Theological loving

Some of you may remember this little incident from last month. I received a fair bit of feed back, both on and off the blog. I've done some thinking, read a bit, thought and talked about it, felt like crying, laughed with my friend at Moore when he repeated the story of being told he goes to an emerging church by a college lecturer, and even reached an epiphany on a train trip with Alison (which I'm starting to forget).

What I've been thinking through is that: a. Jesus Christ is Lord, and everything that statement means is true; b. my basis for identity is in Christ; c. as is everyone else who confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord and believes God raised him from the dead (Romans 10); d. the basis for our relationships within the church (and indeed to the world) is grace - welcome one another just as Christ welcomed you. Given all this one should: i. make sure you tongue is always seasoned with salt (Matt. 5, Col. 4); ii beware of reducing people in "us" and "them"; iii avoid using labels. They can scar people for life, and are a cheap tactic for winning arguments; and iv be wise and make sure you know what the current labels are. It is useful to know what the present "doggiest" theology is when you deny it, or on the odd occasion, affirm it.

Anyway, here is a small quote from Gunton I found yesterday (when speaking on the method of historical and systematic theology):

"Our doctrinal past is best understood if its representatives are taken seriously as living voices with whom we enter into theological conversation. We shall sometimes agree and sometimes disagree with what they say, and that is what it means to take them seriously. In his Church Dogmatics Karl Barth is able to treat even opponents of the Christian faith as theological partners in conversation. Accordingly it can be argued that historical theology should be a theological discipline not because we have decided in advance what to find, but because we approach our predecessors as theologians who have something to teach us."

Colin Gunton, "Historical and systematic theology", The Cambridge Companion to Christian Theology, pp. 6-7. Words in red originally italic.

PS. I start a new job this coming Monday, working for CMS NSW in mission education.

10 points for the picture. Hint: Think Benelux.

Alvin Plantinga on the God Delusion

Alvin Plantinga, writing in Books and Culture, has this to say:

Now despite the fact that this book is mainly philosophy, Dawkins is not a philosopher (he's a biologist). Even taking this into account, however, much of the philosophy he purveys is at best jejune. You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is (grade inflation aside), many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a sophomore philosophy class. This, combined with the arrogant, smarter-than-thou tone of the book, can be annoying. I shall put irritation aside, however and do my best to take Dawkins' main argument seriously.

Anglicanism 7: What could have been

Diarmond MacCulloch dreams of the Church of England under Queen Jane Grey:

"What would the Church of England have looked like if, instead of Queen Mary's triumph, Queen Jane's quite reasonably hereditary claim to the throne had succeeded in establishing her regime? The Lady Mary would have had to have been effectively neutralized before Edward's death, and one fears that neutralizing before Edward's death, and one fears that her forr good would have involved the block, in a return to Henrician savagery. The Lady Elizabeth could have been married off to Lord Robert Dudley, a good catch for a royal bastard, and a good chance for them both of a happy love-match. Archbishop Cranmer, living his allotted three-score years and ten or beyond, could have produced the third version of his Prayer Book, in the light of friendly criticism from Continental reformers whom he respected, like Martyr, Bullinger and Calvin; he would have been succeeded as Archbishop by Nicholas Ridley or Robert Holgate, with energetic younger reformers like Edmund Grindal ready to make their mark and pick up good ideas from the best reformed churches of Europe. John Knox, mellowed by an increasingly successful career in the Church o Engkand, would have been appointed Bishop of Newcastle, benevolently taking no notice of the advanced congregations in his diocese who received congregation sitting; this was a practice in any case increasingly common throughout Jane's Church, despite Archbishop Cranmer's grumbles. The reform of canon law would have been achieved, the 1553 primer and catechism would have become the standard, the Forty-Two Article would have been unmodified by Elizabethan sacramentalist hesitations.
Out in the parishes, the meterical psalms in the style of Geneva would quickly have spread: these were the best secret weapon of the English Reformation making its public worship and private devotional practice genuinely popular throughout increasing areas of the kingdom. This congregational music would also have taken over in the cathedrals, now devoid of choirs or polyphony, and with their organs (where they survived) used mainly for entertaining for entertainmnet, in the Dutch fashion. The conservative nobility would have continued the sullen public compliance with religious change which they had shown under Edward VI, their private celebration of ceremonial worship tolerated ass eccentricity, like the Lady Elizabeth's patronage of choral music in her own chapel. The traditionalist higher clergy would have died off in senior Church offices and in the universities, with no possibility of like-minded replacement: since the universities produced no major haemorrahage of exiles in the 1560's, the Jesuits and other religious orders would have found it difficult to recruit potential clergy to train for their attempt to treat Jane's England as a mission field. England would have become the most powerful political player in the reformed camp, with Cranmer a cordial if geographically distant partner with John Calvin. There is a potent symbolism in the fact that it was Cranmer's son-in-law who translated Calvin's Institutes into English, and Cranmer's veteran printer who published it. With a Cranmer-Calvin axis, the profile of Reformed religion across the whole Continent would have been changed, and with the help and encouragement of Bishop Knox, the Reformation in Scotland might have followed a close path to that in the Reformed Church of England.
That is the history that never happened."

Anglicanism 6: Cranmer, or Laud, or...part ii

Cranmer and the "via media".

"Standing as he did in the developing Reformed tradition of Europe on the 1550's, Cranmer's conception of a 'middle way' or via media in religion was quite different from that of later Anglicanism. In the nineteenth century, when the word 'Anglicanism' first came into common use, John Henry Newman said of a middle way (before his departure for the Church of Rome) that 'a number of distinct notions are included in the notion of Protestantism; and as to all these all our Church has taken via media between it and Popery. Cranmer would violently have rejected such a notion: how: could one have a middle way between truth and Antichrist? The middle ground which he sought was the as Bucer's: an agreement between Winttenburg and Zurich which would provide a united vision of Christian doctrine against the counterfeit being refurbished at the Council of Trent. For him, Catholicism was to b found in the scattered church of the Reformation, and is was his aim to show forth their unity to prove their Catholicity."

Thomas Cranmer, Diarmaid MacCulloch, p. 617.

Anglicanism 5: Cranmer or Laud, or...part i

Well, having posted several quotes from the likes of Archbishop Williams and Bishop Ryle, and having re-read part of MacCulloch's work on Cranmer last night, I may have thought of a new way to look at the question of Anglican identity. It may just be that the answer lies, in part, in who we understand to be the true founders of "Anglicanism". From my own reflection, I think there are at least 3 possible sources for the legitimate Anglican identity.
Firstly, there is the 16th Century Anglicanism of Cranmer, Parker and Hooker. This is the Anglicanism of the Tudors, Henry VIII, Edward VI and Elizabeth I (not so much Mary I, because she had a tendency to burn them). This source is most likely to be termed "Classical Anglicanism", associated as it is with the Book of Common Prayer, the Ordinal and three orders, and the Articles of Religion. And it has been this source that has until recently influenced the direction of Anglicanism most.
Secondly, there is the Anglicanism of the early Stuart period - the Carolinian Church. This is where Archbishop Laud and his descendants in the High Church and Oxford Movements would feel most at home.
And thirdly, there is the Anglicanism influenced not so much by an English theologian or Lord of Cantur, but the Anglicanism imitating Calvin, and even Richard Baxter. Although not mutually exclusive form the first source, if not used well, this third source may ride rough shot of the first source.
There is potentially a fourth source in the various incarnations of liberal protestantism. And although this may claim to large (cashed up) sections of the Anglican Communion, I don't think it can hold a legitimate stake in Anglican identity.
Now all that is left to do is describe the three sources and try and determine which source is bona fide.

Anglicanism 4

To have a break from Rowan Williams, here is a warning to the "true church"
from JC Ryle.

"On this rock I will build my church, and the gates
of hell will not overcome it" (Matthew 16:18)

This is that Church to which belong the Lord's precious promises of
preservation, continuance, protection, and final glory.  "Whatsoever,"
says Hooker, "we read in Scripture, concerning the endless love and
saving mercy which God shows towards His Churches, the only proper
subject is this Church, which we properly term the mystical body of
Christ."  Small and despised as the true Church may be in this world, it
is precious and honorable in the sight of God.  The temple of Solomon in
all its glory was nothing, in comparison with that Church which is built
upon a rock.

Men and brethren, see that you hold sound doctrine on the subject of "the
Church."  A mistake here may lead to dangerous and soul-ruining errors.
The Church which is made up of true believers, is the Church for which
we, who are ministers, are specially ordained to preach.  The Church
which comprises all who repent and believe the Gospel, is the Church to
which we desire you to belong.  Our work is not done, and our hearts are
not satisfied, until you are made new creatures, and are members of the
one true Church.  Outside of this Church there can be no salvation."

I wonder how many of today's evangelicals would be uncomfortable with the last line and be tempted to change it to "Outside of this faith..."? mmm.

10 points if you can tell me how many people were bishop of Liverpool prior to Ryle.

Some pictures of my fingers one week, and ten stitches later.

These are the least gory pictures...

bring on the resurrection.

Anglicanism 3

Williams once again on Anglican Identity:

"The different components in our heritage can, up to a point, flourish in isolation from each other. But any one of them pursued on its own would lead in a direction ultimately outside historic Anglicanism The reformed concern may lead towards a looser form of ministerial order and a stronger emphasis on the sole, unmediated authority of the Bible. The catholic concern may lead to a high doctrine of visible and structural unification of the ordained ministry around a focal point. The cultural and intellectual concern may lead to a style of Christian life aimed at giving spiritual depth to the general shape of the culture around and de-emphasising revelation and history. Pursued far enough in isolation, each of these would lead to a different place – to strict evangelical Protestantism, to Roman Catholicism, to religious liberalism. To accept that each of these has a place in the church’s life and that they need each other means that the enthusiasts for each aspect have to be prepared to live with certain tensions or even sacrifices – with a tradition of being positive about a responsible critical approach to Scripture, with the anomalies of a historic ministry not universally recognised in the Catholic world, with limits on the degree of adjustment to the culture and its habits that is thought possible or acceptable."

I know one theo-blogger doesn't consider just posting quotes to be blogging, but here you go.

MDIX

The Calvin Quincentenary is an international, interdenominational, and interdisciplinary commemoration of the life and work of John Calvin (b. 1509), which left such an indelible impression on the modern world. Climaxing with conferences in multiple locations in 2009, this celebration combines history, spirituality, and culture to recall appropriately the life and work of the Genevan Reformer.

Esteemed leaders, scholars, and ministers will serve as your guides to learning about this influential man, his vibrant city, and the cultural, religious, political, and economic impact flowing from a movement. This multi-faceted approach seeks to introduce many people to one of the most important thinkers (links to Calvin bios) in history.

It looks like a lot of "big names" are involved in the conference, and if you're in Europe in June 2009 it will probably be a useful event to go to.

"I can't quite put my finger on it" (or why I'm looking forward to a bodily resurrection)

I've been a bit busy over the last few weeks, so busy that it has curtailed my frequent blogging. They have been a few reasons for this, which are:

1. I finally moved. After 20 + years living in the same house with the same family (my own) in scenic Katoomba, I am now living on my own in Hurlstone Park, Sydney. It's a nice place, on the Cooks River (aka Cooks Sewer), and is close to church, Alison and Uni. Moving has been a fascinating experience, particularly with many people gracefully making the move easier by giving me book shelves, dinner sets, fridges and so forth. This has given me a great opportunity to reflect on our Lord, who came no to be served but to serve and gave his life as a ransom for many.

2. Getting engaged. Finally. After several months of planning, Alison and I announced our engagement last week, with great relief. And many months of possibly stressful planning ahead of us, it is nice to finally stop and think about what marriage is. What does loving your wife look like? How much did Christ love the church? I guess I kind of know these answers, but it is and will be helpful to keep reflecting on them this year.

3. I chopped my finger off last night. I was making a fold-out bed last night when it collapsed, crushing my left index finger under the bed and severing the tip of my finger. After 4 injections, working out that I'd lost a bit of bone, 7 stitches with the drugs not working, and losing a fair bit of blood, I had a skin graft on my finger which has a 50/50 success rate and leaves my finger almost at normal length. Which gives all the more to look forward to in the bodily resurrection of dead, when evil is judged, the world is renewed and transformed, the body will be raised incorruptible, and every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Come, Lord Jesus.

10 points for naming picture and artist.

Charles I - Martyr or Tyrant

January 30, the anniversary of the execution of Charles I of England, Ireland, (Alba) Scotland (and France). A feast day in the Anglican communion, he was hailed as a saint and martyr throughout the English speaking world until the Victorian era, when the special "Feast of Charles I" homily and morning/evening prayer was removed from the BCP. Charles is the only person to have been canonized by the Church of England since the reformation.

But do you agree with the Carolingian Restoration propaganda? Or do you agree with the puritans accusation of him as a tyrant? Let me know.

Here are some of favourite Carolingian pictures:

Important piece of non-absurd (hebel) news

Alison and I got engaged today...
(I asked, and she said yes).
(At Rose Bay).

Have a happy Feast of the Incanation

(And enjoy Christmastide - Dec. 26 to Jan 5).

Bonhoeffer and Rudd

A few days ago an article appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald about the rise of religion in Australian politics and the "new sectarianism." Well, there is an interesting article in today's
SMH about Kevin Rudd (the new Leader of the Federal Opposition) and his emulation for Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and the dying breed of "politicians with conscience." (There's also a follow-up article on the same page by the same writer on why Al Gore is the "ants pants").

You'll find the article here. You will also find Rudd's original article about Faith and Politics from October's Monthly magazine here.

Genesis 3 and the Ashes

"And your seed will be ooh Ahh, England will bruise his heel, but he will crush their head."

- Michael Wells