Presumption, my dear sir; pure presumption

It's one of the interesting (and annoying) things about scientists these days--well, to be precise, about the high-profile ones who write heavily-publicized books attacking Christianity--that they refuse to hear of anyone without a Ph.D. in science writing anything at all bearing in any way on science, and treat anyone who tries with utter contempt, but don't hesitate to wade into the fields of the humanities, of which they know nothing at all, with the serene assurance that since they're scientists, they must be experts here, too. Watching the likes of Richard Dawkins and Steven Weinberg dress up as philosophers, theologians and historians would be hysterically funny were it not so embarrassingly cringe-inducing, at least for those who actually know something about practicing the disciplines of philosophy, theology and history; it's amateur hour to the nth power, rather as if someone stepped out of America's Funniest Home Videos and into the finals of American Idol. Watching the noted philosopher Alvin Plantinga dismantle Dawkins' book The God Delusion, however, is a very different experience, one in which Dawkins' work plays the role of carrot to Plantinga's Cuisinart; for his part, Weinberg's smug, self-satisfied theory of historical development doesn't fare much better against Barton Swaim.

I'll concede, it would be unreasonable to expect these folks to stop trying to refute Christianity; but I would appreciate it if they would at least set aside their disciplinary arrogance and treat the humanities with the same academic respect they demand for the sciences.

Edit: as noted in the comments, including Daniel Dennett with Dawkins and Weinberg was inappropriate in more than one respect; he has therefore been removed. Mea culpa; mea maxima culpa. That said, I would still appreciate it if he would "treat the humanities with the same academic respect [he] demands for the sciences," even if he's formally a philosopher himself, as he treats even his own ostensible discipline with public disdain.

Song for St. Patrick's Day

According to Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, in New York City, Lenten disciplines are suspended by special dispensation on St. Patrick's Day; so I thought I'd put a song up in honor of that great (and much-misappreciated) saint. He probably didn't write the caim (encircling prayer) that's often called "St. Patrick's Breastplate," but I don't know that it matters much--I expect he would have approved. This is the Kuno Meyer translation, which has its own title.

The Deer's Cry

I arise today
Through a mighty strength, the invocation of the Trinity,
Through belief in the Threeness,
Through confession of the Oneness
Of the Creator of Creation.

I arise today
Through the strength of Christ's birth with His baptism,
Through the strength of His crucifixion with His burial,
Through the strength of His resurrection with His ascension,
Through the strength of His descent for the judgment of Doom.

I arise today
Through the strength of the love of the Cherubim,
In the obedience of angels,
In the service of archangels,
In the hope of the resurrection to meet with reward,
In the prayers of patriarchs,
In prediction of prophets,
In preaching of apostles,
In faith of confessors,
In innocence of holy virgins,
In deeds of righteous men.

I arise today
Through the strength of heaven:
Light of sun,
Radiance of moon,
Splendor of fire,
Speed of lightning,
Swiftness of wind,
Depth of sea,
Stability of earth,
Firmness of rock.

I arise today
Through God's strength to pilot me:
God's might to uphold me,
God's wisdom to guide me,
God's eye to look before me,
God's ear to hear me,
God's word to speak to me,
God's hand to guard me,
God's way to lie before me,
God's shield to protect me,
God's host to save me
From snares of devils,
From temptations of vices,
From everyone who shall wish me ill,
Afar and anear,
Alone and in a multitude.

I summon today all these powers between me and those evils,
Against every cruel merciless power that may oppose my body and soul,
Against incantations of false prophets,
Against black laws of pagandom,
Against false laws of heretics,
Against craft of idolatry,
Against spells of wizards,
Against every knowledge that corrupts body and soul.

Christ to shield me today
Against poisoning, against burning,
Against drowning, against wounding
So there come to me abundance of reward.
Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me,
Christ in me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me,
Christ on my right, Christ on my left,
Christ when I lie down, Christ when I sit down, Christ when I arise,
Christ in the heart of everyone who thinks of me,
Christ in the mouth of everyone who speaks of me,
Christ in the eye of everyone who sees me,
Christ in every ear that hears me.

I arise today
Through a mighty strength, the invocation of the Trinity,
Through belief in the Threeness,
Through confession of the Oneness
Of the Creator of Creation.

Lenten Song of the Week

Back to the hymns this week, and specifically to one of the greatest ever written, by one of the greatest hymnwriters ever. You might not know that Watts wrote five verses to this song, not four; the fourth verse was dropped during the period of the Wesleyan revival, and pretty much stayed buried.

When I Survey the Wondrous Cross

When I survey the wondrous cross
On which the Prince of Glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.

Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast,
Save in the cross of Christ, my God;
All the vain things that charm me most—
I sacrifice them to his blood.

See, from his head, his hands, his feet,
Sorrow and love flow mingled down;
Did e'er such love and sorrow meet,
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?

His dying crimson, like a robe,
Spreads o'er his body on the tree;
Then I am dead to all the globe,
And all the globe is dead to me.

Were the whole realm of nature mine,
That were an offering far too small;
Love so amazing, so divine,
Demands my soul, my life, my all.

Words: Isaac Watts
Music based on a Gregorian chant, standard arr. Lowell Mason
HAMBURG, LM

Conversation on Calvinism

The question has come in, what does it mean to be Reformed? . . . OK, so it means to be Calvinist, but then, what's that? So, to kick things off and provide a logical place for discussion, here's a brief summary, cribbed straight from our membership class at church.

Central themes of Reformed doctrine

Total depravity (Romans 3:9-11, 8:7-8)

• not “total corruption”—not that we’re as bad as we could possibly be, incapable of any good at all
• but that there is nothing we do which is untainted by sin—our motives and desires are never pure, always mixed
• also called “total inability”—in and of ourselves, we are not able to turn away from sin and toward God, because we are born in slavery to sin; left to our own devices, we would be without hope

Irresistible grace (John 6:43-44, Romans 9:14-18, Ephesians 2:1-10)

• therefore it is only by God’s grace that we are saved, through his gift of faith to us
• his grace breaks the shackles of sin on our lives
• the Spirit can make himself irresistible—if he so chooses, we cannot resist his work any more than the prisoner can resist the key that unlocks his chains

Unconditional election (Romans 9:14-18, Ephesians 1:3-6, 2:1-10)

• therefore our salvation cannot depend on our own effort and initiative, because those are not and cannot be sufficient
• God chooses whom he will save
• we do not know and will never know on what basis; all we know is that it is his free gift
  ––his choice and his love have no conditions and no strings attached

Limited atonement (Mark 10:45, John 10:14-15, Romans 8:31-32, Ephesians 5:25-27)

• the death of Christ on the cross was immediately effective to save all those whom God chose (the elect)
• it was sufficient to save all, but only efficient to save the elect
• not made available for people to choose or not, but powerful in and of itself

Perseverance of the saints (Romans 8, Philippians 1:6, 1 John 2:1-6, Jude 24-25)

• therefore, since our salvation is God’s work in our lives, and since it is a work of transformation, it is not something we can undo
• we have been justified (our relationship with God has been restored—the penalty for our sin has been paid and his wrath at our sin has been satisfied), and we are being sanctified (made holy—we are being changed into the people God wants us to be, so that we live lives that are in accordance with his will)
• this means we are in process; we are saints, because we are in right relationship with God, but we are also sinners, because we’re still being changed
  ––Lutheran language: simul iustus et peccator, “at once justified and a sinner”
• the fact that we still sin doesn’t mean that we have fallen away from God, nor does it mean that we risk losing our salvation--it just means we aren’t perfected yet; our sin cannot be so big or awful that it undoes what God did

Note: the standard acronym for these five points (in slightly different order) is TULIP. It's an effective mnemonic, especially since this particular summary of Calvinist doctrine was first developed in the Netherlands.

Overarching theme: the sovereignty (lordship) of God

• it’s all about what God does
• this doesn’t mean it’s not about what we do; but it does mean that what we do is a response to what he has done, is doing and will do
• we don’t carry the responsibility on our shoulders, whether for our own salvation or anything else—he does

Lenten Song of the Week

I like Michael Card's explanation of how this song came to be (from his book Immanuel): "I had been playing with these questions for quite some time, trying to make them sound lyrical, which is to say, trying to make them sound pretty. But they aren't pretty questions.

"The three questions which make up the verses of the song were all finished. I had planned to write one chorus, which would answer all three. That proved to be as impossible as the questions themselves. So I did the only thing a committed seeker of the Truth could do: I gave up and put them away in a drawer!

"Weeks later I was awakened in the night with the three separate choruses going through my mind, something that had never happened before--and has never happened since. To my trilogy of vain, cynical questions the Lord gave three unexpected answers . . .

"Each time I listen to the song, I hear two separate voices. My own pessimistic voice, asking the meaningless 'why' questions, and another gentler Voice, speaking the wonderful answers."

Why

Why did it have to be a friend who chose to betray the Lord?
And why did he use a kiss to show them? That's not what a kiss is for.

Only a friend can betray a friend; a stranger has nothing to gain.
And only a friend comes close enough to ever cause so much pain.

And why did there have to be a thorny crown pressed upon his head?
It should have been a royal one made of jewels and gold instead.

It had to be a crown of thorns because in this life that we live,
For all who would seek to love, a thorn is all the world has to give.

And why did it have to be a heavy cross he was made to bear?
And why did they nail his feet and hands? His love would have held him there.

It was a cross, for on a cross a thief was supposed to pay,
And Jesus had come into the world to steal every heart away.
Yes, Jesus had come into the world to steal every heart away.

Words and music: Michael Card
© 1984 Whole Armour Publishing
From the album Known By the Scars, by Michael Card

Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, RIP

The world of scholarship, and particularly of historical scholarship, lost one of its great figures recently, as did the American church; as the Salvation Army would put it, on January 2, 2007, Dr. Elizabeth Fox-Genovese was promoted to glory. I envy her eulogists, who knew her as a friend; I only knew her through her writings, which were wide-ranging and often brilliant, but by all accounts she was as remarkable a human being as she was a scholar. Her account of her conversion to Catholicism (she had been a convinced Marxist) is a marvelous piece; while she will probably be remembered best for her scholarly works (such as the magnum opus she co-wrote with her husband and fellow historian, Dr. Eugene Genovese, on the psychology and ideology of Southern American slaveholders, The Mind of the Master Class), I'm probably not the only one who will remember her conversion story with the most gratitude. A great scholar and a great Christian, she is and will be greatly missed.

Lenten Song of the Week

This isn't the most lyrically deep or complex hymn, to be sure, but in its simplicity it's an excellent one for reflection and prayer--rather like many of the Psalms in that respect. I have a deep fondness for Appalachian folk hymnody, both texts and music, and this is one of my favorites. If you're not familiar with the tune, the link is below.

What Wondrous Love Is This

What wondrous love is this, O my soul, O my soul,
What wondrous love is this, O my soul!
What wondrous love is this that caused the Lord of bliss
To bear the dreadful curse for my soul, for my soul,
To bear the dreadful curse for my soul!

When I was sinking down, sinking down, sinking down,
When I was sinking down, sinking down;
When I was sinking down beneath God's righteous frown,
Christ laid aside his crown for my soul, for my soul,
Christ laid aside his crown for my soul!

To God and to the Lamb I will sing, I will sing,
To God and to the Lamb I will sing!
To God and to the Lamb, who is the great "I AM,"
While millions join the theme, I will sing, I will sing,
While millions join the theme, I will sing!

And when from death I'm free, I'll sing on, I'll sing on,
And when from death I'm free, I'll sing on!
And when from death I'm free, I'll sing and joyful be,
And through eternity I'll sing on, I'll sing on,
And through eternity I'll sing on!

Words: Appalachian folk hymn
Music: Southern Harmony, 1835
WONDROUS LOVE, 12.9.12.12.9

Simply Wright

One of my frustrations as a pastor is that with everything else I need to do, I can't do the reading I wish I could do. As Ecclesiastes says, "Of the making of many books there is no end," and while many that come out each year are of great value, I have neither the time nor the energy to read as many as I'd like to read--or indeed, arguably, as many as I need to read.

It's not a problem unique to me, of course; which is why, I think, God invented journals and review essays. There are a number of periodicals to which I subscribe, and a handful in particular which I find critically important in keeping up with things and highlighting the books I need to make time to read. The most important are First Things and Books & Culture, which you'll find linked over on the left side of the page; not far below them is Touchstone, which describes itself as "a Christian journal, conservative in doctrine and eclectic in content, with editors and readers from each of the three great divisions of Christendom — Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox . . . [designed to] provide a place where Christians of various backgrounds can speak with one another on the basis of shared belief in the fundamental doctrines of the faith as revealed in Holy Scripture and summarized in the ancient creeds of the Church."

Personally, I find Touchstone a bit more erratic than First Things (and also shorter), but the editors find (or write) and publish some wonderful pieces. In the latest issue, perhaps the best is a review essay on C. S. Lewis' Mere Christianity by the Anglican Bishop of Durham, England, the incomparable N. T. Wright. Bishop Wright might just be the perfect person to do this, since like Lewis he's an Englishman, an Anglican, a scholar (though his field is New Testament rather than Renaissance literature) and a writer who recently wrote a small work of popular apologetics, Simply Christian, which can be profitably compared with Lewis' book. (I know this because it's been done.) What's more, Bishop Wright also happens to be extremely good at what he does, and a man of real grace and humility. (I know that from people I know who are friends of his.)

As one would expect, then, he offers an excellent and quite thorough appraisal of Lewis' work, pointing out its great strengths and not sparing its weaknesses. There's no need to recapitulate his points here--go read the article (and give Touchstone some page hits); but I do want to call attention to Bishop Wright's closing paragraphs:

[Despite the book's flaws,] the bee flies, and gets the honey. Credit where credit is due. Lewis himself would have been the first to say that of course his book was neither perfect nor complete, and that what mattered was that, if it brought people into the company, and under the influence (or “infection”) of Jesus Christ, Jesus himself would happily take over—indeed, that Jesus had been operating through the process all along, albeit through the imperfect medium of the apologist.

And, as another imperfect apologist, I salute a great master, and can only hope that in sixty years’ time children yet unborn will say of me that, despite all my obvious and embarrassing failings, I too was used, in however small a way, to bring people under the influence and power, and to the love and kingdom, of the same Jesus Christ.