Jonathan Edwards and Positive Agency

Many of my friends here at Loma Linda are big fans of the well-known writer and pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, John Piper. One them gave me some of his sermons on a CD last year and I was quite impressed by what I heard. Since then I've been a somewhat regular reader of Piper's blog and have enjoyed what I've read there. My introduction at Loma Linda was not my first to Piper though. When I was at Asbury, Piper was one of "those Calvinists," with whom we loved to disagree. Even at Asbury, the little I knew about Piper caused me to respect him in the same way I respected Al Mohler. I knew I had some serious disagreements and I was convinced that they would probably see my form of Christianity as deficient but I respected them both as bold defenders of Biblical Christianity. 

On Sunday, after a week of midterms I was at Barnes and Noble to get a book on surfing but I also decided to browse the Christian section. Piper's Desiring God, a book I've wanted to check out for a while, stood out to me on the shelf so I decided to pick that up also. I've read the first two chapters so far and especially appreciated his chapter on Conversion where he takes on the idea that you can just say a little prayer, and experience no repentance or change in your life and yet somehow that makes you a Christian. But as I've read I've also struggled with a Calvinistic idea that I find very problematic: the complete and utter determinism by God of all events in history that Calvin seems to imply in his Institutes and that Calvinist leaders like Piper seem to embrace today. This blog post is not going to be any sort of in-depth exploration of the matter as I don't have the time to spend on it. But I was impressed by something I read in one of the appendices to Piper's Desiring God yesterday. 

The appendix is entitled, "Is God Less Glorious Because He Ordained That Evil Be?" And the section that I found helpful is called, "Is God the Author of Sin?" Piper quotes Jonathan Edwards quite a bit in this section and adds in some of his own analysis:

Is God the author of sin?

Edwards answers, "If by 'the author of sin,' be meant the sinner, the agent, or the actor of sin, or the doer of a wicked thing. . .it would be a reproach and blasphemy, to suppose God to be the author of sin." But he argues, willing that sin exist in the world is not the same as sinning. God does not commit sin in willing that there be sin. God has established a world in which sin will indeed necessarily come to pass by God's permission, but not by His "positive agency."

God is, Edwards says, "the permitter. . .of sin; and at the same time, a disposer of the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy and most excellent ends and purposes, that sin, if it be permitted. . .will most certainly and infallibly follow."

He uses the analogy of the way the sun brings about light and warmth by its essential nature, but brings about dark and cold by dropping below the horizon. "If the sun were the proper cause of cold and darkness," he says, "it would be the fountain of these things, as it is the fountain of light and heat: and then something might be argued from the nature of cold and darkness, to a likeness in the nature in the sun." In other words, "sin is not the fruit of any positive agency or influence of the most High, but on the contrary, arises from the withholding of his action and energy, and under certain circumstances, necessarily follows on the want of his influence.

I have no disagreement with the way Edwards presents sin here and how sin relates to God's "positive agency." It is the idea that God has "positive agency" in the real moral evil of this world that causes me to have serious doubts about what I have understood to be the Calvinist position. Piper frequently reminds us in Desiring God that we should have a God-centered and not a man-centered view of the universe. With this I completely agree but I think part of having this God-centered view is not embracing a theology which in any way infringes upon an important attribute of God, His goodness. And I realize that as sinful humans we have a deficient understanding of what real goodness is but at the same time when we call God "good" that idea of "goodness" must have a strong relation to what we would normally think of as "goodness" or else it is completely meaningless to say that God is good. I know that many of the things that might seem evil to us in this world are really a blessing or a judgment from God but at the same time I don't believe that there is anything in Scripture which would ever cause me to believe that God has any "positive agency" in the horrendous moral evils committed by free creatures in the universe.

I look forward to continuing on in Desiring God, a book which one of my housemates called the most influential book in his life, second only to the Bible. I also expect more theological conversations with my classmates and more posts like this one as a result of my reading.

Expelled

I had heard about Ben Stein's film Expelled months ago and at the time it didn't excite me all that much. The evolution/creation debate is one I like to stay away from as I think there are often many questionable assumptions on both sides and both sides tend to be so dismissive of the other. I also think it's something people get too heated about and something that can turn into too big of a distraction for Christians. I actually debated with a guy once who was convinced that when we're trying to preach the Gospel to an unbeliever the first thing we must do is to convince them that Young Earth Creationism is true. Being far from a Young Earth Creationist myself I was unconvinced, and I argued that the first thing we need to do in preaching the Gospel is to make people aware of their sin and guilt before God so that they can actually come to Christ for salvation from the hell that we all deserve. When it comes to origins, I'm happy to be in the company of Augustine and Origen in not believing in the necessity of taking the days of Creation to be seven literal 24-hour days. Those two great interpreters were writing long before anyone dreamed up materialistic evolution or theological liberalism so no one can accuse either of them of having their minds poisoned by either of those evil and false ideologies. So I was skeptical about Expelled but in the end I thought it was an excellent and important film for our time. Stein doesn't concentrate so much on the intricacies of the scientific side of the debate, although there is an excellent illustration of the complexity of the cell and a good analysis of the unlikelihood of some sort of life arising spontaneously from some kind of primordial goo. What I really appreciated about the film was the more philosophical side, especially the interviews with Richard Dawkins and various scientists and proponents of Intelligent Design. I think Stein was also correct to warn of the evils that can be brought on by a fundamentalist secularism. The last interview of the film was the most powerful to me where Richard Dawkins, the great and militant Atheist, comes off as a weak, angry and irrational little man who will embrace any theory, no matter how far-fetched as long as he can deny God any part in the creation and development of the universe. So I would recommend Expelled to people all along the spectrum of belief concerning the origin of the universe. I think in some ways Stein's documentary is a good counterbalance to the rising militant Atheism and Secularism that we see in Western societies.

Assurance

Lately I've been going on long runs with one of my classmates and during our jogs we like to talk theology. Last night we ran 10.5 miles, making a loop and going from the middle of Loma Linda to downtown Redlands. I've really enjoyed our conversations. We've talked about a wide variety of things, from the problems of liberalism creeping into the Church to the debate between Arminians and Calvinists. My running buddy, by the way, is a hardcore Calvinist. But yesterday one thing that came up was assurance of salvation. We talked about how we had both struggled with it at times and I admitted that on bad days a frequent prayer of mine is still, "Lord, save me." I don't think that there is anything wrong with that prayer depending on what assumptions are going into it. But assurance is something I've thought a lot about and what I said was that what assures me the most of my salvation, aside from the plain testimony of Scripture, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness," is the experience of God calling me back to Himself even as I have tried to run away. When I look back on my life, both before and after I asked Christ to save me from my sins, I see such providence from God in people, in books and especially in some of the hardest things I've experienced that have caused me to cry out to Him. God has changed me and freed me from sins that once bound me but the more compelling evidence to me is that during those times when I was farthest from God in my thoughts and actions, I can look and see that He was actively reminding me of His existence and His goodness. 

Another thing we talked about though was the propensity of many Evangelical pastors only to try to give assurance of salvation, that is, the tendency to downplay any parishioner's fears that perhaps they are not in Christ. We both agreed that this is wrong. It isn't bad to wrestle with whether or not you are saved. Many who have gone forward at one time and prayed the "Sinner's Prayer" have perhaps not really given over their lives to Christ. Many have not realized the gravity of their own sin and what Jesus is actually saving them from. For these people it isn't a bad thing to wrestle with whether or not they are saved because by the grace of God and the action of the Holy Spirit they will be made aware of the true nature of their sin and the true nature of Christ's death on the cross. Even if they are already saved this can only have a good effect on their faith. Of course there are individual believers who struggle inordinately with the fear that they are not saved and these people most likely do need reassuring words from their pastor. But in the American Church I believe that the opposite is what is usually true, that too much assurance is given, not allowing people to work out their salvation, "with fear and trembling," and come to a deeper understanding of the cross or a saving faith in Jesus Christ for the first time.

(Theological) Liberalism = The Enemy Part V: Christ or anti-Christ?

We have come then to this fearsome place where the word 'Jesus' has become the enemy of the Person Jesus, and the enemy of what Jesus taught. We must fear this contentless banner of the word 'Jesus' not because because we do not love Jesus, but because we do love Him. We must fight this contentless banner, with its deep motivations, rooted into the memories of the race, which is being used for the purpose of sociological form and control. We must teach our spiritual children to do the same.

This accelerating trend makes me wonder whether, when Jesus said that towards the end-time there will be other Jesuses, He meant something like this. We must never forget that the great enemy who is coming is the anti-Christ. He is not the anti-non-Christ. He is anti-Christ. Increasingly over the last few years the word 'Jesus', separated from the content of the the Scriptures, has become the enemy of the Jesus of history, the Jesus who died and rose and who is coming again and who is the eternal Son of God. So let us take care. If evangelical Christians begin to slip into a dichotomy, to separate an encounter with Jesus from the content of the Scriptures (including the discussable and verifiable), we shall, without intending to, be throwing ourselves and the next generation into the millstream of the modern system. This system surrounds us as an almost monolithic consensus.

-Francis Schaeffer, Escape From Reason

Like a little boy on Christmas morning...

I arrived home after a long day of studying to find a package with my name on it at home. I knew right away that my new ESV Study Bible had arrived. I've been looking forward to getting this Bible for at least six months now and I thought the earliest I would get it would be tomorrow (the 15th) which was listed as the release date on the website. I felt like a little boy on Christmas morning as I tore apart the packaging and began to get to know my new best friend. My trusty NIV Study Bible, given to me by my grandparents who have since passed away, has been my companion for over a decade now and is seriously falling apart. My new ESV Study Bible will replace it and my venerable, marked-up NIV will take a place of respect high on my bookshelf. 

One of the things that made me so excited about this Bible are the theologians who worked on it and some of the pastors who recommended it. John Piper said, “The ESV is a dream come true for me. The rightful heir to a great line of historic translations, it provides the continuity and modern accuracy I longed for. Now the scope and theological faithfulness of the ESV Study Bible study notes is breathtaking. Oh how precious is the written Word of God.” And Mark Driscoll, "The ESV Study Bible is the most important resource that has been given to the emerging generation of Bible students and teachers. The ESV Study Bible is the best. Period.” I've cracked it open and have liked what I've seen so far. I'll look forward to another decade or two of meeting God through this Bible. Wayne Grudem of Phoenix Seminary was the general editor and the Anglican theologian, J.I. Packer was the theological editor.

Tradition Bound

Last night I was reading my Bible and I came to a passage where it seemed strange to me that the word "God" in my NIV was not capitalized. I have a wide selection of Bibles in my room and I happened to pull my John MacArthur Study Bible off the shelf. This John MacArthur Bible was given to me by a customer with whom I had become friends at a bookstore I worked at a few years ago. After I had looked up the passage in question, I decided to flip to 1st Corinthians 14 to see what MacArthur had to say about that. I had just read the 14th chapter of 1st Corinthians the night before and I was curious to see what MacArthur, a strong Cessationist, would do with the passage. I was disappointed by what I saw. In my opinion MacArthur had to seriously twist the clear meaning of Scripture to deny that there is a God-given form of tongues which is not any intelligible human language, and to argue that even tongues, as the ability to speak a real language unknown to the speaker, had ceased. His arguments were weak and they involved assuming that Paul was speaking "sarcastically" over a good portion of the passage and that the singular "tongue" had a different meaning from the plural "tongues." I'm always very skeptical when I hear someone give an interpretation of Scripture where the writer is interpreted to be speaking in a joking or sarcastic manner. I think it is often a way of just avoiding whatever truth is being expressed there. 

But on a deeper level, seeing MacArthur's commentary on 1st Corinthians showed me that MacArthur is just as tradition bound as any other Christian. His tradition is American Fundamentalism and in many ways I respect his tradition. I am thankful for the stress that the Fundamentalists place on the authority of Scripture, and the need for repentance and faith in Christ for salvation. I like the fact that Fundamentalists are about as far as you can get from post-modernism and relativism. But Fundamentalism is still a tradition that must twist Scripture here and there to hold on to some of its assumptions, especially its cessationist assumption. 

The fact is that all Christians are in some way "tradition bound." I've always said that if a person could show me any place where the Tradition I am a part of, Anglicanism, conflicts with Scripture in any way, that I will leave that belief or practice behind. And I think that is the spirit of the English Reformation and the attitude all Christians should have. That where the Tradition conflicts with Scripture we will remove that aspect from our belief and practice. But where there is no conflict, where Scripture is silent, we will allow freedom. Personally, I am thankful for the kind of Tradition that doesn't conflict with Scripture. I believe that much of this Tradition, like the liturgy, is a gift from the Holy Spirit to the Church. If I am going to have any Tradition I want it to be the Ancient Tradition, accepted by all Christians before the division between East and West and confirmed as good and true by centuries of Christians.

The Wonderful Exchange

I live in a house with five other med students, all of whom are Christians, and lately the topic of the Eucharist has come up in our conversations. My housemates strongly take the typically Protestant "Symbolic" view while I've tried to argue for what would probably be described as a more Lutheran view, the Presence of Christ being spiritually, "with the bread, in the bread, and under the bread." So last night to take a break from studying I cracked open John Calvin's Institutes to look at his view on the Eucharist once again. It's not that I haven't looked at it before. When I was at Asbury Seminary I wrote a paper on it but Calvin's view was confusing enough for me that I felt the need to refresh my memory. This post really isn't about the Eucharist though because I simply wanted to post a wonderful sentence from Calvin that I came across while I was reviewing his theology of the Sacrament. So here it is:

This is the wonderful exchange which, out of his measureless benevolence, he has made with us; that, becoming Son of man with us, he has made us sons of God with him; that, by his descent to earth, he has prepared an ascent to heaven for us; that, by taking on our mortality, he has conferred his immortality upon us; that, accepting our weakness, he has strengthened us by his power; that, receiving our poverty unto himself, he has transferred his wealth to us; that, taking the weight of our iniquity upon himself (which oppressed us), he has clothed us with his righteousness.

- John Calvin, Institutes 4.17.2

What Real Anglicans Believe About Scripture

If there were any word of God beside the Scripture, we could never be certain of God's Word; and if we be uncertain of God's Word, the devil might bring in among us a new word, a new doctrine, a new faith, a new church, a new god, yea himself to be a god. If the Church and the Christian faith did not stay itself upon the Word of God certain, as upon a sure and strong foundation, no man could know whether he had a right faith, and whether he were in the true Church of Christ, or a synagogue of Satan.

- Thomas Cranmer, leader of the English Reformation

H/T Northern Plains Anglicans

Pentecost

But Oh, this power could not be bought. All the money in the world could not have purchased it, but to those who humble themselves in lowliness and in sincerity before the Lord shall the Spirit be given freely without money and without price. Oh, tell me, Peter and Paul, tell me John and James, and all you who received this mighty incoming of the Holy Ghost with its attendant power and glory, may we, in this 20th century, receive this like precious gift, or did the Holy Spirit empty Himself of all His power in the apostolic days? Did you consume all of these supernatural wondrous blessings, or did you leave enough to spare for us today?

"Yes, indeed," they answer in unison. "Heaven is not bankrupt. Heaven's storehouse still is full. The Holy Spirit has never lost his power, the promise is unto them that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. Did not our Lord say: 'When He is come, He shall abide with you forever'? Doubt no longer, but with open heart ask ye of the Lord rain in the time of the latter rain. Remember these words of Joel the prophet: 'It shall come to pass in the last days,' saith God, 'I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh.' Remember, too, that when the high priest went in the Holy of Holies the bells rang, and the high priest came out the bells rang again. When Jesus ascended up on high the bells rang and the people spoke with tongues and magnified God. Now this same Jesus, our high priest, is coming forth again for his waiting church, and on earth the bells are ringing, the latter rain is falling, and again those who have received the old-time power speak with other tongues."

- Aimee Semple McPherson 

Blessed Are Those Who Mourn

I was reading Romans the other day, through a passage I have read many times, and a short instruction from the Apostle Paul jumped out at me. This instruction was, “mourn with those who mourn. (Romans 12:15b)” I guess part of the reason it jumped out at me was because of a recent conversation I had with a friend. This friend has been dealing with some hard times lately and he’s been grappling with depression. He is also a friend who helped get me through a battle with depression a few years ago. We both realized that part of what we appreciated about each other’s friendship was the fact that neither of us just tried to solve the other’s problem. Instead we actually “mourned with those who mourn.”

It’s not that it’s never right to try to solve someone’s problems. But the reality is that often there is no easy solution to the problems and struggles a person faces. Maybe a person doesn't even have a good reason to "mourn" yet they seem unable to find joy in life. I think that there is a common assumption in our Western, modern culture which is that there is a solution to every problem if only we are intelligent enough, or perhaps from the Christian point of view, only if we know our Bible well enough or if we’re close enough to God. If this is your point of view, then a person who mourns and who cannot be easily consoled will only seem like a problem to you. Perhaps you will get frustrated with the person and avoid being around them because their mourning depresses you. But this is not obedience to the words of the Holy Spirit written down by the Apostle Paul. In Ecclesiastes, we see it affirmed that there can be a season for mourning. If we are to allow for “seasons” of mourning instead of thinking we can quickly solve every problem, and if we are seeking to love those who mourn, I think we must be obedient to the words of Paul and mourn with those who mourn.

The Language of God

Francis Collins’ The Language of God has been high on my list of books to read since I heard of its publication in 2006. Collins is the head of the Human Genome Project, a distinguished scientist and an Evangelical Christian. While I was in Kentucky, visiting my friend David Goran and his wife in Versailles, Dave gave me his copy of the book. Like me, David got his undergraduate degree in a biology-related field so it is not surprising that he also appreciated the book. I read the book in a couple of sittings between Kentucky and Washington. The Language of God is Collins’ testimony of his coming to faith in Christ but it is also a treatise on faith and science and how they should relate. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and whole-heartedly agree with Collins’ view that faith and science both have the same goal of truth and the two therefore should not be in conflict. Not only did I appreciate the story of Collins’ spiritual journey but I was fascinated by the more scientific side of the book. I really enjoyed the story of the Human Genome Project and Collins’ writing on the origin of the universe and on the theory of evolution. Collins’ view of theistic evolution will be controversial to many Bible-believing Christians, but he does an impressive job of presenting his view and arguing for its compatibility with respect for the authority of Scripture. As a Bible-believing Christian and a scientist I also have struggled with how I should understand the evidence and the overwhelming consensus of biologists with respect to the origin of species. I can’t say that I have arrived at a totally satisfying synthesis yet but I appreciate the conclusion that Collins came to and I am certainly leaning in that direction with respect to my own views. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who has struggled with reconciling the truth revealed in Scripture with the truth that God has allowed us to discover using our scientific abilities.

A White Easter

He is Risen! For the first half of my spring break from Loma Linda I've returned to my home-away-from-home in Wilmore, Kentucky where I spent two years at Asbury Theological Seminary. I spent a blessed Easter with old friends at my old church, St. Patrick's Anglican. It was a wonderful service with a baptism the way a baptism should be. I especially enjoyed the preaching from Father Peter Matthews. It was a short message but it was one that confronted the reality of death with the stronger reality of the Resurrection. The day became even more interesting when last night it began snowing hard here in the Bluegrass of Kentucky. It only snowed for a while and there wasn't much more than a trace of accumulation but it was the first "white Easter" I had ever seen.

In his message Fr. Matthews talked about the unnaturalness of death. He talked about how the very center of our beings cry out against this reality we all must face. Fr. Matthews didn't preach that we should somehow embrace death as a natural part of life. He said that there is a reason why death seems so wrong to us. That is, we were not made for death but for life. In his message he quoted this poem from Dylan Thomas:

Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Which Cross do you believe in?

The old cross slew men; the new cross entertains them. The old cross condemned; the new cross amuses. The old cross destroyed confidence in the flesh; the new cross encourages it.
–A. W. Tozer
HT - T19

All Glory, Laud and Honor

Happy Palm Sunday! As I got ready for church today and enjoyed the processional and liturgy I was reminded of Palm Sundays I celebrated as a child at our little Methodist church in Battle Ground, Washington. For some reason Palm Sunday was always one of my favorite days as a child. I remember Palm Sunday commonly being one of the first sunny or slightly warm days in the cold, rainy western-Washington spring. Perhaps God was showing his grace to all of the many church members who would be parading around their sanctuaries, waving palm branches that day. Another cherished memory of Palm Sunday involves the spear-like palm fronds that our church would always use. I remember regularly getting into trouble with my brothers as we turned our palm fronds into weapons to whip one another with as the good kids folded their palms into nice little crosses. I think another thing a I really liked about the day was its uniqueness. There is something unique about a bunch of reserved business-like people walking around a church waving palm branches.

Undoubtedly as a child, I liked the festive nature of the Palm Sunday service. When I got older I began to appreciate the irony of the day, that this celebration of Jesus with cries of "Hosanna" would shortly turn into the Passion of Christ, with cries of "Crucify Him!" Today in our service, as part of the liturgy, we joined in with the crowd, saying, "Crucify Him!" When we say this we express an important truth. That we are just as guilty as those who crucified our Lord. That it was not the nails that held Christ to the cross but our own sin.

I still love Palm Sunday. I love that it is a festival of Christ's coming to the city. I still long to see Christ welcomed with cries of Hosanna and the laying down of palm branches. But it is not only a day of festivity but also a day of the cross. Ultimately there can be no festivity, no real joy, without the cross.

Amen

Couldn't have said it better myself...

“From a child I was taught to love and reverence the Scripture, the oracles of God; and, next to these, to esteem the primitive Fathers, the writers of the first three centuries. Next after the primitive Church, I esteem our own, the Church of England."

-John Wesley
From the Works of John Wesley, ed. Thomas Jackson, Vol. XIII, p. 234

Humility

"There is generally upon my heart such a sense of my unworthiness that sometimes I dare hardly open my mouth before a child of God; and think it an unspeakable honor to stand before one who has recovered something of the image of God, or sincerely seeks after it. Is it possible that such a sinful worm as I should have the privilege to converse with one whose soul is besprinkled with the blood of my Lord? The thought amazes, confounds me; and fills my eyes with tears of humble joy."

- John Fletcher - Anglican Priest, Associate of John Wesley and early Methodist leader

(Theological) Liberalism = The Enemy: Part IV

The following is a quote from the Russian Orthodox Bishop of Vienna and Austria, Hilarion Alfeyev. I found the quote on Reformed Pastor's blog. According to Reformed Pastor, this was addressed to the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches in Geneva. I think it is one of the best statements I have seen on theological liberalism in a while.

I would like to draw your attention to the danger of liberal Christianity. The liberalization of moral standards, initiated by some Protestant and Anglican communities several decades ago and developing with ever-increasing speed, has now brought us to a situation where we can no longer preach one and the same code of moral conduct. We can no longer speak about Christian morality, because moral standards promoted by ‘traditional’ and ‘liberal’ Christians are markedly different, and the abyss between these two wings of contemporary Christianity is rapidly growing.

We are being told by some allegedly Christian leaders, who still bear the titles of Reverends and Most Reverends, that marriage between a woman and a man is no longer the only option for creating a Christian family, that there are other patterns, and that the church must be ‘inclusive’ enough to recognize alternative lifestyles and give them official and solemn blessing. We are being told that human life is no longer an unquestionable value, that it can be summarily aborted in the womb, or that one may have the right to interrupt it voluntarily, and that Christian ‘traditionalists’ should reconsider their standpoints in order to be in tune with modern developments. We are being told that abortion is acceptable, contraception is agreeable, and euthanasia is better still, and that the church must accommodate all these ‘values’ in the name of human rights.

What, then, is left of Christianity? In the confusing and disoriented world in which we live, where is the prophetic voice of Christians? What can we offer, or can we offer anything at all to the secular world, apart from what the secular world will offer to itself as a value system on which society should be built? Do we have our own value system which we should preach, or should we simply applaud every novelty in public morality which becomes fashionable in the secular society?

I would also like to draw your attention to the danger of a ‘politically correct’ Christianity, of a Christianity which not only so easily and readily surrenders itself to secular moral standards, but also participates in promoting value systems alien to Christian tradition.

We are facing a paradoxical situation. British secular politicians who share Christian convictions are concerned about the rising Christianophobia in the UK and initiate a debate on this issue in Parliament, calling for recognition of the country’s Christian identity. At the same time the primate of the Church of England calls for ‘a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law.’

I am sure I will be told that Christianity must become more tolerant and all-inclusive, that we Christians should no longer insist on our religion as being the only true faith, that we should learn how to adopt other value systems and standards. My question, however, is: when are we going to stop making Christianity politically correct and all-inclusive; why do we insist on accommodating every possible alternative to the centuries-old Christian tradition? Where is the limit, or is there no limit at all?

Many Christians worldwide look to Christian leaders in the hope that they will defend Christianity against the challenges that it faces. It is not our task to defend Sharia law, or to commend alternative lifestyles or to promote secular values. Our holy mission is to preach what Christ preached, to teach what the apostles taught and to propagate what the holy Fathers propagated. It is this witness which people are expecting of us.

I am convinced that liberal Christianity will not survive for a long time. A politically correct Christianity will die. We see already how liberal Christianity is falling apart and how the introduction of new moral norms leads to division, discord and confusion in some Christian communities. This process will continue, while traditional Christians, I believe, will consolidate their forces in order to protect the faith and moral teaching which the Lord gave, the Apostles preached and the Fathers preserved.

Thank you Bishop Alfeyev!

God's Power in the Darkness

I just finished reading an excellent book last night. It is one that had been recommended to me many times and perhaps because of the many recommendations I had held off on reading it until now. But this book overwhelmed me again and again by its testimonies of God's love and power, much like The Cross and the Switchblade has done as I've read and re-read that book. The book is The Hiding Place by Corrie Ten Boom. If you've read my blog for very long, you know that one of the philosophical issues I'm most interested in is the problem of theodicy, that is, justifying a good and all-powerful God in a world where so many horrible evils occur. I feel like this book adds something to the whole theodicy conversation. It is clear that God was at work even in the midst of the worst evil of the last century. God did not step in and limit the freedom of the Nazis as they committed their heinous crimes but God did use those who would be obedient even to the point of death to save some of His chosen people, the Jews, and to bring comfort and salvation to some of those in concentration camps who were about to go to the gas chambers. I was struck by the centrality of Scripture for the ten Boom family, how the Bible was the authority when it came to life and belief. I was also struck by a statement by Caspar, Corrie's father when, as a little girl, she asked him what "sexual sin" was. Caspar said something like, that is a knowledge that is too dark for you to be burdened with. Later that same line of thought is applied by Corrie to the problem of evil itself. I think that is one of the hardest things for us in this scientific age to accept that in this life we may not get pat and satisfying answers to our deepest, darkest questions. Even in the midst of this ambiguity we must find the ability to live a life of trust in God. If we can't learn to live with the things that don't make sense, I think we can only go down the road of despair or of dishonesty where we try to convince ourselves that the easy answers really satisfy us. When it comes to things like horrible diseases or the holocaust, no answer really satisfies me. But we must continue on, seeking to bring God's light, love and healing into the dark places and believing that these "present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us."

The Joy of Thanksgiving

Okay, I know, I know, - it's February and Thanksgiving is in November but something hit me today as I walked out of my anatomy and histology midterms. The exams went well and as I walked to my car I quietly sang a hymn of thanks and praise to God. And I realized that it is a great blessing to have Someone to thank. If I were an Atheist I guess I could find some happiness in feeling lucky or something but it seems like something would be truly missing not to be able to praise God for the blessings of this life. I had read someone else saying the same thing before, that they felt sorry for Atheists because they couldn't be thankful to God. For some reason when I first read that it didn't make much of an impact on me but today it just hit me for some reason.

Of course, the hard part is being thankful even when things don't go well. Not being a Calvinist, I think that things happen in reality that are truly contrary to the will of God. I don't think that God willed horrendous evils like the holocaust to take place. So I think 'giving thanks' for the holocaust would be wrong. But I think that as Christians we should always be able to give thanks. When the very reality of our existence is that we are sinners saved and redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb, I don't see how we can be anything but thankful in all situations.

As though they were our own words...

In some of my rare moments of free time I have been reading St. Athanasius’ Letter to Marcellinus. The letter concerns mainly the Psalms, one of my favorite parts of Scripture, and I think what I read the other day in this text is one of the best and truest statements about the Psalms I have ever seen:

There is also this astonishing thing in the Psalms. In other books, those who read what the holy ones say, and what they might say concerning certain people, are relating the things that were written about those earlier people. And likewise, those who listen consider themselves to be other than those about whom the passage speaks, so that they only come to the imitation of the deeds that are told to the extent that they marvel at them and desire to emulate them. By contrast, however, he who takes up this book – the Psalter – goes through the prophecies about the Savior, as is customary in the other Scriptures, with admiration and adoration, but the other psalms he recognizes as being his own words. And the one who hears is deeply moved, as though he himself were speaking, and is affected by the words of the songs, as if they were his own songs. And for the sake of clarity of expression, do not hesitate, as the Apostle says, to repeat the very things they say…

…remarkably, after the prophecies about the Savior and the nations, he who recites the Psalms is uttering the rest as his own words, and each sings them as if they were written concerning him, and he accepts them and recites them not as if another were speaking, nor as if speaking about someone else. But he handles them as if he is speaking them from himself. For not as in the case of the sayings of the patriarchs and Moses and the other Prophets will he be cautious of these things, but he who chants these will be especially confident in speaking what is written as if his own and about him. For the Psalms comprehend the one who observes the commandment as well as the one who transgresses, and the action of each. And it is necessary for everyone to be constrained by these, and either as a keeper of the law or as its transgressor, to speak the words that have been written about each.

I remember how years ago when I began praying the Psalms how I was often amazed by the fact that the Psalm put into words what I needed to say to God so much better than anything I could come up with. What a wonderful thing it is that in the middle of God’s Word we have this prayer-book for His people through which we can praise our Maker and receive much blessing from him.