling Calvin with a doctrinal hold;
Old Latimer’s death fire warming a time grown cold;
From the galley the glimpse of St. Andrews’ Church dome.
Giddy with joy over the bridegroom’s wedding kiss,
Daring the lifeless, faithless monks: Come out! Debate this!
The preacher of Ecclesiastes tells us, "Of the making of many books, there is no end." To which we add, "Of the buying and reading of many books, there is no end."
Monday, October 31, 2005
Sunday, October 30, 2005
Reformation Celebration
Celebrating the Reformation
All Europe, once content, kneeling on her bent knees
Indulged in faith in Rome while counting rosaries,
Until your hammer tapped the death knell on the door,
With Latin theses the Elbe River swept the shore.
Could not this be settled with a dark German beer?
Or forgotten with some gold (it’s the Turks we fear)?
No need to stir the masses, let the book stay closed.
Look at the Church’s wealth; there’s no need to foreclose.
Why protest thus, Luther? Have you been blinded so
Not to see where once let loose, the wild boar would go?
You stood there before mere Worms doubly justified,
Your books condemned, your vows broken, and your soul tried.
With German tongue, you bristled imperial fur,
While papal brethren gathered wood for your transfer
You poked anti-Christ till his rage was made full.
You feasted on the fat meat of the pope’s bull
In violent tug you ripped the seamless rotted cloth,
Loosening the thrones of emperor and pope both.
Scattered sheep ran wild, as robed wolves stripped naked fled,
Then you broke your vows, monk, finding a nun to wed.
The battles still rage, but the fortress stands secure.
We praise your doubts and the trials that made our faith sure.
Luther, may we your children, hold our father’s hand,
So glad you built our house on rock, not shifting sand.
All Europe, once content, kneeling on her bent knees
Indulged in faith in Rome while counting rosaries,
Until your hammer tapped the death knell on the door,
With Latin theses the Elbe River swept the shore.
Could not this be settled with a dark German beer?
Or forgotten with some gold (it’s the Turks we fear)?
No need to stir the masses, let the book stay closed.
Look at the Church’s wealth; there’s no need to foreclose.
Why protest thus, Luther? Have you been blinded so
Not to see where once let loose, the wild boar would go?
You stood there before mere Worms doubly justified,
Your books condemned, your vows broken, and your soul tried.
With German tongue, you bristled imperial fur,
While papal brethren gathered wood for your transfer
You poked anti-Christ till his rage was made full.
You feasted on the fat meat of the pope’s bull
In violent tug you ripped the seamless rotted cloth,
Loosening the thrones of emperor and pope both.
Scattered sheep ran wild, as robed wolves stripped naked fled,
Then you broke your vows, monk, finding a nun to wed.
The battles still rage, but the fortress stands secure.
We praise your doubts and the trials that made our faith sure.
Luther, may we your children, hold our father’s hand,
So glad you built our house on rock, not shifting sand.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Eusebius Now
Pioneers and founders face great difficulties. Those of us who build on foundations already established may think we have troubles, but at least we have patterns or forms to follow. Imitating is easier than creating. Traveling a road is easier than blazing a trail. In spite of the difficulties, various saints are called by God to venture into areas where none have ventured before.
Of such a calling was Eusebius, an early church father. Eusebius, whose dates are c. 260 to c. 340, wrote, taught, and preached extensively. However, he is primarily remembered today for his work Ekklesiatices Historias, which we usually call either Ecclesiastical History or Church History. His labors to compile the records and collate the details of the first several centuries of church history earned him the title “The Father of Church History.” His ecclesiastical classic covered the time from the Apostles up through the age of Constantine. The first three centuries in which Christianity was born and began spreading is a marvelous story of the success of the church. Quite often, the successes were as Herbert Schlossberg describes in Idols for Destruction “a series of victories disguised as defeat.”
There are certainly numerous volumes of church histories available today that are more thorough, accurate, and certainly more up to date than Eusebius. The great German American Philip Schaff compiled a history of some eight volumes in the 19th century that remains in print. Schaff was an evangelical believer and a first rate scholar, whose work included the latest and greatest scholarship of his time. His history covers more time and covers it more accurately than Eusebius’ history. Schaff’s research and writing earned him the title “Father of American Church History.” In the academic iron sharpening iron process, even the valuable works of Schaff can be supplemented with better scholarship and more insight.
An exhaustive bibliography of books on church history would be beyond the comprehension of even so rapacious a book collector as me. Studies just on the early church, that is, on the same time period that Eusebius covered, still entails the listing of thousands of books. In the many black holes of historical and theological ignorance that characterize my frustrated life, knowledge of the early church is one of the greatest of my own deficiencies. Just a few years back I would have thought that the word “Patristics” referred to an exercise program. While I now know the term refers to the early church fathers, I am still laboring to learn just who these church fathers were.
My reading on the church history has often entailed skimming the first fifteen centuries and then getting serious when Luther and Calvin appear. Portions of the latter Medieval period were viewed in light of how they paved the way for the much needed Protestant Reformation. The story of the church after the Book of Acts and in the centuries shortly following was sorely neglected. Still several valuable resources have emerged. Henry Chadwick’s The Early Church is reckoned as a valuable book on this time period. N. R. Needham’s two volumes on the early and Medieval church are both noteworthy for their emphasis on the main theologians and ideas found in the early church. My two most often referenced works on church history are Bruce Shelley’s highly readable Church History in Plain Language and Justo Gonzalez’s The Story of Christianity. These works along with another two or three dozen books, many of which are unread, constitute my main library of books on the early church. Add to that my recently obtained collection of the thirty-eight volume Church Fathers set. I can have lots of wisdom near me, even if I have far too little in me.
So, surrounded by so great a cloud of recent scholarship and books hot off the presses, why read Eusebius? After all, he operated with limited resources; he made many mistakes; some of the sources he used were flawed; and his style and organization beg for severe editing.
Something is to be said for going to the sources. Modern scholars have studied Origen and know a lot about Constantine. Eusebius studied under Origen and personally knew Constantine. Many Christians find reading accounts of the martyrs of the early church inspiring. Eusebius personally knew fellow Christians who were martyred in the early church. There is a freshness to reading an original work, even in translation. We look at Eusebius’ account from a perspective where we know of the ultimate triumph of the early church over its enemies. We are evidence nearly seventeen hundred years after Eusebius that the faith continues and grows. Eusebius is writing with an assurance of victory that is based on faith and not on evidence. The witness who from the trenches sees the triumph amidst the smoke and haze of battle can be quite compelling. Eusebius’ account of the early church sheds light on many theological issues. Among these are his discussion of the church’s recognition of the canon of New Testament Scriptures, the power of the testimony of the martyrs, and the favorable change that Constantine ushered in with the Edict of Milan in 312.
The Canon
The canon of Scripture has been the center of battle in the past several centuries just as it was in the early centuries. The parameters of the battle have changed, but part of contending for the faith entails contending for the centrality of Scripture. In recent times, particularly since the rise of the Higher Critical movement in the 19th century, Scripture was put in the dock and judged by theologians and scholars. In contrast to the faithful who submitted to the authority of Scripture, the higher critics pronounced judgments on the Word of God. Their beginning presupposition was that whatever else a portion of the Bible might be, it was not a revelation from God. Accepting that on faith, they then proceeded to analyze (or psycho-analyze) authors, determine the dates of composition, and accept or reject the theological content with frenzied abandon. The Bible was demythologized, humanized, deconstructed, psychoanalyzed, feminized, and subjected to every variety of modern apostate thought available.
The struggle in the early church was different. Some, perhaps many, of the early church fathers differed over whether particular books should be included, like John’s Revelation, or whether they should be excluded, like Clement’s Letters. But they did not reject the belief that a revelation from God did exist. Dan Brown has gotten rich off his doubly fictional screed casting doubt on the development of Scripture and Christology in his best selling Da Vinci Code. But the early church was much more Berean and careful in discerning the will of God concerning the canon. And it must be made clear that they were recognizing what constituted the Word of God rather than determining what was the true rule of faith.
This struggle for the canon of Scripture necessarily entailed a separation between orthodox thought and heresy. The church then strove to find the truth. R.J. Rushdoony, in his excellent study of the early church, The Foundations of Social Order, points out a key difference between the early church and the modern church: “First, the early councils had as their primary purpose the defense and establishment of truth, not unity. Unity had to be established on the foundation of truth, not truth as a product of unity.” (p. 19) Spurious books and heretical doctrines were an ever-threatening danger to the future of the church. Providentially, God preserved the truth. One of the key ways He did so was by bringing the early church to a recognition of what constituted the New Testament.
Testimony of the Martyrs
American Christianity is above all else comfortable. We are comfortable in our padded pews in air-conditioned sanctuaries behind our stain glass windows. Most of us are middle class; we have enjoyed easy access to the great American lifestyle; and our Christian faith has been relatively easily acquired and maintained. For these reasons, we need large doses of tales of martyrs and missionaries. Since we are hindered from Sunday worship by staying up too late on Saturday night, we need to read of those hindered from worship by chains and tortures.
Eusebius recounts the sufferings of Christians in Gaul and other parts of the Roman Empire. Some of the stories of martyrdom, like that of Polycarp, are quite famous. Others less so. At the heart of this persecution was the Roman state, which was humanistic, polytheistic, and fickle. Christians died not for simply following Christ, but for refusing to also bow the knee to Caesar. We live in a time that exalts tolerance, compromise, and polytheism, so here again, we need Eusebius.
Constantine's Legacy
Constantine’s issuing of the Edict of Milan signaled a change in the treatment the church received. Christians have differing views on both Constantine as a professing Christian and on his policy toward Christianity. Some view him as the model of a Christian emperor and accept his testimony as indicating a true faith. Some think his edict opened the doors of the church to worldly people and ideas. A textbook for Christian schools states, “The church of the saints and martyrs had conquered the Roman Empire, but now the Roman Empire conquered the church and institutionalized Christianity."
Eusebius is the source for a much more favorable view toward Constantine. In fact, the latter part of his history is a panegyric to Constantine. Eusebius becomes, in effect, a court historian and close associate with the Emperor. His close association with Constantine neither proves nor disproves the overall effects of Constantine’s faith and rule. But it is critical to see how a believer who saw the effects of persecution first hand reacts when the emperor becomes a professing believer.
C.S. Lewis makes the case that reading old books makes us aware of ideas and perspectives that we are blinded to in our own age. When we talk about what modern Christians need or what the church today needs, we provide endless answers and directions. Eusebius will not provide us a model to direct our next presbytery meeting or church planting effort, but he will give us much insight and encouragement. We will see how the church has grown, but also how it has, in some ways, regressed. Eusebius blazed a trail by committing the story of the church to writing. Once a trail is blazed, it goes both ways. At those times when we seek to move ahead, we need to consider looking back as well.
Of such a calling was Eusebius, an early church father. Eusebius, whose dates are c. 260 to c. 340, wrote, taught, and preached extensively. However, he is primarily remembered today for his work Ekklesiatices Historias, which we usually call either Ecclesiastical History or Church History. His labors to compile the records and collate the details of the first several centuries of church history earned him the title “The Father of Church History.” His ecclesiastical classic covered the time from the Apostles up through the age of Constantine. The first three centuries in which Christianity was born and began spreading is a marvelous story of the success of the church. Quite often, the successes were as Herbert Schlossberg describes in Idols for Destruction “a series of victories disguised as defeat.”
There are certainly numerous volumes of church histories available today that are more thorough, accurate, and certainly more up to date than Eusebius. The great German American Philip Schaff compiled a history of some eight volumes in the 19th century that remains in print. Schaff was an evangelical believer and a first rate scholar, whose work included the latest and greatest scholarship of his time. His history covers more time and covers it more accurately than Eusebius’ history. Schaff’s research and writing earned him the title “Father of American Church History.” In the academic iron sharpening iron process, even the valuable works of Schaff can be supplemented with better scholarship and more insight.
An exhaustive bibliography of books on church history would be beyond the comprehension of even so rapacious a book collector as me. Studies just on the early church, that is, on the same time period that Eusebius covered, still entails the listing of thousands of books. In the many black holes of historical and theological ignorance that characterize my frustrated life, knowledge of the early church is one of the greatest of my own deficiencies. Just a few years back I would have thought that the word “Patristics” referred to an exercise program. While I now know the term refers to the early church fathers, I am still laboring to learn just who these church fathers were.
My reading on the church history has often entailed skimming the first fifteen centuries and then getting serious when Luther and Calvin appear. Portions of the latter Medieval period were viewed in light of how they paved the way for the much needed Protestant Reformation. The story of the church after the Book of Acts and in the centuries shortly following was sorely neglected. Still several valuable resources have emerged. Henry Chadwick’s The Early Church is reckoned as a valuable book on this time period. N. R. Needham’s two volumes on the early and Medieval church are both noteworthy for their emphasis on the main theologians and ideas found in the early church. My two most often referenced works on church history are Bruce Shelley’s highly readable Church History in Plain Language and Justo Gonzalez’s The Story of Christianity. These works along with another two or three dozen books, many of which are unread, constitute my main library of books on the early church. Add to that my recently obtained collection of the thirty-eight volume Church Fathers set. I can have lots of wisdom near me, even if I have far too little in me.
So, surrounded by so great a cloud of recent scholarship and books hot off the presses, why read Eusebius? After all, he operated with limited resources; he made many mistakes; some of the sources he used were flawed; and his style and organization beg for severe editing.
Something is to be said for going to the sources. Modern scholars have studied Origen and know a lot about Constantine. Eusebius studied under Origen and personally knew Constantine. Many Christians find reading accounts of the martyrs of the early church inspiring. Eusebius personally knew fellow Christians who were martyred in the early church. There is a freshness to reading an original work, even in translation. We look at Eusebius’ account from a perspective where we know of the ultimate triumph of the early church over its enemies. We are evidence nearly seventeen hundred years after Eusebius that the faith continues and grows. Eusebius is writing with an assurance of victory that is based on faith and not on evidence. The witness who from the trenches sees the triumph amidst the smoke and haze of battle can be quite compelling. Eusebius’ account of the early church sheds light on many theological issues. Among these are his discussion of the church’s recognition of the canon of New Testament Scriptures, the power of the testimony of the martyrs, and the favorable change that Constantine ushered in with the Edict of Milan in 312.
The Canon
The canon of Scripture has been the center of battle in the past several centuries just as it was in the early centuries. The parameters of the battle have changed, but part of contending for the faith entails contending for the centrality of Scripture. In recent times, particularly since the rise of the Higher Critical movement in the 19th century, Scripture was put in the dock and judged by theologians and scholars. In contrast to the faithful who submitted to the authority of Scripture, the higher critics pronounced judgments on the Word of God. Their beginning presupposition was that whatever else a portion of the Bible might be, it was not a revelation from God. Accepting that on faith, they then proceeded to analyze (or psycho-analyze) authors, determine the dates of composition, and accept or reject the theological content with frenzied abandon. The Bible was demythologized, humanized, deconstructed, psychoanalyzed, feminized, and subjected to every variety of modern apostate thought available.
The struggle in the early church was different. Some, perhaps many, of the early church fathers differed over whether particular books should be included, like John’s Revelation, or whether they should be excluded, like Clement’s Letters. But they did not reject the belief that a revelation from God did exist. Dan Brown has gotten rich off his doubly fictional screed casting doubt on the development of Scripture and Christology in his best selling Da Vinci Code. But the early church was much more Berean and careful in discerning the will of God concerning the canon. And it must be made clear that they were recognizing what constituted the Word of God rather than determining what was the true rule of faith.
This struggle for the canon of Scripture necessarily entailed a separation between orthodox thought and heresy. The church then strove to find the truth. R.J. Rushdoony, in his excellent study of the early church, The Foundations of Social Order, points out a key difference between the early church and the modern church: “First, the early councils had as their primary purpose the defense and establishment of truth, not unity. Unity had to be established on the foundation of truth, not truth as a product of unity.” (p. 19) Spurious books and heretical doctrines were an ever-threatening danger to the future of the church. Providentially, God preserved the truth. One of the key ways He did so was by bringing the early church to a recognition of what constituted the New Testament.
Testimony of the Martyrs
American Christianity is above all else comfortable. We are comfortable in our padded pews in air-conditioned sanctuaries behind our stain glass windows. Most of us are middle class; we have enjoyed easy access to the great American lifestyle; and our Christian faith has been relatively easily acquired and maintained. For these reasons, we need large doses of tales of martyrs and missionaries. Since we are hindered from Sunday worship by staying up too late on Saturday night, we need to read of those hindered from worship by chains and tortures.
Eusebius recounts the sufferings of Christians in Gaul and other parts of the Roman Empire. Some of the stories of martyrdom, like that of Polycarp, are quite famous. Others less so. At the heart of this persecution was the Roman state, which was humanistic, polytheistic, and fickle. Christians died not for simply following Christ, but for refusing to also bow the knee to Caesar. We live in a time that exalts tolerance, compromise, and polytheism, so here again, we need Eusebius.
Constantine's Legacy
Constantine’s issuing of the Edict of Milan signaled a change in the treatment the church received. Christians have differing views on both Constantine as a professing Christian and on his policy toward Christianity. Some view him as the model of a Christian emperor and accept his testimony as indicating a true faith. Some think his edict opened the doors of the church to worldly people and ideas. A textbook for Christian schools states, “The church of the saints and martyrs had conquered the Roman Empire, but now the Roman Empire conquered the church and institutionalized Christianity."
Eusebius is the source for a much more favorable view toward Constantine. In fact, the latter part of his history is a panegyric to Constantine. Eusebius becomes, in effect, a court historian and close associate with the Emperor. His close association with Constantine neither proves nor disproves the overall effects of Constantine’s faith and rule. But it is critical to see how a believer who saw the effects of persecution first hand reacts when the emperor becomes a professing believer.
C.S. Lewis makes the case that reading old books makes us aware of ideas and perspectives that we are blinded to in our own age. When we talk about what modern Christians need or what the church today needs, we provide endless answers and directions. Eusebius will not provide us a model to direct our next presbytery meeting or church planting effort, but he will give us much insight and encouragement. We will see how the church has grown, but also how it has, in some ways, regressed. Eusebius blazed a trail by committing the story of the church to writing. Once a trail is blazed, it goes both ways. At those times when we seek to move ahead, we need to consider looking back as well.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
A Sovereign God
There is much from my childhood worship experiences that I now appreciate. I grew up attending a Methodist Church in a small east Texas town. The decorum and reverence of church, the mighty Wesleyan hymns, the Apostles' Creed, and the reciting of the Lord's prayer and reciting of the Psalms responsively helped train me in the worship of God. Sad to say, like all too many Methodist Churches, my home church had lost connections with the great evangelical zeal of John and Charles Wesley. The importance of the New Birth, the vital connection of a believer with the Savior, the changed life of a person in Christ, and the living and active Christian communion in body life of the church were long since dulled and muted in my experiences. The Scriptures were read, but the authority of the Scriptures was not emphasized.
It was later when I learned of a third figure in the founding of the Methodist movement that I was confronted with some of the greatest truths of the Scriptures. That third figure was George Whitefield. Whitefield was a powerful preacher who took his Gospel messages first to the churches, then to the fields and city streets and wherever there were sinners needing to hear of God's grace. Several times, Whitefield crossed the Atlantic and preached up and down the Colonial American seaboard. People of all denominational backgrounds flocked to hear Whitefield. Stories of his preaching have become legends in church history. Amazingly to me when I first learned of it was the realization that Whitefield was a Calvinist--A Calvinistic Methodist.
By Calvinist, I mean that Whitefield's study of Scripture convinced him of the absolute Sovereignty of God in all areas, including salvation. Whitefield boldly called upon men to forsake their sins and embrace Christ. Whitefield believed that when this happened, it happpened because the Holy Spirit changed people who were dead in their trespasses to living souls who then believed on Christ for salvation. He believed the revivals of his day were the work of God and not of men.
The Sovereignty of God was a doctrine that changed me and changed me and kept changing me. Every fact of the universe suddenly had to be reinterpreted. Every complaint I ever uttered or thought about my plight in life, I realized, was a complaint against a Sovereign God. History moved only at God's sovereign will; things philosophically held together and cohered only because of a sovereign will; 'all things lived and moved and had being' only in God; there were no brute facts in the universe; instead, only God created, God interpreted facts.
The children in the Narnia series think that Aslan has grown during one of their later experiences in being around him. He explains that he has not grown, but rather their understanding of him has grown. Such is the case with out feeble groping to understand the Sovereign nature and power of God. Coming to a more comprehensive state of understanding God is a life altering experience, and it never ends. I don't think it ends in eternity either.
One of my students from recent years, who I am sorry to say lives in another town this year, thus depriving me of his wisdom, sent me a devotional he gave at his school. Usually I cringe over reading devotionals. Many are sweet, sentimental, touching, and inspiring--all things I hate, all things that only harden my already mean spirit. But when confronted with a powerful theological truth, with a unswerving declaration of God's nature, then my still wicked heart is melted. Thanks to Graham Alexander for sharing this devotion and doctrinal treatise with me.
It has been asked of us that we begin our meetings with a devotion or challenge of some nature. I have been asked to do such this time, and so I will relay a piece of a personal conviction:
God requires utmost respect as the most High Being. We often trivialize this because of our compact Christianity and using God as our medium to deal with life. Reverence has been mistaken with convenience and personal expression. This is not what God asks of us. God demands absolute respect, and for obvious reasons, He deserves it. If you met George Washington, would you be afraid of what you might say to a man who you have heard about all your life? How much more so should we come trembling to the Almighty Sovereign God who created the Heaven’s and the Earth, defied human boundaries, struck down His enemies and delivered His faithful? How much more so? For me to fathom that I can speak to such a Being goes beyond my thinking so much, that I can do nothing but tremble before Him. I am in no way undermining the personal relationship we have with Jesus Christ, but we still need to have the utmost respect towards Him. We need to be ever so careful what we say to Him. We absolutely need to think and discern carefully through our prayers. Jesus Christ is not our ‘home-boy’ but rather our Redeemer and Superior Friend. When worshiping Him, we must discern every word that flows from our lips before we say them. When praying to Him, we must search for Him, respect Him, and humble ourselves before Him. This is why many kneel. This is why many close their eyes. I am not saying if you do not do those things that you are not respecting Him; I am just saying why all these things are practiced. What do our prayers sound like? Are they arbitrary? Forced? Or are they careful, cautious, and passionate? This is why I am very careful when I am asked to pray out loud. I will not pray every time it is asked of me. I will come to the Most High God publicly when I believe it is necessary through the Holy Spirit. I am in no way saying to reduce your prayers, for our prayers should be abundant to the Lord. James 5:13-16 says:
Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective. I believe that accounts for a ‘small’ devotion.
I tend now to often forget the truths I once learned about God. Thanks, Graham, for reminding me of Who we approach in prayer.
It was later when I learned of a third figure in the founding of the Methodist movement that I was confronted with some of the greatest truths of the Scriptures. That third figure was George Whitefield. Whitefield was a powerful preacher who took his Gospel messages first to the churches, then to the fields and city streets and wherever there were sinners needing to hear of God's grace. Several times, Whitefield crossed the Atlantic and preached up and down the Colonial American seaboard. People of all denominational backgrounds flocked to hear Whitefield. Stories of his preaching have become legends in church history. Amazingly to me when I first learned of it was the realization that Whitefield was a Calvinist--A Calvinistic Methodist.
By Calvinist, I mean that Whitefield's study of Scripture convinced him of the absolute Sovereignty of God in all areas, including salvation. Whitefield boldly called upon men to forsake their sins and embrace Christ. Whitefield believed that when this happened, it happpened because the Holy Spirit changed people who were dead in their trespasses to living souls who then believed on Christ for salvation. He believed the revivals of his day were the work of God and not of men.
The Sovereignty of God was a doctrine that changed me and changed me and kept changing me. Every fact of the universe suddenly had to be reinterpreted. Every complaint I ever uttered or thought about my plight in life, I realized, was a complaint against a Sovereign God. History moved only at God's sovereign will; things philosophically held together and cohered only because of a sovereign will; 'all things lived and moved and had being' only in God; there were no brute facts in the universe; instead, only God created, God interpreted facts.
The children in the Narnia series think that Aslan has grown during one of their later experiences in being around him. He explains that he has not grown, but rather their understanding of him has grown. Such is the case with out feeble groping to understand the Sovereign nature and power of God. Coming to a more comprehensive state of understanding God is a life altering experience, and it never ends. I don't think it ends in eternity either.
One of my students from recent years, who I am sorry to say lives in another town this year, thus depriving me of his wisdom, sent me a devotional he gave at his school. Usually I cringe over reading devotionals. Many are sweet, sentimental, touching, and inspiring--all things I hate, all things that only harden my already mean spirit. But when confronted with a powerful theological truth, with a unswerving declaration of God's nature, then my still wicked heart is melted. Thanks to Graham Alexander for sharing this devotion and doctrinal treatise with me.
It has been asked of us that we begin our meetings with a devotion or challenge of some nature. I have been asked to do such this time, and so I will relay a piece of a personal conviction:
God requires utmost respect as the most High Being. We often trivialize this because of our compact Christianity and using God as our medium to deal with life. Reverence has been mistaken with convenience and personal expression. This is not what God asks of us. God demands absolute respect, and for obvious reasons, He deserves it. If you met George Washington, would you be afraid of what you might say to a man who you have heard about all your life? How much more so should we come trembling to the Almighty Sovereign God who created the Heaven’s and the Earth, defied human boundaries, struck down His enemies and delivered His faithful? How much more so? For me to fathom that I can speak to such a Being goes beyond my thinking so much, that I can do nothing but tremble before Him. I am in no way undermining the personal relationship we have with Jesus Christ, but we still need to have the utmost respect towards Him. We need to be ever so careful what we say to Him. We absolutely need to think and discern carefully through our prayers. Jesus Christ is not our ‘home-boy’ but rather our Redeemer and Superior Friend. When worshiping Him, we must discern every word that flows from our lips before we say them. When praying to Him, we must search for Him, respect Him, and humble ourselves before Him. This is why many kneel. This is why many close their eyes. I am not saying if you do not do those things that you are not respecting Him; I am just saying why all these things are practiced. What do our prayers sound like? Are they arbitrary? Forced? Or are they careful, cautious, and passionate? This is why I am very careful when I am asked to pray out loud. I will not pray every time it is asked of me. I will come to the Most High God publicly when I believe it is necessary through the Holy Spirit. I am in no way saying to reduce your prayers, for our prayers should be abundant to the Lord. James 5:13-16 says:
Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective. I believe that accounts for a ‘small’ devotion.
I tend now to often forget the truths I once learned about God. Thanks, Graham, for reminding me of Who we approach in prayer.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Happy Birthday Christopher--October 12
Happy Birthday Christopher Dawson!
Without distracting in the least from the well-deserved honor and holiday of Christopher Columbus’ arrival (or discovery or rediscovery) of the New World, another man also should be honored on October 12. Another Christopher, Dawson in this case, a discoverer of history, was born on that date in 1889 in Wales. Like the big man of 1492, this Christopher had a mission of being a Christ-bearer.
Christopher Dawson’s mission field was the study of history. His contemporaries included such men as G.K. Chesterton, T.S. Eliot, and C.S. Lewis. They were more than just contemporaries in a time-spatial sense; they were the intellectual and spiritual peers of Dawson. Together with a host of other writers and thinkers such as Dorothy Sayers, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Hilaire Belloc, they were a part of the “m” of I Corinthians 1:26a (“…not many wise…are called”—as opposed to ‘not any…'). In the post-Christian culture of 20th century Britain, as the sun was setting on the empire, as Matthew Arnold’s sea of faith echoed “its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,” the sun continued to blaze brightly on that kingdom greater than even Albion at its height. Of this greater kingdom, the prophet Daniel said it would never be destroyed.
Put simply God converted and commissioned a host of novelists, poets, and intellectuals from among the peoples of Britain. Some produced great novels, poems, and literary essays. Some, and here we think of Chesterton and Lewis, wrote brilliant apologies (you know, defenses) of the Christian faith. Some, and here we think of Martyn Lloyd-Jones, rediscovered Puritan writings, Calvinistic theology, and expository preaching from the Bible. At least one, Winston Churchill, defended Christendom against Teutonic tyranny, the Nazi juggernaught menace, and the Bolshevik menace, and then chronicled the account in an historical epic. And one, Christopher Dawson, restructured a Christian interpretation of history on Europe and the world.
The twentieth century was in one sense a time of maturity for the field of history. Universities claimed the field, usurping what had once been the domain of true scholars, that is, men of leisure who read and reflected and wrote. In another sense, the twentieth century was a time of historiographical adolescent foolishness. Some historians flirted with Hegelian theories of history and saw the State as god marching upon the earth. Before World War I, they were bounding with optimism over the brave new world of the future. After 1918, they despaired of life or history having any meaning or purpose. Some historians courted Marxian theory with its economic determinism and its eschatological vision of a utopian society. It finally took more than one account of the gulags and holocausts to break them of their romantic love affair with Marx, Lenin, and Mao. Alas, some never abandoned their love or their tenured posts. Into the late 1980s and 1990s, they still gushed over the brilliant Mikhail Gorbachev and scorned the reactionary Alexander Solzhenitsyn and the foolish Cold Warrior Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan). Those not quite Marxist courted the equally ugly twin sister—Socialism. With a few common grace exceptions, and one thinks of British historian Christopher Hill and American historian Eugene Genovese, the economic determinists added little to our knowledge of history.
The brutal edges of political history cut too sharply for some historians. Hence, they looked at social institutions; they bemoaned the plight of women and the dispossessed classes; they ignored the great men of history in search of the underlying social causes; they exalted environment over rhetoric, chance over destiny, and academic trivia pursuit (which produces dissertations and tenure) over the grand sweeps of history.
And God raised up Christopher Dawson. Nothing new here for God. He had done the same in the fifth century when Augustine’s blockbuster The City of God hit the shelves of the Scrolls-a-Million franchise and stayed on the bestseller list for a millennium. God’s enemies always seem to know that it is not the facts of the event, but the interpretation of the event that matters most. Barbarians sacked Rome: it was the Christians’ fault, so they said. Then spake Augustine. But back to Christopher Dawson.
Dawson was quite an unexciting man. He was quite ordinary looking and suffered from poor health. He was never an athlete, warrior, or political figure. Sitting in Rome at the same place where Edward Gibbon conceived the notion of compiling what became The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Dawson committed his life and intellectual career to writing about history from a Christian perspective. His life was then devoted to study. He read books, he gave lectures, he wrote essays. Books evolved out of the essays and lectures.
The academic community, as is all too often the case, largely ignored this diminutive man with his beard and thick glasses. He wasn’t in line with the trends of the political ‘isms’ and academic printing presses of his day. Still Dawson plugged away, winning a plaudit here or there, and reaching a small number of scholars on both sides of the Atlantic. In his latter years, Dawson was invited to the United States where he taught at Harvard University for a time. Returning to England, he died in 1970. In time, many of his books and essays fell to the wayside and were forgotten.
But God is gracious to us in matters relating to the printed word. Those obscure books tucked away in college libraries and used bookstores continued to fall into the right hands here and there. The cultural renaissance and reformation of our time has resulted in the rediscovery of Christian scholarship. Books and essays by Dawson began to be reprinted. For a time back in the 1980s, I received a newsletter devoted to the thinking of Christopher Dawson. I did not quite understand his importance then, but I did recognize that here was a scholar worthy of note.
Not all of his books are yet reprinted. Some can still be found only in the used book market, but there are several worthy books available.
One of the best places to begin studying Christopher Dawson is in his biography A Historian and His World: A Life of Christopher Dawson, written by his daughter Christina Scott. An excellent collection of his essays is found in Christianity and European Culture: Selections from the Work of Christopher Dawson, edited by Gerald Russello. Also in print is The Dynamics of World History, which outlines Dawson’s Christian approach to history. Religion and the Rise of Western Culture and The Making of Europe are both useful surveys of the impact of Christianity upon European cultural history. My most recent read in the works of Dawson was Medieval Essays, which has played a key role in the whole field of Medieval studies. And if The Crisis of Western Education is not still in print, it certainly ought to be. Even though it was written some decades ago, the case for the necessity for Christian education has never been more strongly stated.
Dawson’s many works can be reduced down to a key theme or two, the main one being this: The key determining factor in a culture is religion, not politics, not economics, not geography, but religion. All those other things matter, but religion is central. A second key idea in Dawson’s thinking follows: The true religion is Christianity. Hence, Dawson’s study of European history titled The Making of Europe is essentially a study of the Christian faith in Europe. The main interpretive principle of education is religious, or more specifically, Christian education. Christian presuppositions formed the basis for the development of law, education, government, literature, and other aspects of life in Europe. The most apparent divisions of history into epochs or time periods are to be determined by theological, not political, institutions and revolutions. Any hope for civilization is to be found not in technology or evolution or some subjective experience, but in a revival of the Christian faith.
Open almost any book by Dawson, at almost any point, and Dawson will be reiterating these themes. He is not a narrative historian like Churchill or Paul Johnson. His stories will not keep you up late at night, turning pages, gulping coffee, and awaiting the final charges of the cavalry. Dawson was not a storyteller like Herodotus. He analyzed history: he explained the causes, the moving forces, and the underlying currents of history. He gives the interpretive framework for the great stories.
At least one quote must be given: “It is hardly too much to say that it is Christian culture that has created Western man and the Western way of life.” “It is hardly too much to say” and yet with the exception of one faithful Christian history teacher in our local junior college, I never heard it said by my professors. Christianity—or Christian culture or better yet, Christendom—was ignored, minimized, ridiculed, distorted, or attacked. Christianity was responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, the burning of witches, the suppression of drama, and the oppression of women—so we have all been told. Young Christians should never head off to the university without the major premises of Dawson’s thinking in their minds and hearts.
Yes, there is a third key theme to Dawson. Religion is the key and Christianity is the religion, and the branch of Christianity that Dawson converted to and loved and defended was the Roman Catholic Church. Like Chesterton and Tolkien in Britain, like Flannery O’Connor and Walker Percy in America, Dawson was Roman Catholic—through and through. So what is the lonely Calvinist (of Richard Tawney’s myth) to do?
Simple, don’t ordain Dawson (or Chesterton or Tolkien or even Lewis, for that matter) as your pastor, but join him in reciting the Apostles’ Creed, use him for understanding history Christianly, and thank God for raising him up. Practically speaking, Protestants may best read many a fine Dawson paragraph by substituting the word “Christian” for “Catholic.” Christians have got to get beyond a narrow sectarianism that cannot reach beyond our Sunday services toward those who battle the same enemies.
Tolkien saw the destruction of his world from the trenches of World War I. He envisioned Middle Earth and told the story of its redemption. Dawson saw the same cultural ‘No Man’s Land’ from his book-lined study. He saw that cultural redemption would result as an outgrowth of the Christian faith. Calvinist scholar Henry Van Til would aptly state this by saying, “Culture is religion externalized.” Christians have to think beyond merely evangelizing the lost and planting churches—and those are both worthy efforts. A Christian culture must be created. It has been done before—not perfectly—but still done well. Christian historians like Christopher Dawson have led the way.
For more on Christopher Dawson's thought and writings, click here to visit the Christopher Dawson Archives
Without distracting in the least from the well-deserved honor and holiday of Christopher Columbus’ arrival (or discovery or rediscovery) of the New World, another man also should be honored on October 12. Another Christopher, Dawson in this case, a discoverer of history, was born on that date in 1889 in Wales. Like the big man of 1492, this Christopher had a mission of being a Christ-bearer.
Christopher Dawson’s mission field was the study of history. His contemporaries included such men as G.K. Chesterton, T.S. Eliot, and C.S. Lewis. They were more than just contemporaries in a time-spatial sense; they were the intellectual and spiritual peers of Dawson. Together with a host of other writers and thinkers such as Dorothy Sayers, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Hilaire Belloc, they were a part of the “m” of I Corinthians 1:26a (“…not many wise…are called”—as opposed to ‘not any…'). In the post-Christian culture of 20th century Britain, as the sun was setting on the empire, as Matthew Arnold’s sea of faith echoed “its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,” the sun continued to blaze brightly on that kingdom greater than even Albion at its height. Of this greater kingdom, the prophet Daniel said it would never be destroyed.
Put simply God converted and commissioned a host of novelists, poets, and intellectuals from among the peoples of Britain. Some produced great novels, poems, and literary essays. Some, and here we think of Chesterton and Lewis, wrote brilliant apologies (you know, defenses) of the Christian faith. Some, and here we think of Martyn Lloyd-Jones, rediscovered Puritan writings, Calvinistic theology, and expository preaching from the Bible. At least one, Winston Churchill, defended Christendom against Teutonic tyranny, the Nazi juggernaught menace, and the Bolshevik menace, and then chronicled the account in an historical epic. And one, Christopher Dawson, restructured a Christian interpretation of history on Europe and the world.
The twentieth century was in one sense a time of maturity for the field of history. Universities claimed the field, usurping what had once been the domain of true scholars, that is, men of leisure who read and reflected and wrote. In another sense, the twentieth century was a time of historiographical adolescent foolishness. Some historians flirted with Hegelian theories of history and saw the State as god marching upon the earth. Before World War I, they were bounding with optimism over the brave new world of the future. After 1918, they despaired of life or history having any meaning or purpose. Some historians courted Marxian theory with its economic determinism and its eschatological vision of a utopian society. It finally took more than one account of the gulags and holocausts to break them of their romantic love affair with Marx, Lenin, and Mao. Alas, some never abandoned their love or their tenured posts. Into the late 1980s and 1990s, they still gushed over the brilliant Mikhail Gorbachev and scorned the reactionary Alexander Solzhenitsyn and the foolish Cold Warrior Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan). Those not quite Marxist courted the equally ugly twin sister—Socialism. With a few common grace exceptions, and one thinks of British historian Christopher Hill and American historian Eugene Genovese, the economic determinists added little to our knowledge of history.
The brutal edges of political history cut too sharply for some historians. Hence, they looked at social institutions; they bemoaned the plight of women and the dispossessed classes; they ignored the great men of history in search of the underlying social causes; they exalted environment over rhetoric, chance over destiny, and academic trivia pursuit (which produces dissertations and tenure) over the grand sweeps of history.
And God raised up Christopher Dawson. Nothing new here for God. He had done the same in the fifth century when Augustine’s blockbuster The City of God hit the shelves of the Scrolls-a-Million franchise and stayed on the bestseller list for a millennium. God’s enemies always seem to know that it is not the facts of the event, but the interpretation of the event that matters most. Barbarians sacked Rome: it was the Christians’ fault, so they said. Then spake Augustine. But back to Christopher Dawson.
Dawson was quite an unexciting man. He was quite ordinary looking and suffered from poor health. He was never an athlete, warrior, or political figure. Sitting in Rome at the same place where Edward Gibbon conceived the notion of compiling what became The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Dawson committed his life and intellectual career to writing about history from a Christian perspective. His life was then devoted to study. He read books, he gave lectures, he wrote essays. Books evolved out of the essays and lectures.
The academic community, as is all too often the case, largely ignored this diminutive man with his beard and thick glasses. He wasn’t in line with the trends of the political ‘isms’ and academic printing presses of his day. Still Dawson plugged away, winning a plaudit here or there, and reaching a small number of scholars on both sides of the Atlantic. In his latter years, Dawson was invited to the United States where he taught at Harvard University for a time. Returning to England, he died in 1970. In time, many of his books and essays fell to the wayside and were forgotten.
But God is gracious to us in matters relating to the printed word. Those obscure books tucked away in college libraries and used bookstores continued to fall into the right hands here and there. The cultural renaissance and reformation of our time has resulted in the rediscovery of Christian scholarship. Books and essays by Dawson began to be reprinted. For a time back in the 1980s, I received a newsletter devoted to the thinking of Christopher Dawson. I did not quite understand his importance then, but I did recognize that here was a scholar worthy of note.
Not all of his books are yet reprinted. Some can still be found only in the used book market, but there are several worthy books available.
One of the best places to begin studying Christopher Dawson is in his biography A Historian and His World: A Life of Christopher Dawson, written by his daughter Christina Scott. An excellent collection of his essays is found in Christianity and European Culture: Selections from the Work of Christopher Dawson, edited by Gerald Russello. Also in print is The Dynamics of World History, which outlines Dawson’s Christian approach to history. Religion and the Rise of Western Culture and The Making of Europe are both useful surveys of the impact of Christianity upon European cultural history. My most recent read in the works of Dawson was Medieval Essays, which has played a key role in the whole field of Medieval studies. And if The Crisis of Western Education is not still in print, it certainly ought to be. Even though it was written some decades ago, the case for the necessity for Christian education has never been more strongly stated.
Dawson’s many works can be reduced down to a key theme or two, the main one being this: The key determining factor in a culture is religion, not politics, not economics, not geography, but religion. All those other things matter, but religion is central. A second key idea in Dawson’s thinking follows: The true religion is Christianity. Hence, Dawson’s study of European history titled The Making of Europe is essentially a study of the Christian faith in Europe. The main interpretive principle of education is religious, or more specifically, Christian education. Christian presuppositions formed the basis for the development of law, education, government, literature, and other aspects of life in Europe. The most apparent divisions of history into epochs or time periods are to be determined by theological, not political, institutions and revolutions. Any hope for civilization is to be found not in technology or evolution or some subjective experience, but in a revival of the Christian faith.
Open almost any book by Dawson, at almost any point, and Dawson will be reiterating these themes. He is not a narrative historian like Churchill or Paul Johnson. His stories will not keep you up late at night, turning pages, gulping coffee, and awaiting the final charges of the cavalry. Dawson was not a storyteller like Herodotus. He analyzed history: he explained the causes, the moving forces, and the underlying currents of history. He gives the interpretive framework for the great stories.
At least one quote must be given: “It is hardly too much to say that it is Christian culture that has created Western man and the Western way of life.” “It is hardly too much to say” and yet with the exception of one faithful Christian history teacher in our local junior college, I never heard it said by my professors. Christianity—or Christian culture or better yet, Christendom—was ignored, minimized, ridiculed, distorted, or attacked. Christianity was responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, the burning of witches, the suppression of drama, and the oppression of women—so we have all been told. Young Christians should never head off to the university without the major premises of Dawson’s thinking in their minds and hearts.
Yes, there is a third key theme to Dawson. Religion is the key and Christianity is the religion, and the branch of Christianity that Dawson converted to and loved and defended was the Roman Catholic Church. Like Chesterton and Tolkien in Britain, like Flannery O’Connor and Walker Percy in America, Dawson was Roman Catholic—through and through. So what is the lonely Calvinist (of Richard Tawney’s myth) to do?
Simple, don’t ordain Dawson (or Chesterton or Tolkien or even Lewis, for that matter) as your pastor, but join him in reciting the Apostles’ Creed, use him for understanding history Christianly, and thank God for raising him up. Practically speaking, Protestants may best read many a fine Dawson paragraph by substituting the word “Christian” for “Catholic.” Christians have got to get beyond a narrow sectarianism that cannot reach beyond our Sunday services toward those who battle the same enemies.
Tolkien saw the destruction of his world from the trenches of World War I. He envisioned Middle Earth and told the story of its redemption. Dawson saw the same cultural ‘No Man’s Land’ from his book-lined study. He saw that cultural redemption would result as an outgrowth of the Christian faith. Calvinist scholar Henry Van Til would aptly state this by saying, “Culture is religion externalized.” Christians have to think beyond merely evangelizing the lost and planting churches—and those are both worthy efforts. A Christian culture must be created. It has been done before—not perfectly—but still done well. Christian historians like Christopher Dawson have led the way.
For more on Christopher Dawson's thought and writings, click here to visit the Christopher Dawson Archives
Friday, October 07, 2005
Quietism versus Activism
My recent essay that reviewed the siege of Malta and praised the Christian knights defense of that island has now come under siege. Dr. Karen Kruse Thomas of Florida State University commented on the essay with quite a detailed and vigorous response. Dr. Thomas' articulate and forcefully argued points can be accessed by going to the comments section of my September 19 blog entry.
Below is my answer to her arguments. Probably my answers to her will be no more personally persuasive to her than her arguments were persuasive to me. Why argue? Iron sharpens iron. Argumentation and debate are at the heart of the goals of Classical Christian education of which I am a part. And we argue and debate because we are finite and seeking to understand.
At the heart of our disagreement is an age-old Christian debate (and I do count Dr. Thomas as a fellow believer based on her testimony as such). The debate is that between Quietism and Activism.
Throughout church history, there have been those Christians who seek to pull away from the conflicts of the world and to focus on the spiritual aspects of life. The goal is a church of the faithful; the chief end is personal piety; the attitude is one of seeking God and eschewing the world. This is the emphasis of Christian Quietism, sometimes called Pietism.
The other side is Christian Activism. The Christian activist wants to enter the arena of politics and culture and bring the Christian message to bear on all areas of life and thought. The Christian Activist seeks a Christian political order, a Christian view of war and economics, Christian standards of literary criticism and philosophy.
Some monastics, mystics, Anabaptists, and other groups have sought to create small bands of faithful Christians. Some Puritan groups had such a vision; Roger Williams was certainly in this camp.
On the Activist side, there were monks who were transformed civilization--Irish and otherwise; there were Christian soldiers and magistrates who weilded swords and made laws in the name of Christ; there were Puritans who battled for Christian commonwealths, Covenanters who died for the Crown Rights of Jesus, missionaries who administered the gospel and medicine, and Christian scholars who jousted academia for a Christian voice in the lecture hall.
I am strongly of the Activist mindset. It is their theology that motivates me. I am personally a poor and weak example of such when compared to Augustine, Eusebius, Dante, Calvin, Luther, Knox, Thomas Chalmers, Francis Schaeffer, and R. J. Rushdoony. Still these guys are my heroes.
One of my all time favorite quotes comes from that great Christian Activist Abraham Kuyper, who said,
One desire has been the ruling passion of my life. One high motive has acted like a spur upon my mind and soul. It is this: That in spite of all worldly opposition, God’s holy ordinances shall be established again in the home, in the school, and in the state for the good of the people, to carve as it were into the conscience of the nation, the ordinances of the Lord to which Bible and Creation bear witness, until the nation again pays homage to God.
How do Christians interact with a fallen world? Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of Lords and we are not to love the world. Satan is defeated and bound and Satan goes about as a roaring lion. Guard your heart with all diligence and every knee shall bow to Christ. Church Father Tertullian asked, "What hath Jerusalem to do with Athens?" His answer was--KEEP FAR AWAY. But Church Father Augustine said the Christian is to plunder the Egyptians. Martyn Lloyd-Jones says that Philippians 4:8 refers to meditating on Biblical things only. We think it the 'whatever' encompasses even the beautiful works of pagans.
We activist Christians can learn a lot from Quietist brethren. If you serve in Constantine's court and have access to the emperor's ear, it is easy to forget to go boldly before the throne of grace. You can be the administrator of a Christian school and be too busy to meditate on the Lord.
This age-old Christian debate will not be quickly resolved. The answer below to Dr. Thomas is only a small part of some greater issues.
Christian dialog, debate, and argumentation, done with civility and love, will certainly do us all some good.
Below is my answer to her arguments. Probably my answers to her will be no more personally persuasive to her than her arguments were persuasive to me. Why argue? Iron sharpens iron. Argumentation and debate are at the heart of the goals of Classical Christian education of which I am a part. And we argue and debate because we are finite and seeking to understand.
At the heart of our disagreement is an age-old Christian debate (and I do count Dr. Thomas as a fellow believer based on her testimony as such). The debate is that between Quietism and Activism.
Throughout church history, there have been those Christians who seek to pull away from the conflicts of the world and to focus on the spiritual aspects of life. The goal is a church of the faithful; the chief end is personal piety; the attitude is one of seeking God and eschewing the world. This is the emphasis of Christian Quietism, sometimes called Pietism.
The other side is Christian Activism. The Christian activist wants to enter the arena of politics and culture and bring the Christian message to bear on all areas of life and thought. The Christian Activist seeks a Christian political order, a Christian view of war and economics, Christian standards of literary criticism and philosophy.
Some monastics, mystics, Anabaptists, and other groups have sought to create small bands of faithful Christians. Some Puritan groups had such a vision; Roger Williams was certainly in this camp.
On the Activist side, there were monks who were transformed civilization--Irish and otherwise; there were Christian soldiers and magistrates who weilded swords and made laws in the name of Christ; there were Puritans who battled for Christian commonwealths, Covenanters who died for the Crown Rights of Jesus, missionaries who administered the gospel and medicine, and Christian scholars who jousted academia for a Christian voice in the lecture hall.
I am strongly of the Activist mindset. It is their theology that motivates me. I am personally a poor and weak example of such when compared to Augustine, Eusebius, Dante, Calvin, Luther, Knox, Thomas Chalmers, Francis Schaeffer, and R. J. Rushdoony. Still these guys are my heroes.
One of my all time favorite quotes comes from that great Christian Activist Abraham Kuyper, who said,
One desire has been the ruling passion of my life. One high motive has acted like a spur upon my mind and soul. It is this: That in spite of all worldly opposition, God’s holy ordinances shall be established again in the home, in the school, and in the state for the good of the people, to carve as it were into the conscience of the nation, the ordinances of the Lord to which Bible and Creation bear witness, until the nation again pays homage to God.
How do Christians interact with a fallen world? Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of Lords and we are not to love the world. Satan is defeated and bound and Satan goes about as a roaring lion. Guard your heart with all diligence and every knee shall bow to Christ. Church Father Tertullian asked, "What hath Jerusalem to do with Athens?" His answer was--KEEP FAR AWAY. But Church Father Augustine said the Christian is to plunder the Egyptians. Martyn Lloyd-Jones says that Philippians 4:8 refers to meditating on Biblical things only. We think it the 'whatever' encompasses even the beautiful works of pagans.
We activist Christians can learn a lot from Quietist brethren. If you serve in Constantine's court and have access to the emperor's ear, it is easy to forget to go boldly before the throne of grace. You can be the administrator of a Christian school and be too busy to meditate on the Lord.
This age-old Christian debate will not be quickly resolved. The answer below to Dr. Thomas is only a small part of some greater issues.
Christian dialog, debate, and argumentation, done with civility and love, will certainly do us all some good.
The Great Siege under Siege
A Response to Dr. Karen Kruse Thomas' comments on my September 19 essay:
Dear Dr. Thomas,
Let me again thank you for your commentary on my article “The Great Siege.” Our differences are legion, but I appeal to a common faith in the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ who saves us, not on the basis of our web log entries, but on the basis of His marvelous grace.
Let me respond to the major points of criticism:
1. You said that my purpose was more “a defense of war and of a particular political and cultural viewpoint than a defense of Biblical Christianity.”
Yes, exactly. I was reviewing a book about a battle. This was an application of a Christian worldview to a particular event. Christian apologetics is a separate, although overlapping field of study. As to being a defense of war, yes. Since Augustine, Christian theologians have dealt with the concept of the “Just War Theory.” When armed Turkish ships arrived off the coast of Malta, bearing upwards to 40,000 soldiers, the people there faced war, not prayer meetings. The Knights of Malta ministered to the sick, including Jews and Muslims, until attacked. Yes, I was presenting a political and cultural viewpoint as an application of a Christian worldview. Christians must regain the field of moral philosophy where political and cultural viewpoints are analyzed. My view is right, it seems to me, in methodology, although the particular applications may be flawed. Meaning, I am right as a Christian and a historian to apply a Christian lens to history, culture, politics, economics, literature, etc. But I may make weak or even false applications. I am doing nothing more than what has been advocated throughout church history and especially in recent decades by thinkers like Francis Schaeffer, R.J. Rushdoony, Harry Blamires, and others.
2. Your next point concerns my praising the British for the role the island of Malta played in defeating Hitler’s 3rd Reich. First, I am aware of the limitations of America’s involvement in the European theater of the war. Stephen Ambrose’s books make the case for America’s greatest generation, but Max Hastings’ Armageddon: The Battle for Germany 1944-45 has deep criticisms of the American soldiers and leadership. Anthony Bevor and others have aptly dealt with the tremendous sacrifices of Soviet Russia in defeating the Nazis. The historical consensus, I thought, was that Britain was not able to win the war against Hitler, but were able to keep Hitler from winning. I still stand behind the praise of the Desert 8th Army and the RAF in the Battle of Britain and of the units based on Malta. Even with limited resources, Rommel could have captured Cairo and the Suez Canal. The Middle East was shaky, politically. Arab leaders would easily have sided with Hitler. (‘The enemy of my enemy—British and French occupying forces—is my friend.) One of Britain’s greatest roles in that war was keeping the Middle Eastern countries (actually colonial possessions/protectorates) on the allied side or at least neutral. Turkey had old political ties with Germany and even older hostility toward Russia. A Nazi dominated Middle East would have been a domino effect flank for the Axis powers. Iran was shaky. India would have been vulnerable from both the west and the east where the Japanese army was in Burma. The entire southern flank of Russia would have been endangered. The Caucasus mountain region would have provided an open door to the Nazi armies being on the eastern bank of the Volga River. The places in Iran where my Dad served in that war—somewhat later—would not have been shared airfields with British, American, and Russian units, but would have been German controlled areas. In no way am I minimizing the ocean of blood spilled on the Russian steppes. But, along with the frozen stacks of dead Germans in the Russian snows, there were other places where battles also helped defeat Nazism.
3. Concerning your comment on David as a man of war: I agree that David is a great Old Testament war hero. God did forbid him from building the temple for that reason. But God describes David as a man after His own heart in all matters, except in the events concerning Uriah the Hittite. God also rebuked him for numbering the men for war. All in all, God commended and blessed this man of war. The only reason Solomon could be a man of peace was because his dad had cleared the borders. David’s calling from boyhood was killing God’s enemies—uncircumcised Philistines and others who mocked God.
4. Concerning my use of historical rather than Biblical figures: This is no counter-example! Like the author of Hebrews, time does not permit me to name them all. Abraham went to war. Joshua is a great man of war. Moses led the Israelites in war. God raised up judges who were generally warriors. Saul and Jonathan fought God’s enemies. Good ole Prophet Samuel hacked Agag to pieces. David had his own honor roll of mighty men of war. Nehemiah had his men armed with a sword and trowel. Drop the historical names and fill in any number of Biblical heroes.
5. You said this concerning me: “He seems to confuse vicious cruelty with religious zeal, strategic vision, and bravery.” Great warriors have described the horrors of war with far more authenticity than I could ever do. As Nathan Bedford Forrest said, “War means killin’.” Victor Davis Hanson has rightly pointed out that the Western way of war has entailed massive destruction delivered swiftly in order to stop the enemy. This entails some sort of zeal, whether the zeal of a religious belief or nationalism or personal aggrandizement. When I view Nazi death camps in documentaries, then I cheer at the WWII footage showing the advance of the Russian and British/American forces.
6. Concerning my citing of Generals Lee and Jackson as examples: My fondness of Lee and Jackson is the result first and foremost of their exemplary Christian faith. They were Christian warriors, 19th century knights, great men of Biblical faith and military skill. My particular citation in the essay of contention had reference to their strategic and tactical gifts. As far as battlefield skills are concerned, any number of names could have been substituted. Grant’s Vicksburg campaign was brilliant. Sherman’s flanking maneuvers leading to the capture of Atlanta were incredible. We could go back in time to Hannibal or Alexander or forward in time to the American command leading to the capture of Iraq.
7. Concerning the particular case of Valette beheading his prisoners and firing their heads back at the enemy: Context is everything. The knights and Maltese were being urged by the Muslims to surrender. Their case looked hopeless. The Muslims had beheaded 4 knights and floated their bodies to Valette’s camp. He had to send two messages. First, his men had to know that surrender was no option. (Valette is following principles going back to Sun Tzu and his classic The Art of War.) Second, he had to let the Muslims know that he was not intimidated. This was war—and Sherman said War is Hell. Leaders often make decisions that cause me—and I would be a prissy warrior—to shake and shiver. Gen. Washington had mutinous regiments execute their own leaders. Allies bombed civilians in World War II. Stalin sent NKVD officers to execute deserters. Commanders on all sides in the American uncivil war hung deserters. Armor units are called in to run over infantry. I hate it—even when reading about it. The opening scenes of “Saving Private Ryan” are unbearable to me. Homer’s Iliad is a favorite book, but still unnerving. Commanders have to make decisions on the spot that we as historians have to evaluate in air-conditioned classrooms.
8. Concerning the concept of Total War in the American Civil War: Neither I nor the book I reviewed dealt with that concept. Both Muslim and Christian armies attempted to focus fighting on armies, not civilians. Since there were civilians on the island, they were in harm’s way. But it was not the policy. Personally, I think R.E. Lee and George McClellan had the better views of such in the Civil War.
9. You said this of me: “House posits a unified ‘Christian West’ extending from the dawn of the early church through the Crusades and into our own century.” Yes, I recite such in our historic creeds. I believe there is something that can historically, demographically, and covenantally be called the Christian West. I did not make up or create the concept. Look at any world almanac or history of Western Civilization.
10. You said: “The concept of a unified Christian West is…more political and cultural than religious.” Henry Van Til said that culture is religion externalized. The Christian West should have been and should be more unified—we recite the same creeds and say the same prayers. Our politics and culture should grow from the faith and not the other way around. Christendom was tried and found difficult, just like Christian living.
11. You said: “I am of the Puritan viewpoint that the true Church is a tiny remnant, reliant completely and fearfully…on God’s grace.” Puritan theology is not a nice neat pocket size theology packet. Ian Murray’s classic The Puritan Hope certainly shows a far more dominion oriented Puritanism. Also, see the books and journals of the Christian Reconstructionists. Winthrop’s city on a hill seemed to be pretty visible and expansive.
12. Your quote above continues with “…rather than destined to be the dominant rulers of this age.” The dominion mandate of Genesis 1 and the mandate of Joshua 1 and the Great Commission all combined with the Messianic Psalms and with the victorious note of John’s Revelation all seem to point to dominant rule by Christ and His people. The theological debate is whether it happens on this side of history or the other side. In other words, we believers disagree over the extent to which that will happen either before or after Christ’s return.
13. You said, “I am a person of unclean lips, from a nation of unclean lips.” Me too. For that reason, Christian scholars and thinkers and web loggers should discuss and debate and maintain Christian civility, which I believe you did.
14. You asked: “Then how can we of the ‘Christian West’ expect to retake Israel’s lost national (political) chosen status?” Your position is common among true brothers and sisters in Christ, especially in our time. I hold to the older Postmillennial theology that would answer by saying, “We take on Israel’s status because we have the fulfillment of God’s promises in Christ. We exercise Christian stewardship in His name. The earth is the Lord’s.” Read the writings of Rushdoony, Ken Gentry, and others on this. And even if Postmillennialism is wrong, I still think it is right for Christians to exercise dominion to whatever extent possible. This is my Father’s world. (This does not mean that I endorse everything ever done in the name of Christ.)
15. You said that there is no sign of contrition in my article for sins—individual or corporate—toward the Islamic world. I have many personal sins, but none that I can think of toward Muslims except for not praying enough for their conversion.
16. Concerning exploitation of the Middle East by the West: My view of colonialism is best articulated in the works of economic historians P.T. Bauer and Neill Ferguson. Colonialism had many ugly aspects. The overall results have been good. Osama bin Laden went ballistic when the United States got involved with Afghanistan in the 80s trying to wedge the Soviets out. We were doing a good thing. There is a whole library of books now in this post 9-11 era concerning the Islamic mindset versus the Western mindset. My favorite is George Grant’s Blood of the Moon. If the Western world had never touched the Middle East, they would still be a bitter, divided, and poor hate-filled region. I think the issue is far more complicated than you indicate.
17. Concerning Nice Muslims versus Fanatics: I believe there are nice Muslims. I believe that some Muslims deplore the 9-11 attacks. I think they are exceptions to their theology. Some professing Christians believe Muslims can go to heaven; some Christians believe we should not evangelize people of other faiths; some Christians are pluralists. I think all such is bad theology. I think a true Muslim believer would have to look at the map of America and mourn the fact that Allah is not worshiped here, just as I look at Saudi Arabia and mourn that they do not know Christ.
18. You said: “I can only remember with a shudder that the medieval era was also known as the Dark Ages, the very lowest and dimmest point in the history of Christianity.” My logic students would say that contains the fallacies of hasty generalization and chronological snobbery. Do historians still call the Medieval period ‘the Dark Ages’? Read anything by Christopher Dawson; read How the Irish Saved Civilization; read the books on my Humanities class reading list. Read the excellent book by Douglas Wilson and Douglas Jones called Angels in the Architecture: A Protestant Vision of Middle Earth. Read Thomas Woods’ wonderful new book How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization. A thousand years that gave us Dante and Aquinas, St. Francis of Assisi and St. Benedict; Chaucer and Beowulf; cathedrals and the university; hospitals, law codes, Magna Charta, and chivalry—the lowest and dimmest point of Christianity?
19. Your last comments concern my anti-French bias. Your citation of the military skills of Napoleon and of the French contribution to American independence certainly makes the case that French perfidy or passivity in one case does not imply such in all cases.
I am certain that neither of us will change our theological or political positions on these matters, but the conversation has been a mental delight.
Respectfully,
Ben House
Dear Dr. Thomas,
Let me again thank you for your commentary on my article “The Great Siege.” Our differences are legion, but I appeal to a common faith in the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ who saves us, not on the basis of our web log entries, but on the basis of His marvelous grace.
Let me respond to the major points of criticism:
1. You said that my purpose was more “a defense of war and of a particular political and cultural viewpoint than a defense of Biblical Christianity.”
Yes, exactly. I was reviewing a book about a battle. This was an application of a Christian worldview to a particular event. Christian apologetics is a separate, although overlapping field of study. As to being a defense of war, yes. Since Augustine, Christian theologians have dealt with the concept of the “Just War Theory.” When armed Turkish ships arrived off the coast of Malta, bearing upwards to 40,000 soldiers, the people there faced war, not prayer meetings. The Knights of Malta ministered to the sick, including Jews and Muslims, until attacked. Yes, I was presenting a political and cultural viewpoint as an application of a Christian worldview. Christians must regain the field of moral philosophy where political and cultural viewpoints are analyzed. My view is right, it seems to me, in methodology, although the particular applications may be flawed. Meaning, I am right as a Christian and a historian to apply a Christian lens to history, culture, politics, economics, literature, etc. But I may make weak or even false applications. I am doing nothing more than what has been advocated throughout church history and especially in recent decades by thinkers like Francis Schaeffer, R.J. Rushdoony, Harry Blamires, and others.
2. Your next point concerns my praising the British for the role the island of Malta played in defeating Hitler’s 3rd Reich. First, I am aware of the limitations of America’s involvement in the European theater of the war. Stephen Ambrose’s books make the case for America’s greatest generation, but Max Hastings’ Armageddon: The Battle for Germany 1944-45 has deep criticisms of the American soldiers and leadership. Anthony Bevor and others have aptly dealt with the tremendous sacrifices of Soviet Russia in defeating the Nazis. The historical consensus, I thought, was that Britain was not able to win the war against Hitler, but were able to keep Hitler from winning. I still stand behind the praise of the Desert 8th Army and the RAF in the Battle of Britain and of the units based on Malta. Even with limited resources, Rommel could have captured Cairo and the Suez Canal. The Middle East was shaky, politically. Arab leaders would easily have sided with Hitler. (‘The enemy of my enemy—British and French occupying forces—is my friend.) One of Britain’s greatest roles in that war was keeping the Middle Eastern countries (actually colonial possessions/protectorates) on the allied side or at least neutral. Turkey had old political ties with Germany and even older hostility toward Russia. A Nazi dominated Middle East would have been a domino effect flank for the Axis powers. Iran was shaky. India would have been vulnerable from both the west and the east where the Japanese army was in Burma. The entire southern flank of Russia would have been endangered. The Caucasus mountain region would have provided an open door to the Nazi armies being on the eastern bank of the Volga River. The places in Iran where my Dad served in that war—somewhat later—would not have been shared airfields with British, American, and Russian units, but would have been German controlled areas. In no way am I minimizing the ocean of blood spilled on the Russian steppes. But, along with the frozen stacks of dead Germans in the Russian snows, there were other places where battles also helped defeat Nazism.
3. Concerning your comment on David as a man of war: I agree that David is a great Old Testament war hero. God did forbid him from building the temple for that reason. But God describes David as a man after His own heart in all matters, except in the events concerning Uriah the Hittite. God also rebuked him for numbering the men for war. All in all, God commended and blessed this man of war. The only reason Solomon could be a man of peace was because his dad had cleared the borders. David’s calling from boyhood was killing God’s enemies—uncircumcised Philistines and others who mocked God.
4. Concerning my use of historical rather than Biblical figures: This is no counter-example! Like the author of Hebrews, time does not permit me to name them all. Abraham went to war. Joshua is a great man of war. Moses led the Israelites in war. God raised up judges who were generally warriors. Saul and Jonathan fought God’s enemies. Good ole Prophet Samuel hacked Agag to pieces. David had his own honor roll of mighty men of war. Nehemiah had his men armed with a sword and trowel. Drop the historical names and fill in any number of Biblical heroes.
5. You said this concerning me: “He seems to confuse vicious cruelty with religious zeal, strategic vision, and bravery.” Great warriors have described the horrors of war with far more authenticity than I could ever do. As Nathan Bedford Forrest said, “War means killin’.” Victor Davis Hanson has rightly pointed out that the Western way of war has entailed massive destruction delivered swiftly in order to stop the enemy. This entails some sort of zeal, whether the zeal of a religious belief or nationalism or personal aggrandizement. When I view Nazi death camps in documentaries, then I cheer at the WWII footage showing the advance of the Russian and British/American forces.
6. Concerning my citing of Generals Lee and Jackson as examples: My fondness of Lee and Jackson is the result first and foremost of their exemplary Christian faith. They were Christian warriors, 19th century knights, great men of Biblical faith and military skill. My particular citation in the essay of contention had reference to their strategic and tactical gifts. As far as battlefield skills are concerned, any number of names could have been substituted. Grant’s Vicksburg campaign was brilliant. Sherman’s flanking maneuvers leading to the capture of Atlanta were incredible. We could go back in time to Hannibal or Alexander or forward in time to the American command leading to the capture of Iraq.
7. Concerning the particular case of Valette beheading his prisoners and firing their heads back at the enemy: Context is everything. The knights and Maltese were being urged by the Muslims to surrender. Their case looked hopeless. The Muslims had beheaded 4 knights and floated their bodies to Valette’s camp. He had to send two messages. First, his men had to know that surrender was no option. (Valette is following principles going back to Sun Tzu and his classic The Art of War.) Second, he had to let the Muslims know that he was not intimidated. This was war—and Sherman said War is Hell. Leaders often make decisions that cause me—and I would be a prissy warrior—to shake and shiver. Gen. Washington had mutinous regiments execute their own leaders. Allies bombed civilians in World War II. Stalin sent NKVD officers to execute deserters. Commanders on all sides in the American uncivil war hung deserters. Armor units are called in to run over infantry. I hate it—even when reading about it. The opening scenes of “Saving Private Ryan” are unbearable to me. Homer’s Iliad is a favorite book, but still unnerving. Commanders have to make decisions on the spot that we as historians have to evaluate in air-conditioned classrooms.
8. Concerning the concept of Total War in the American Civil War: Neither I nor the book I reviewed dealt with that concept. Both Muslim and Christian armies attempted to focus fighting on armies, not civilians. Since there were civilians on the island, they were in harm’s way. But it was not the policy. Personally, I think R.E. Lee and George McClellan had the better views of such in the Civil War.
9. You said this of me: “House posits a unified ‘Christian West’ extending from the dawn of the early church through the Crusades and into our own century.” Yes, I recite such in our historic creeds. I believe there is something that can historically, demographically, and covenantally be called the Christian West. I did not make up or create the concept. Look at any world almanac or history of Western Civilization.
10. You said: “The concept of a unified Christian West is…more political and cultural than religious.” Henry Van Til said that culture is religion externalized. The Christian West should have been and should be more unified—we recite the same creeds and say the same prayers. Our politics and culture should grow from the faith and not the other way around. Christendom was tried and found difficult, just like Christian living.
11. You said: “I am of the Puritan viewpoint that the true Church is a tiny remnant, reliant completely and fearfully…on God’s grace.” Puritan theology is not a nice neat pocket size theology packet. Ian Murray’s classic The Puritan Hope certainly shows a far more dominion oriented Puritanism. Also, see the books and journals of the Christian Reconstructionists. Winthrop’s city on a hill seemed to be pretty visible and expansive.
12. Your quote above continues with “…rather than destined to be the dominant rulers of this age.” The dominion mandate of Genesis 1 and the mandate of Joshua 1 and the Great Commission all combined with the Messianic Psalms and with the victorious note of John’s Revelation all seem to point to dominant rule by Christ and His people. The theological debate is whether it happens on this side of history or the other side. In other words, we believers disagree over the extent to which that will happen either before or after Christ’s return.
13. You said, “I am a person of unclean lips, from a nation of unclean lips.” Me too. For that reason, Christian scholars and thinkers and web loggers should discuss and debate and maintain Christian civility, which I believe you did.
14. You asked: “Then how can we of the ‘Christian West’ expect to retake Israel’s lost national (political) chosen status?” Your position is common among true brothers and sisters in Christ, especially in our time. I hold to the older Postmillennial theology that would answer by saying, “We take on Israel’s status because we have the fulfillment of God’s promises in Christ. We exercise Christian stewardship in His name. The earth is the Lord’s.” Read the writings of Rushdoony, Ken Gentry, and others on this. And even if Postmillennialism is wrong, I still think it is right for Christians to exercise dominion to whatever extent possible. This is my Father’s world. (This does not mean that I endorse everything ever done in the name of Christ.)
15. You said that there is no sign of contrition in my article for sins—individual or corporate—toward the Islamic world. I have many personal sins, but none that I can think of toward Muslims except for not praying enough for their conversion.
16. Concerning exploitation of the Middle East by the West: My view of colonialism is best articulated in the works of economic historians P.T. Bauer and Neill Ferguson. Colonialism had many ugly aspects. The overall results have been good. Osama bin Laden went ballistic when the United States got involved with Afghanistan in the 80s trying to wedge the Soviets out. We were doing a good thing. There is a whole library of books now in this post 9-11 era concerning the Islamic mindset versus the Western mindset. My favorite is George Grant’s Blood of the Moon. If the Western world had never touched the Middle East, they would still be a bitter, divided, and poor hate-filled region. I think the issue is far more complicated than you indicate.
17. Concerning Nice Muslims versus Fanatics: I believe there are nice Muslims. I believe that some Muslims deplore the 9-11 attacks. I think they are exceptions to their theology. Some professing Christians believe Muslims can go to heaven; some Christians believe we should not evangelize people of other faiths; some Christians are pluralists. I think all such is bad theology. I think a true Muslim believer would have to look at the map of America and mourn the fact that Allah is not worshiped here, just as I look at Saudi Arabia and mourn that they do not know Christ.
18. You said: “I can only remember with a shudder that the medieval era was also known as the Dark Ages, the very lowest and dimmest point in the history of Christianity.” My logic students would say that contains the fallacies of hasty generalization and chronological snobbery. Do historians still call the Medieval period ‘the Dark Ages’? Read anything by Christopher Dawson; read How the Irish Saved Civilization; read the books on my Humanities class reading list. Read the excellent book by Douglas Wilson and Douglas Jones called Angels in the Architecture: A Protestant Vision of Middle Earth. Read Thomas Woods’ wonderful new book How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization. A thousand years that gave us Dante and Aquinas, St. Francis of Assisi and St. Benedict; Chaucer and Beowulf; cathedrals and the university; hospitals, law codes, Magna Charta, and chivalry—the lowest and dimmest point of Christianity?
19. Your last comments concern my anti-French bias. Your citation of the military skills of Napoleon and of the French contribution to American independence certainly makes the case that French perfidy or passivity in one case does not imply such in all cases.
I am certain that neither of us will change our theological or political positions on these matters, but the conversation has been a mental delight.
Respectfully,
Ben House
Thursday, October 06, 2005
Another and a Nicer Look at Christian Bookstores
My recent posting called "Lost in the Christian Bookstore Cosmos" pokes fun at Christian book stores. I have had many experiences of walking into such places and being lost in the Christian paraphernalia and puzzled by the few books to be found. Humor must exaggerate a bit to make a point. But let me be a bit contrite and point out other aspects of the matter.
1. I like the general sense of there being a world of objects, do-dads, what-nots, and bric-a-brac covered with Bible verses and Christian themes. I love Celtic crosses. I need Bible verses all around me on every flat surface. Like the Old Testament prophecy, I long to see a shelf of bells for horses with "Holiness to the Lord" inscribed on them. Perhaps someday I will buy my wife some holy cookware (Zechariah 14:20-21).
2. I just recently had the experience of visiting a Christian bookstore in our town that has quite a few good books. Not as many as I would like, but still quite a few. I found a few books that I mentally filed away as future purchases. I have over the years purchased many books there.
3. At that same bookstore, I bought a Michael Card CD off the demo rack for $1.00! I am thankful for the abundance of Christian music.
4. I rejoice in there being the internet where lots of good Christian books can be found. I wish I could go to a store in town and find copies of the works of Rushdoony and Warfield, Calvin and Hodge, Gene Edward Veith and Peter Kreeft. Those authors are not found on the shelves here in town, but they are a click of the mouse away.
5. And then there are the Calvinistic popularizers. I have frequently found Calvinistic books in frilly bookstores, in Christian gift shops, and the like. The works of J.I. Packer, R.C. Sproul, George Grant, D. James Kennedy, Jerry Bridges, and John Piper are available at a surprising number of places. Also, reprints of the works of Spurgeon and A.W. Pink can be found.
6. I love elderly Christian women who love the Lord and work in bookstores. I do wish to see more Marlbourgh man-types shelving great theology while telling about the latest fishing trip or ball game, but little old ladies who love the Lord and read nice books are salt and light.
1. I like the general sense of there being a world of objects, do-dads, what-nots, and bric-a-brac covered with Bible verses and Christian themes. I love Celtic crosses. I need Bible verses all around me on every flat surface. Like the Old Testament prophecy, I long to see a shelf of bells for horses with "Holiness to the Lord" inscribed on them. Perhaps someday I will buy my wife some holy cookware (Zechariah 14:20-21).
2. I just recently had the experience of visiting a Christian bookstore in our town that has quite a few good books. Not as many as I would like, but still quite a few. I found a few books that I mentally filed away as future purchases. I have over the years purchased many books there.
3. At that same bookstore, I bought a Michael Card CD off the demo rack for $1.00! I am thankful for the abundance of Christian music.
4. I rejoice in there being the internet where lots of good Christian books can be found. I wish I could go to a store in town and find copies of the works of Rushdoony and Warfield, Calvin and Hodge, Gene Edward Veith and Peter Kreeft. Those authors are not found on the shelves here in town, but they are a click of the mouse away.
5. And then there are the Calvinistic popularizers. I have frequently found Calvinistic books in frilly bookstores, in Christian gift shops, and the like. The works of J.I. Packer, R.C. Sproul, George Grant, D. James Kennedy, Jerry Bridges, and John Piper are available at a surprising number of places. Also, reprints of the works of Spurgeon and A.W. Pink can be found.
6. I love elderly Christian women who love the Lord and work in bookstores. I do wish to see more Marlbourgh man-types shelving great theology while telling about the latest fishing trip or ball game, but little old ladies who love the Lord and read nice books are salt and light.
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
Beowulf and Storytelling
At the heart of all great stories is the telling of the story itself. A story by definition must be told. Whether written, told, sung, or portrayed on the screen, the story must have a storyteller and a listener. Stories are mirrors, types, and symbols. They are images of greater realities; stories are of unfinished happenings; and they point to a future eschatological fulfillment. “And they lived happily ever after” resonates with us because it reaches something in the soul that says that despite earthly appearances to the contrary, such a fate is possible.
The great stories told in epic poems, novels, and movies are filled with adventures, quests, romance, and sacrifice, but they also contain reminders that it is the story itself that matters. Somehow the Iliad rises above a case of personal pique of a Greek warrior over a woman. The Irish poet Patrick Kavanaugh wrote of Homer whispering in his mind: “I made the Iliad from such a local row. Gods make their own importance.” This supposed local row between Achilleus and Agamemnon is symbolized in Achilleus’ shield, which is a picture of the entire world. Achilleus is thus a savior of the world, and not just the Achaeans army. (What a reversed-image picture of salvation and inadequate salvation we have in this savior; hence the long wait of that cold dead ancient world needing Christ and His story.) Achilleus’ fate is tied to the stories that both precede and succeed his. His destiny was tied to the prophecy that the child of Thetis would be greater than his father, thus prompting both Zeus and Poseidon to reject her and then have her marry a mere mortal. Achilleus faced the prospect of being glorified in death as the greatest of soldiers ever or of being reduced to obscurity by shunning the battle. In other words, the story of the Iliad is sung (or now read) because Achilleus chose the story over a longer mortal life.
Mankind is made for stories. Children quickly learn to listen to the story being told or read. Stories educate. Stories heal. In one case in the Iliad, Patroklos attends to the wounded Eurypylos by “entertaining him with words and applying medicines…” The gospel is presented to us not in abstract philosophical propositions, but in stories. Even when Paul summarizes the gospel in I Corinthians 15, he presents the outline as the story of the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Early Norsemen, like the ancient Greeks and Hebrews, gathered around in the frozen Northland by fires for fellowship, food, and stories. An early evidence of this is Beowulf. This Anglo-Saxon poem Beowulf is most remembered for the battle scenes, yet the true center of the poem is found in fellowship of warriors in the mead hall and in the telling of stories. Heorot, the mead hall, is the world in need of salvation in this poem. It is the mead hall rather than the slaying of monsters that provides the clues to how this poem relates to the survival of both civilization and the human soul. The conflict arises because the monster Grendel disrupts the feasts of Heorot. When he is defeated in a rather short battle sequence, the feastings resume at the mead-hall.
Daniel Russ said, “When reading the works of Homer, Virgil, and Milton…one is struck with how little action they contain.” He adds Beowulf to the list of works containing little actual action, and then comments that this lack of action is offset “because the epic poem is not about battles; battles in the epic poem are over the values, culture, and civilization which the hero and the people he leads are attempting to found or preserve. Most of the epics are taken up with these religious, communal, and familial gatherings which reveal to the reader and remind the people of the way of life for which they are willing to die.”
For this reason, people’s lives are centered around gatherings for which they are willing to die. People die for their homelands, their hearths, and their countries because such places are where they gather to feast, to fellowship, and to live. The easy answer in Beowulf might have been to stop the feasting at Heorot, just as the easy answer to terrorism might have been to stop all air traffic and dealings with the Middle East. Just as our lives today center around the feasts and community celebrations—holidays, marriages, parties—so the lives of those in the past centered around similar gatherings.
When Beowulf returns to Gotland as a triumphant warrior, he retells the story of his triumph to his king and awaiting countrymen. Again the battle sequence is told briefly and Beowulf then tells of the feasting and gifts that followed. Beowulf tells his king and friends that “there was song and laughter—the Spear-Danes’ king/ stretched his memory for stories of childhood.” (Lines 2105-2106) The fighting is secondary because the purpose of life is found in man living in harmony with his community. The community is held together by the shared experiences, that is, the stories, the battles, and the monsters that were defeated. This telling of stories is reminiscent of The Odyssey where Odysseus’ story is told by him and others repeatedly, and the story is usually told at a feast. The Odyssey begins with Telemachus having to learn the story of his father before he can then begin his own story.
One can imagine that some strong Anglo-Saxon poet who both crafted and Christianized the Beowulf legend presented it, not as a book, but as an after dinner musical performance to well-fed Christian warriors peacefully reclining in fellowship.
Plato noted this same need for storytelling in The Republic, where he said, “Come then, and let us pass a leisure hour in storytelling, and our story shall be the education of our heroes.” This same passion for stories can be found in Exodus, where the telling of the story began happening soon after the event.
And Moses told his father in law all that the Lord had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel's sake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how the Lord delivered them. (Exodus 18:8)
Long before the book of Exodus was written down, even longer before Cecile B. deMille and Charleton Heston, and thankfully long before “The Prince of Egypt,” Jethro enjoyed a good meal with his son-in-law and a delightful evening listening to the story of the plagues, the Passover, and the Red Sea crossing. His response?
And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel, whom he had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them. (Exodus 18:9-11)
Stories will be told. Somebody will do the telling. Somebody, many somebodies, will listen. Along with Christian theologians and philosophers and apologists, we need Christian storytellers. We need to tell the great stories of our faith. We need to take the paganized archetypal stories (now the common fare of Hollywood productions) and do like the author of Beowulf by recasting stories within a Christian framework. And we need to write and tell our own stories, both real and fictional, based on the Truth.
Reading and learning will have to precede writing and telling. Beowulf is one of many good places to start.
The great stories told in epic poems, novels, and movies are filled with adventures, quests, romance, and sacrifice, but they also contain reminders that it is the story itself that matters. Somehow the Iliad rises above a case of personal pique of a Greek warrior over a woman. The Irish poet Patrick Kavanaugh wrote of Homer whispering in his mind: “I made the Iliad from such a local row. Gods make their own importance.” This supposed local row between Achilleus and Agamemnon is symbolized in Achilleus’ shield, which is a picture of the entire world. Achilleus is thus a savior of the world, and not just the Achaeans army. (What a reversed-image picture of salvation and inadequate salvation we have in this savior; hence the long wait of that cold dead ancient world needing Christ and His story.) Achilleus’ fate is tied to the stories that both precede and succeed his. His destiny was tied to the prophecy that the child of Thetis would be greater than his father, thus prompting both Zeus and Poseidon to reject her and then have her marry a mere mortal. Achilleus faced the prospect of being glorified in death as the greatest of soldiers ever or of being reduced to obscurity by shunning the battle. In other words, the story of the Iliad is sung (or now read) because Achilleus chose the story over a longer mortal life.
Mankind is made for stories. Children quickly learn to listen to the story being told or read. Stories educate. Stories heal. In one case in the Iliad, Patroklos attends to the wounded Eurypylos by “entertaining him with words and applying medicines…” The gospel is presented to us not in abstract philosophical propositions, but in stories. Even when Paul summarizes the gospel in I Corinthians 15, he presents the outline as the story of the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Early Norsemen, like the ancient Greeks and Hebrews, gathered around in the frozen Northland by fires for fellowship, food, and stories. An early evidence of this is Beowulf. This Anglo-Saxon poem Beowulf is most remembered for the battle scenes, yet the true center of the poem is found in fellowship of warriors in the mead hall and in the telling of stories. Heorot, the mead hall, is the world in need of salvation in this poem. It is the mead hall rather than the slaying of monsters that provides the clues to how this poem relates to the survival of both civilization and the human soul. The conflict arises because the monster Grendel disrupts the feasts of Heorot. When he is defeated in a rather short battle sequence, the feastings resume at the mead-hall.
Daniel Russ said, “When reading the works of Homer, Virgil, and Milton…one is struck with how little action they contain.” He adds Beowulf to the list of works containing little actual action, and then comments that this lack of action is offset “because the epic poem is not about battles; battles in the epic poem are over the values, culture, and civilization which the hero and the people he leads are attempting to found or preserve. Most of the epics are taken up with these religious, communal, and familial gatherings which reveal to the reader and remind the people of the way of life for which they are willing to die.”
For this reason, people’s lives are centered around gatherings for which they are willing to die. People die for their homelands, their hearths, and their countries because such places are where they gather to feast, to fellowship, and to live. The easy answer in Beowulf might have been to stop the feasting at Heorot, just as the easy answer to terrorism might have been to stop all air traffic and dealings with the Middle East. Just as our lives today center around the feasts and community celebrations—holidays, marriages, parties—so the lives of those in the past centered around similar gatherings.
When Beowulf returns to Gotland as a triumphant warrior, he retells the story of his triumph to his king and awaiting countrymen. Again the battle sequence is told briefly and Beowulf then tells of the feasting and gifts that followed. Beowulf tells his king and friends that “there was song and laughter—the Spear-Danes’ king/ stretched his memory for stories of childhood.” (Lines 2105-2106) The fighting is secondary because the purpose of life is found in man living in harmony with his community. The community is held together by the shared experiences, that is, the stories, the battles, and the monsters that were defeated. This telling of stories is reminiscent of The Odyssey where Odysseus’ story is told by him and others repeatedly, and the story is usually told at a feast. The Odyssey begins with Telemachus having to learn the story of his father before he can then begin his own story.
One can imagine that some strong Anglo-Saxon poet who both crafted and Christianized the Beowulf legend presented it, not as a book, but as an after dinner musical performance to well-fed Christian warriors peacefully reclining in fellowship.
Plato noted this same need for storytelling in The Republic, where he said, “Come then, and let us pass a leisure hour in storytelling, and our story shall be the education of our heroes.” This same passion for stories can be found in Exodus, where the telling of the story began happening soon after the event.
Long before the book of Exodus was written down, even longer before Cecile B. deMille and Charleton Heston, and thankfully long before “The Prince of Egypt,” Jethro enjoyed a good meal with his son-in-law and a delightful evening listening to the story of the plagues, the Passover, and the Red Sea crossing. His response?
Stories will be told. Somebody will do the telling. Somebody, many somebodies, will listen. Along with Christian theologians and philosophers and apologists, we need Christian storytellers. We need to tell the great stories of our faith. We need to take the paganized archetypal stories (now the common fare of Hollywood productions) and do like the author of Beowulf by recasting stories within a Christian framework. And we need to write and tell our own stories, both real and fictional, based on the Truth.
Reading and learning will have to precede writing and telling. Beowulf is one of many good places to start.
Monday, October 03, 2005
Lost in the Christian Bookstore Cosmos
Dedicated to James Jordan in regard to his excellent essay, “The Closing of the Calvinistic Mind”; and to George Grant in regard to his recent traumatic experience in a Christian bookstore.
I need your help. I am trying to locate a dear friend of mine named John. Let me explain his situation. John was always quite intellectual and prone to have a book in hand at all times, even while swimming. In college he achieved a double major in philosophy and in English literature. After obtaining a master’s degree in England, he returned to the States to attend law school. He graduated near the top of his class. Instead of practicing law, John took advantage of his family’s wealth, and being single, he was free of family obligations.
For years, I prayed for and witnessed to John. And then the miracle happened. Out of intellectual curiosity, John dropped in on a worship service. The minister, borrowing heavily from Martin Luther, preached from Galatians on the doctrine of saving grace. Like that other John some centuries back, my friend John left having felt his heart “strangely warmed.” Being saved, John became a different man, and for a time was quite satisfied with his new life as a Christian. But something happened one morning as he was enjoying the most Christian combination of Bible reading and strong coffee. He happened upon the words, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your mind.” He pulled out his college diplomas and his law degree and placed them beside his Bible. His quest began.
John is currently lost somewhere out there in the great American shopping mall cosmos. In the first of a series of epistles, he told me that he had left in search of “good, serious Christian books that apply what the Bible says to those areas I studied in college.” I wrote back and said that we call it a “Christian Worldview” or “Weltanschauung,” to use the fancy German term. “Ah, excellent,” he responded, “Now I know what to look for.”
Below are portions of the letters he sent regarding his experiences.
Dear Ben,
My first disappointment. Found a store called “New Life Christian Books.” I went in and asked for books on a Christian Weltanschauung. A nice lady showed me some booklets on activities for youth programs. “No Ma'm, this is not it. I am looking for books, serious Christian books.” “Books?” she said. She then called the manager. “Oh yes, books,” he said. He led me through Christian whatnots, do-dads and bric-a-brac, past Christian pictures and posters, around Christian music, near to the Christian tee shirts and caps, over close to Christian toys, and on back to a small rack at the back of the store that was mostly empty. “Oh I think someone forgot to restock this department.” I left empty handed, but the little breath mints, called “New Testamints” were quite tasty. On to the next town.”
John
It was a month before I got this letter.
Dear Ben,
Hope you and the family are well. Family, next to good books, must be pure bliss. Yet, I am enjoying the freedom of being single by continuing my quest for books. Would that I were like Paul and could sit in a nice jail cell and summon Timothy to bring me my books, especially the parchments! I learned in philosophy to pursue a matter to its logical conclusion. The philosophical framework of the Bible must of necessity have spawned lots of good books. So far, I think it might be easier to find the Holy Grail. I went to “New Birth Books,” “Christian Book Bonanza,” “Holy Trinkets,” “Spirit Books,” and a place called “Sacred Screeds.” I have picked up any number of little gifts for all my friends and their kids. Did you know that the entire Gospel of John can be squeezed onto a number 2 pencil? And this little gadget I found today has Santa Claus kneeling beside a manger. When you shake it, it snows. But so far, no good books. I did get introduced to a series of books about the second coming. I started reading one called The Armageddon Force. It was in not in the children’s section, but it seemed like the action adventure books I read as a boy. Two brothers, kind of a Christian like Hardy boys, solve mysteries all leading up to figuring out which evil world leader is the anti-Christ. (There is supposed to be a video game coming out soon on the series.) Picked up a few other pamphlets and a work called a “devotional.” I actually picked it up for my mom, thinking it was a recipe book. Still not sure what it is, but she has a cold and the chicken soup recipe might be just what she needs.
John
I managed to get a letter to John at this point where I recommended that he ask for some Christian classics—older books—and for works emphasizing the Reformers. A few weeks later, this came:
Ben,
Asked for some of the older Christian classics today and may have struck a gold mine. The nice lady—are all Christian bookstores run by nice elderly ladies? —showed me a copy of an old classic called The Late Great Planet Earth. Is this theologian named Lindsay one of the Reformers? They had several theological books by this same author. And, they had an even older classic—God’s Psychiatry. I am interested in this one, because even in my pagan days, I was convinced that Freud was Freudulent! Bet this Christian thinker dropkicks old Sigmund all the way back to Vienna. Ad fontes and tole lege and all that.
John
And then this.
Ben,
Forget the last letter. The Late Great Planet Earth made no sense. It must have been written by the staff of the “McGovern for President” campaign. Strange stuff about helicopters and locusts. God’s Psychiatry will go in the package with the chicken recipe book for mom. There are no good, serious Christian books. Will be back home soon. Thinking about working on a doctorate in philosophy or becoming a medical doctor.
John
When I got that sad letter, I had just finished reading some of Augustine and Athanasius, so I suggested to John that he focus on finding some books by the great fathers of the early Western Church.
Ben,
Took up your suggestion and resumed my search. At a bookstore called “The Joy Explosion Christian Book Center,” I was directed to what may be one of your great Western church fathers. Is one of the fathers named Roy Rogers? I picked up a book called Happy Trails—the Life of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. Neat people. I remember watching them on their ranch show on Saturday mornings. The lady at the store—just like a grandmother to me—did not know of any books by Augustine or Athanasius, but she assured me that Roy was a part of the early westerns and that he and Dale adopted quite a few kids, so he was a great father. I think I will turn my search to fiction. Have any Christians written great poems or novels? Will begin my search early tomorrow. There is a store near here called Living Water Books and Bibles.
John
And then this:
Ben,
I did not find any books today, but I found a clue that gives me hope. In the Living Water store, they had few books, but they had a nice selection of ties. One in particular caught my eye—it had an imprint of bookshelves bulging with big weighty books. From Plato, I now know that the form exists, which frustrates me. So I turn to Aristotle who reminds me that the particular—the actual books exist. You know the old One and the Many problem, like the Raphael painting. Surely Christians have written on that. This tie is surely a sign from God that I will yet find whole shelves of great, serious Christian books. My true Weltanshauung awaits. “Oh Worldview, Worldview, where art thou Worldview?” Every time I nearly give up, something happens to keep me going. By the way, did you know there is a brand of Christian oatmeal? It’s called Instant Graces. Not bad, except for the flavor.
John
And later…
Ben,
I found an older gentleman running a store today—called Faith Books—and I told him of my desire for great Christian books. He directed me to his wife—a nice Christian lady. “Great Christian books, including fiction,” I told her. She directed me to an author, who seems to have written about two hundred books. Her name is Okee Dokee. Bought a volume called Journey Across The Barren Wilds. It deals with a young Christian woman on a train trip across western Canada. She meets a lumberjack and about two hundred pages later, he becomes a Christian and they get married. I probably will not go back for the sequel Winter in the Barren Wilds. Oops, just spilled some Instant Graces on my tie.
John
It was a while before I heard from John again.
Ben,
Just left a place called “First Fruits Bookstore.” Do you know anything about a series on prayer in which the first is called A Mother Prays for Her Son? Seems like the book did well, for she then wrote one on praying for her daughter, her husband, and her grandchildren. The publisher seemed to like the series. Maybe it is something like the Christian worldview you mentioned. Volume 59, which is the latest, is called A Plumber Prays for His Electrician. Most of the books are about 100 pages long with prayers of one to ten sentences.
John
There were a couple more letters from John. In one case, he did find a copy of My Utmost for His Highest, but it was a modernized, abridged edition, with a few too many liberties granted to the editor. For example, I don’t think Oswald Chambers ever actually began a day’s reading with the words, “Hey dude, wanna know what’s groovin’ in the book of Mark?” And then there was the systematic theology series he found where each volume relates some aspect of theology to baseball. John stopped reading when he got to the description of the Trinity being like the three bases on the baseball diamond. By now, it has been some months since I heard from John. I keep hoping that he found that shelf of books pictured on the tie. Maybe, he is off somewhere reading those great books. Or then again, maybe he bought the Armageddon Squad video game and got lost in it. If you see him roaming around your local Christian bookstore, ask him to drop me a line.
I need your help. I am trying to locate a dear friend of mine named John. Let me explain his situation. John was always quite intellectual and prone to have a book in hand at all times, even while swimming. In college he achieved a double major in philosophy and in English literature. After obtaining a master’s degree in England, he returned to the States to attend law school. He graduated near the top of his class. Instead of practicing law, John took advantage of his family’s wealth, and being single, he was free of family obligations.
For years, I prayed for and witnessed to John. And then the miracle happened. Out of intellectual curiosity, John dropped in on a worship service. The minister, borrowing heavily from Martin Luther, preached from Galatians on the doctrine of saving grace. Like that other John some centuries back, my friend John left having felt his heart “strangely warmed.” Being saved, John became a different man, and for a time was quite satisfied with his new life as a Christian. But something happened one morning as he was enjoying the most Christian combination of Bible reading and strong coffee. He happened upon the words, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your mind.” He pulled out his college diplomas and his law degree and placed them beside his Bible. His quest began.
John is currently lost somewhere out there in the great American shopping mall cosmos. In the first of a series of epistles, he told me that he had left in search of “good, serious Christian books that apply what the Bible says to those areas I studied in college.” I wrote back and said that we call it a “Christian Worldview” or “Weltanschauung,” to use the fancy German term. “Ah, excellent,” he responded, “Now I know what to look for.”
Below are portions of the letters he sent regarding his experiences.
Dear Ben,
My first disappointment. Found a store called “New Life Christian Books.” I went in and asked for books on a Christian Weltanschauung. A nice lady showed me some booklets on activities for youth programs. “No Ma'm, this is not it. I am looking for books, serious Christian books.” “Books?” she said. She then called the manager. “Oh yes, books,” he said. He led me through Christian whatnots, do-dads and bric-a-brac, past Christian pictures and posters, around Christian music, near to the Christian tee shirts and caps, over close to Christian toys, and on back to a small rack at the back of the store that was mostly empty. “Oh I think someone forgot to restock this department.” I left empty handed, but the little breath mints, called “New Testamints” were quite tasty. On to the next town.”
John
It was a month before I got this letter.
Dear Ben,
Hope you and the family are well. Family, next to good books, must be pure bliss. Yet, I am enjoying the freedom of being single by continuing my quest for books. Would that I were like Paul and could sit in a nice jail cell and summon Timothy to bring me my books, especially the parchments! I learned in philosophy to pursue a matter to its logical conclusion. The philosophical framework of the Bible must of necessity have spawned lots of good books. So far, I think it might be easier to find the Holy Grail. I went to “New Birth Books,” “Christian Book Bonanza,” “Holy Trinkets,” “Spirit Books,” and a place called “Sacred Screeds.” I have picked up any number of little gifts for all my friends and their kids. Did you know that the entire Gospel of John can be squeezed onto a number 2 pencil? And this little gadget I found today has Santa Claus kneeling beside a manger. When you shake it, it snows. But so far, no good books. I did get introduced to a series of books about the second coming. I started reading one called The Armageddon Force. It was in not in the children’s section, but it seemed like the action adventure books I read as a boy. Two brothers, kind of a Christian like Hardy boys, solve mysteries all leading up to figuring out which evil world leader is the anti-Christ. (There is supposed to be a video game coming out soon on the series.) Picked up a few other pamphlets and a work called a “devotional.” I actually picked it up for my mom, thinking it was a recipe book. Still not sure what it is, but she has a cold and the chicken soup recipe might be just what she needs.
John
I managed to get a letter to John at this point where I recommended that he ask for some Christian classics—older books—and for works emphasizing the Reformers. A few weeks later, this came:
Ben,
Asked for some of the older Christian classics today and may have struck a gold mine. The nice lady—are all Christian bookstores run by nice elderly ladies? —showed me a copy of an old classic called The Late Great Planet Earth. Is this theologian named Lindsay one of the Reformers? They had several theological books by this same author. And, they had an even older classic—God’s Psychiatry. I am interested in this one, because even in my pagan days, I was convinced that Freud was Freudulent! Bet this Christian thinker dropkicks old Sigmund all the way back to Vienna. Ad fontes and tole lege and all that.
John
And then this.
Ben,
Forget the last letter. The Late Great Planet Earth made no sense. It must have been written by the staff of the “McGovern for President” campaign. Strange stuff about helicopters and locusts. God’s Psychiatry will go in the package with the chicken recipe book for mom. There are no good, serious Christian books. Will be back home soon. Thinking about working on a doctorate in philosophy or becoming a medical doctor.
John
When I got that sad letter, I had just finished reading some of Augustine and Athanasius, so I suggested to John that he focus on finding some books by the great fathers of the early Western Church.
Ben,
Took up your suggestion and resumed my search. At a bookstore called “The Joy Explosion Christian Book Center,” I was directed to what may be one of your great Western church fathers. Is one of the fathers named Roy Rogers? I picked up a book called Happy Trails—the Life of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. Neat people. I remember watching them on their ranch show on Saturday mornings. The lady at the store—just like a grandmother to me—did not know of any books by Augustine or Athanasius, but she assured me that Roy was a part of the early westerns and that he and Dale adopted quite a few kids, so he was a great father. I think I will turn my search to fiction. Have any Christians written great poems or novels? Will begin my search early tomorrow. There is a store near here called Living Water Books and Bibles.
John
And then this:
Ben,
I did not find any books today, but I found a clue that gives me hope. In the Living Water store, they had few books, but they had a nice selection of ties. One in particular caught my eye—it had an imprint of bookshelves bulging with big weighty books. From Plato, I now know that the form exists, which frustrates me. So I turn to Aristotle who reminds me that the particular—the actual books exist. You know the old One and the Many problem, like the Raphael painting. Surely Christians have written on that. This tie is surely a sign from God that I will yet find whole shelves of great, serious Christian books. My true Weltanshauung awaits. “Oh Worldview, Worldview, where art thou Worldview?” Every time I nearly give up, something happens to keep me going. By the way, did you know there is a brand of Christian oatmeal? It’s called Instant Graces. Not bad, except for the flavor.
John
And later…
Ben,
I found an older gentleman running a store today—called Faith Books—and I told him of my desire for great Christian books. He directed me to his wife—a nice Christian lady. “Great Christian books, including fiction,” I told her. She directed me to an author, who seems to have written about two hundred books. Her name is Okee Dokee. Bought a volume called Journey Across The Barren Wilds. It deals with a young Christian woman on a train trip across western Canada. She meets a lumberjack and about two hundred pages later, he becomes a Christian and they get married. I probably will not go back for the sequel Winter in the Barren Wilds. Oops, just spilled some Instant Graces on my tie.
John
It was a while before I heard from John again.
Ben,
Just left a place called “First Fruits Bookstore.” Do you know anything about a series on prayer in which the first is called A Mother Prays for Her Son? Seems like the book did well, for she then wrote one on praying for her daughter, her husband, and her grandchildren. The publisher seemed to like the series. Maybe it is something like the Christian worldview you mentioned. Volume 59, which is the latest, is called A Plumber Prays for His Electrician. Most of the books are about 100 pages long with prayers of one to ten sentences.
John
There were a couple more letters from John. In one case, he did find a copy of My Utmost for His Highest, but it was a modernized, abridged edition, with a few too many liberties granted to the editor. For example, I don’t think Oswald Chambers ever actually began a day’s reading with the words, “Hey dude, wanna know what’s groovin’ in the book of Mark?” And then there was the systematic theology series he found where each volume relates some aspect of theology to baseball. John stopped reading when he got to the description of the Trinity being like the three bases on the baseball diamond. By now, it has been some months since I heard from John. I keep hoping that he found that shelf of books pictured on the tie. Maybe, he is off somewhere reading those great books. Or then again, maybe he bought the Armageddon Squad video game and got lost in it. If you see him roaming around your local Christian bookstore, ask him to drop me a line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)