In this study we begin to actually examine the petitions of the "Our Father" themselves in depth, being that they are short but say much. The petition "Thy kingdom come" is devoted an entire chapter in Guardini's book, and it is so because of the fact that it embodies the eschatological hope of all Christians. We always need to anticipate the coming of the Kingdom, but as we shall see, in some ways it is in us as individuals but also manifest in the Church. However, as I will be saying throughout this study, the kingdom of God is "now but not yet," and therefore what we see within us as individuals and as a Church is only one aspect of the kingdom.
On page 37 of Guardini's text, he notes that the words "Thy kingdom come" are not an exact translation. There is, of course, no harm in praying that way, but the problem he identifies here could be summarized in the fact that often we pray these words without understanding their significance. A more accurate translation of this petition, Guardini notes, would be "May thy kingdom arrive," and even then, it doesn't express the full dimensions of the prayer. As we have established, the kingdom has already come in a couple of aspects, but what we need to pray is the hope of the fulness of its coming. The petition itself should communicate to us an expectation, a yearning. This petition is for Christians the same desire that Jewish families pray every Shabbat when they conclude the evening meal with the petition "Next year in Jerusalem." This expectation then is driven by a desire to be in union with our Creator, the Bridegroom, and it demands a readiness on our part for the immanency of the kingdom's coming.
To establish why Jesus included this in the prayer He taught us to pray, we need to take a look at Mark 1;15. In the previous verses, we note that Jesus began His earthly ministry after two events - one was His baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist, which we see happening in verses 9-11, and the second was His temptation in the wilderness for 40 days as recorded in verse 13. The story of the Temptation is not given a lot of detail in Mark's Gospel, but rather is more detailed as to what happened in Luke 4 and Matthew 4. First off, we are presented with an issue here - why on earth would Jesus have to be baptized and then tested by the devil in the wilderness?? St. Jerome gives us three reasons for the Baptism, and they are as follows:
1. He was born a man, so that He might fulfill all justice and humility of the Law.
2. By His baptism He confirmed John's baptism.
3. By sanctifying the waters of the Jordan through the descent of the dove (the Holy Spirit), He might show the Holy Spirit's advent in the baptism of believers. (Manlio Simonetti, ed. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture Vol 1a - Matthew 1-13 {Downer's Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2001} p. 51)
St. Chrysostom notes as well that although John was baptizing for repentance, that was not Jesus's reason for being baptized (p. 51), but rather as Chromatius notes Jesus was baptized for us, to fulfill all righteousness - after all, as Chromatius continues, isn't it only right that the command He gave us should be first demonstrated by its giver? Jesus was trying to teach by His example what must be done for disciples to follow their Master. Therefore, Jesus in a sense sacramentalizes the baptism of John, and in it's execution now a picture of His own death and resurrection is presented to us - in the fount of Holy Baptism, our sins are buried with Christ, and we are resurrected in a sense as a new creature, restored to that which God created us to be. Baptism, then, is a way of fulfilling the petition "Thy kingdom come" because it brings the kingdom to us.
Then there was the Temptation - why was that needed? Again, we consult St. Chrysostom, who notes in his Homily 13.1 that Jesus endured this for us - He was "led up by the Spirit" because He does whatever is necessary for our salvation by acting and being acted upon. He submitted Himself to being led up there (to the wilderness) to wrestle agains the devil (Simonetti, p. 56). How this ties into the petition "Thy kingdom come" is found for us in Ephesians 6, as we are told that we are to take up the armor of God in verses 10-17 because of what it says in verse 12 when it tells that "we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places," (Ephesians 6:12, NKJV). And, the reason for that is this - "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come." (II Timothy 3;1, NKJV). We are no longer, as Christians sealed by the font of Holy Baptism, wholly of this world - we have become part of God's kingdom now in Christ, and therefore we are in direct conflict with the "god of this world" and his kingdom, which although not equal to God in any way is still formidable. Jesus anticipated this struggle and by example showed us how to overcome it when He was "led by the Spirit" to be tempted Himself, and He prevailed. Now that He has prevailed over the enemy, He offers hope to us, provided we follow Him. And this is what initiated His earthly ministry.
As we go back to Mark 1;15, we see that Jesus begins His earthly ministry by doing what - in verse 14, He came "preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God." That Gospel had two aspects:
1. Repentance
2. The nearness of the kingdom.
The Gospel therefore, as Guardini notes, announces to the world the nearness of the kingdom of God. It was originally distant, but now near. However, for one to receive it, we must be aware and perceive it - there is communicated a narrow window of opportunity to respond and an anxiety over the immanence of the kingdom's arrival. In other words, this reminds us of the dire reality of human mortality, and that at any moment our lives could end, and therefore the time for anticipating and receiving the kingdom is now - this is why the petition is included, "Thy kingdom come," for the kingdom comes first to us imwardly (now) but will be fully realized at the Second Coming (not yet).
The kingdom was the primary message of Jesus during His earthly ministry, and no one talked more about it than He did. The parables in particular communicate a lot about the kingdom of God, as to what it is, what it entails, etc. The reason why Jesus spent so much time talking about the kingdom was because the kingdom of God cannot be reduced to a single concept. First, it is something mightly, pervasive, penetrating, and operative - the kingdom operates now, especially in the vocation of Christ's Church, but its fullest expression hasn't been realized yet. Also, the kingdom is multiform, and can only be grasped by contemplation. Prayer and study of the Holy Scriptures help us, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to understand more of it as we grow in our own Christian life, but at the same time our thought must be able to endure the complexity of the kingdom as well as coming to the place where we can grasp its manifold richness as a whole. The various parables aid in this, and many of them are found in Matthew 13.
Without going into the whole spectrum of the parables, I want to focus on those which Guardini, on pages 38-39 of his text, keys in on. Jesus utilized in His pedagogy many symbolisms that His hearers were familiar with to communicate His message, and the medium of choice He used was the parable. Here are some parables that contain the imagery of the kingdom He wished to communicate to His hearers, and even to us today:
1. A treasure hidden in a field (Matthew 13:44) - The imagery portrayed in this is that the kingdom of God is a precious thing that is of more value than can be calculated, and for those that desire it, it must be obtained at any cost.
2. The Pearl (Matthew 13:45-46) - The same message is conveyed here as it was with the treasure.
3. The Mustard Seed (Matthew 13:31-32) - The kingdom looks small and insignificant, even foolish, but will one day encompass the whole earth and everything in it, permeating all and uprooting evil. The mustard seed reminds us of other passages in Scripture as well where Jesus uses the insignificant to communicate the significant - in I Corinthians 1:21, it says "it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe," because in verse 25 we are reminded that "the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men," which is why in verse 27, "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty." Nothing is weaker and more absurd than a tiny mustard seed - if you have seen mustard grains, they are tiny! Yet, from them a huge plant grows. Also, there is the foolishness of the babe in the manger, which screwed up the expectations of royalty many people were expecting, yet that Babe saved countless souls.
4. The Leaven (Matthew 13:33) - In like fashion, Jesus uses a microscopic fungus called yeast to illustrate the kingdom, in that a microscopic bit of leaven in some wheat dough can produce enough bread to sustain a family.
5. The Fishing Net (Matthew 13:47-48) - This is one of a series of parables Jesus uses to say that there will be those who supposedly are in the kingdom but are not, but that like fish, often you net good, edible, and kosher (remember, this was a Jewish cultural context!) fish along with non-kosher fish that are unfit to eat. The message of the kingdom appeals to many, but at the same time, many also do not understand or want to commit to Jesus's teaching and are therefore not part of the kingdom. This is communicated in the Parable of the Sower as well, when if you will recall in Matthew 13:3-9 that the "seed" (message of the Gospel) is received by some but not by others, but in some it takes deeper root, while in others when the trials of life beat down, they easily abandon the kingdom. It is also seen in the latter-day Church too, as we note in I Timothy 4 about the "great apostasy" that is to come - many will fall away, it says, because deceptive spirits will deceive them (this correlates with the Parable of the Sower too - those that "fall away" are like the seed Jesus said was plucked up by birds - birds are always a classic imagery in this case for evil spirits). However, unless we have a sharp sense of discernment, only when the net is gathered (a picture of the Last Judgement) will the bad be separated from the good.
6. The Tares (Matthew 13:24-30) - This parable bears the same message as both the Parable of the Sower, and the Parable of the Fishing Net. It communicates one of a series of contrasting images (good fish/bad fish, sheep/goats, etc.) that tell us that there will be people in the kingdom of God who are not of God, and likewise, only a discerning eye and the Last Judgement will sort them out.
These images that Jesus gives in the parables tell us that the kingdom is a complex thing - it is insignficant by appearance, yet great, for one. It is also more valuable than anything this earth can offer. And, there are people who will masquerade as being part of the kingdom, but they are in reality not - they are in a sense "illegal aliens" because they don't know God and haven't received the grace Jesus died for us to have. But, still, the kingdom is beyond a brief statement of description, and Guardini spends much of the chapter talking about this as well.
What the kingdom means first of all is that God rules, directly and powerfully. And, God, in the freedom of His love, has forgiven sin and allowed us to choose to participate in it - we become sanctified by the holiness of Christ only, something that belongs entirely to God alone. It also means that His truth illumines the mind, meaning we no longer have to waste energy in a futile search for it - it is an openly shining plenitude, without patchiness or ambiguity. God is therefore felt in his holiness, as well as perceived in his majesty. By choosing to participate in the kingdom, therefore, man has surrendered his freedom to God and God now reigns with man's joyful consent. With man's joyful submission to God, he can now experience the intimacy and preciousness of the things of God - this ineffable bliss is a sweet taste to the heart and is felt at the depth of man's being. It also means that God in his Trinitarian wholeness as our Father, our Brother, and our Friend, is now near to us - He is in the depths of our spirit and at the core of our hearts. As a result, love (as a fruit of the Holy Spirit cultivated in us - see Galatians 4) rules now perceptively in our goings and comings and the whole of our existence is transformed by it. And, it means that God now becaome distinct to us in His reality in fulness in two ways. First, He rules in all things. Second, we as believers are now in Him, and free to be what God intended and created us for. In the coming of Jesus, the kingdom was so near as a matter of fact that it was ready to burst forth everywhere, to draw all things to Himself and the freedom now of our community with God. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI talks about this as well when he wrote that "the kingdom of Jesus, Son of David, knows no end because in Him God himself is reigning, in him God's kingdom erupts into this world." (Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth - The Infancy Narratives. New York: Image, 2012. p. 33). Therefore, Jesus is the kingdom of God in a sense manifested, and by reigning on the throne of our hearts He brings the kingdom within us, as He promised Himself when He declared that "for indeed, the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21).
So, what is the message of the kingdom then, that we are to anticipate and pray for to come? First, we note that the kingdom of God is the crux of Jesus's earthly ministry, and entailed two parts according to Mark 1;15. First, we are urged to repent ('do penance"), turn away from our depravation and toward God who calls out to us. Secondly, the nearness of the kingdom of God - Isaiah prophesied that "when the time was fulfilled" the kingdom would come, and indeed when Jesus came, He fulfilled Isaiah's words but not in the way in which many expected. We as individuals are appointed a time to which we are invited to respond to the call that we are to repent and receive the kingdom of God that is at hand even now, and in a response of "yes" we receive that kingdom within us, thus in a sense "the time is fulfilled" on a personal level. This means then something very important - the kingdom is in a continual state of "coming,' or in the vernacular, it is "now but not yet." And, that is what we now want to focus on.
The kingdom of God is directed to us both as individuals and communally (via the Church). However, it must be accepted, and will not force its arrival. For one, it can only come in freedom, in that man must open himself to it. To do so, one must first believe, and then prepare himself. Then, it must be strained toward with eternal longing. Further, one must be courageous with the kingdom of God and let it in - this is why we are admonished in Hebrews 4:16 to "come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need." It also requires a surrender of self too - rebellion and resistance drives the kingdom of God away, which is why we are admonished in Ephesians 4;30 to "not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." The paradox here is that if we continue to rebel and resist, the kingdom of God will be driven away, and by our own action we render the power of God powerless by giving place to sin and rebellion.
Therefore, we are to pray to Him that His kingdom may come, and when the kingdom is joyfully welcomed and received by us, St. Francis notes that we become in a special way an interpreter of the Gospel by our life being transformed by it. And, it streams continually in us as we open ourselves to it. How do we do that? First, by prayer and personal devotion. Second, by full participation in the sacramental life of the Church - the sacraments nourish us. Therefore, if we actively live out our faith - James 2:26 reminds us that "faith without works is dead," and although works are not salvific, they do make our faith active and vibrant - the kingdom will indeed be manifested in us. So, when we pray "thy Kingdom come," we do so with the desire that the kingdom comes in us, as well as being an eschatological hope and reality.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Friday, April 17, 2015
The Lords Prayer Part 4 - "Hallowed Be Thy Name"
In this part of the study, we are going to be starting off with a word study, in particular a study of names. I am sure that many have read the passages in Scripture with those long genealogies - so-and-so "begat" this one, who "begat" that one, etc. Two striking areas where we see these are in Matthew 1, and I Chronicles 1-9. Many people look at these passages, often on the verge of pulling their hair out after reading only a few verses of them, and in their exasperation ask "Why on earth is THIS in Scripture???" We seem to be perfectly fine with the Parables of Jesus in the Gospels, or even the vivid eschatological/prophetic imagery of Daniel and Revelation, but oh, those long genealogies!! However, we must remember that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17 NKJV). And, that of course even includes genealogies! Lest one thinks otherwise, I came across something in some research that illustrates this well. One day, I was reading a book on the present phenomenon of UFO's, and how they are demonic deceptions, by an Evangelical author by the name of Chuck Missler. Missler's book has in its 11th chapter a sort of evangelistic approach to those who are into all this UFO stuff, and one thing he expounds upon is the "hidden message in the family tree," which focuses on those "begat" passages and genealogies in Scripture, and what he writes blew my mind. Missler focuses on the first ten generations of mankind, and notes that there is a significance to the meaning of their names. Here is the synopsis in the following table below:
HEBREW NAME ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Adam "Man"
Seth "Appointed"
Enosh "Mortal"
Kenan "Sorrow"
Mahalel "The Blessed God"
Jared "Shall Come Down"
Enoch "Teaching"
Methuselah "His Death Shall Bring"
Lamech "The Despairing"
Noah "Rest, Comfort"
When all of that is put together, and some English grammatical mechanics are applied, it composes the following message: "Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow; (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching (that) his death shall bring (the) despairing comfort" (Chuck Missler, Alien Encounters {Coir d'Alene, Idaho: Koinonia House, 1997} p. 220). In Hebraic tradition, which is the context that all of Scripture basically is written from the perspective of, the name bears a special meaning to its bearer, and therefore these are what are called by Benedict XVI, in his excellent study Jesus of Nazareth - the Infancy Narratives (New York: Image, 2012) "words in waiting," that may not be recognizable to their "owner" or to his audience at the time, but they later have their fulfillment (p. 17). A lot of Messianic prophecies in the OT have that relationship with the NT. Therefore, even hidden in those tedious genealogies can be profound spiritual truth.
Likewise, the name of God, which is the opening invocation of the Lord's Prayer, has significance. The petition "hallowed be Thy name" as noted by Guardini in his text, is concerned with the name of God, a word. A word is of course something formed by sound, a vibration of the lips and throat, and is in that respect an external aspect. However words have multi-layered significance in Scripture. First, each word has a "mind" of its own - it has a meaning carried by the sound that comes from the mouth of the person uttering it. But, it also has a "soul" - the response the word strikes in the heart. Therefore, every word, by this union of "soul" and "mind," contains a general meaning of universal application, something special which is more closely restricted to the speaker and the object to which the word is spoken and directed to, and final, ultimate refinement of meaning that makes it the property of one individual only - this individual may not necessarily be the person saying the word, or the person hearing it, but rather the object of reference. Words, therefore, are living symbols in and of themselves - we form them, and they form us. We don't just speak words, but we also think in them. The analogy Guradini uses in his text on the Lord's Prayer (on which these lessons are based) is that of a railroad - the words are the "rails" upon which our lives run. And as such, they carry a power of their own.
The interesting thing about all languages of mankind is that they each have a word that designates a "Supreme Being" of some sort, from which all things come, and to whom all things refer back. Of course, false religious systems over the course of human history have corrupted that, but it is still inherent to the nature of man nonetheless. To see where that comes from, all we have to do is look at the fact that all human language, like all human origins, come from one source. That source is referred to in Genesis 11:1 - "Now the whole earth had one language and one speech." However, as the post-diluvian settlement of Noah's descendants took place in one location - the Plain of Shinar in Mesopotamia, near where the ancient city of Babylon would rise - they began to have an inflated sense of self-importance, and therefore God had to scatter them, as we read later in verses 7-8 of the same chapter. With this scattering the nations of the earth, and their languages, had their origin. Also, with that, many vestigial elements of the origins of mankind went with each culture, and in the course of time they were re-interpreted and corrupted. One of those things was the concept of God - it came with man from the Garden of Eden and was integrated into his speech. And, the word God has special significance, as we will now see.
There are some facts to note here. First, God called upon man and revealed Himself. In doing so, he also made a covenant with man - man was able to take possession of the word God and utilize it when referring to the Supreme Being, the Creator. God however is not what the proper name of God really is - God rather denotes nature (what He is) rather than His person (who He is). Therefore, "name" in the original sense embodies the essential nature of the person bearing the name - the name stands for its bearer. Therefore, although God's name is not God in all reality and probability, He allows man to use this name God, and therefore by doing so God Himself has entered into the name. That simply means then that He dwells in its power, and by man's own inherent nature it stands in the midst of human history, even when some segments of our race as humanity seek to remove it (problem is, they can't!). Therefore, when man enters into a covenant with God, the name enters man and works within, even down to the roots of one's individual being.
However, God's own commandments order that this name God should not be used in vain. It is not something that we can flippantly throw around, nor is it to be used as a projectile of our own violence and hatred. Remember those little things called the Ten Commandments? Well, in Exodus 20:7, we see that this command not to take the Lord's name in vain is the third and pivotal commandment of the Decalogue - judgment is promised for those who defy the commandment too. The Jews invested such awe into God's name that to this day many devout Jews refuse to even write it out - in many Jewish texts, you see the name written as G-d, which is their expression of keeping this command. Other words though are used for God's name, one being YHWH, which simply translates as "I AM." Another name from old is the plural Elohim, which literally translates as "Lords" although we tend to contextualize the singular "Lord" The latter is based on some places in the account of Creation in Genesis where you hear God dialoguing as He engages in the act of creation by saying "Let us..." This is an early affirmation of the fact that God is triune - three persons, yet one nature - and although many Jews don't accept that fact, it forms an important cornerstone for orthodox Christian theology for us.
There are reasons we reverence the name of God, and those are included in the attributes of His name. First, the name of God is transient, meaning that it is at the mercy of the fluctuation of existence (bearing on humanity's endowed free will, in other words). Second, it is mighty, meaning it is to be held in honor. However, the propensity to misuse it is also a reality, as it can be desecrated in this context as an object of cursing. Third, it is to be addressed by prayer and adoration. However, at times, it is also spoken thoughtlessly, blasphemously, in doubt, and destructively, even if unintentional. At the risk of sounding politically-incorrect and judgmental here, I want to include a personal observation about regarding certain groups. In the US, the large African-American population is often marked in its speech by religious jargon, so much so that at times it can lose its meaning. I know there are many fine African-American Christians, and like all Christians they are brethren and I know many of them well and highly respect them - what I am about to say doesn't apply to them in any way or fashion. However ,I have noted among many African-American people this tendency to drop religious jargon, including a "thank ya Jezuz!" into practically everything - in many cases, it is sometimes used flippantly, and in inappropriate context. I would challenge the church leadership of this community to address and educate these people about the holiness of the name of God, and to be more careful about how it is used as well as the context, because a great risk is entailed with not taking seriously the name of God - it is in a sense taking the name of the Lord in vain, which as we see does carry consequences. Therefore, the name should be used in reverence, and not blasphemously either - it is a cliche statement, but very true, that "God's last name is not damn." Also, the name of God should be "hallowed." "Hallow" is an Old English word that simply means "holy," and unlike the humorous story of the young boy from Sunday School who ran home to his mother, "Hallow" is not a proper name. In that amusing little story, the boy runs home excited and tells his dad, "Daddy, we learned God's first name today!" The father replies "Really Timmy? What did you learn." Timmy replies, "The pastor kept praying 'Our Father who are in heaven, Howard be thy name!" As cute as that little tale is, it illustrates unfortunately an ignorance in our society today - we have moved so far away from God and his commands that we don't even realize what a simple prayer says. The name of God is holy - it can only be felt, consented to, drank from, or if hostile to it, resisted. It stands for a special quality of his living being, all that is proper to him alone. Therefore, we are inwardly to embrace the name of God, which can permeate and transform us. And, we can do it in a more profound way, which I will discuss in closing.
John 1:1 tells us in the original Greek that Jesus was "the Word from the beginning, and that from the beginning the Word was with God and the Word Was God." The word here is Logos, and what it denotes is a "word of authority." This "Word" has a name, and it is Y'shua, meaning "YHWH (I AM) the salvation." Jesus is the name of God that we are inwardly to embrace by allowing Him to enter into us, both through a personal confession and through the sacramental life of the Church, and as we do so, He will permeate and transform us. Therefore, we understand then that the ultimate Word of God is Himself now a person - Jesus Christ - and as a person He indwells us and restores the true meaning of the fact that all refers back to Him, and all comes from Him - He is, therefore the "Alpha and Omega," (Revelation 1;7 NKJV) as well as being the "Author and finisher of our faith" (Hebrews 12:12 NKJV). And, Jesus, being fully God and fully man, is holy, and is due the reverence we pray in the petition "Hallowed be Thy name." God bless each of you until next time.
HEBREW NAME ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Adam "Man"
Seth "Appointed"
Enosh "Mortal"
Kenan "Sorrow"
Mahalel "The Blessed God"
Jared "Shall Come Down"
Enoch "Teaching"
Methuselah "His Death Shall Bring"
Lamech "The Despairing"
Noah "Rest, Comfort"
When all of that is put together, and some English grammatical mechanics are applied, it composes the following message: "Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow; (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching (that) his death shall bring (the) despairing comfort" (Chuck Missler, Alien Encounters {Coir d'Alene, Idaho: Koinonia House, 1997} p. 220). In Hebraic tradition, which is the context that all of Scripture basically is written from the perspective of, the name bears a special meaning to its bearer, and therefore these are what are called by Benedict XVI, in his excellent study Jesus of Nazareth - the Infancy Narratives (New York: Image, 2012) "words in waiting," that may not be recognizable to their "owner" or to his audience at the time, but they later have their fulfillment (p. 17). A lot of Messianic prophecies in the OT have that relationship with the NT. Therefore, even hidden in those tedious genealogies can be profound spiritual truth.
Likewise, the name of God, which is the opening invocation of the Lord's Prayer, has significance. The petition "hallowed be Thy name" as noted by Guardini in his text, is concerned with the name of God, a word. A word is of course something formed by sound, a vibration of the lips and throat, and is in that respect an external aspect. However words have multi-layered significance in Scripture. First, each word has a "mind" of its own - it has a meaning carried by the sound that comes from the mouth of the person uttering it. But, it also has a "soul" - the response the word strikes in the heart. Therefore, every word, by this union of "soul" and "mind," contains a general meaning of universal application, something special which is more closely restricted to the speaker and the object to which the word is spoken and directed to, and final, ultimate refinement of meaning that makes it the property of one individual only - this individual may not necessarily be the person saying the word, or the person hearing it, but rather the object of reference. Words, therefore, are living symbols in and of themselves - we form them, and they form us. We don't just speak words, but we also think in them. The analogy Guradini uses in his text on the Lord's Prayer (on which these lessons are based) is that of a railroad - the words are the "rails" upon which our lives run. And as such, they carry a power of their own.
The interesting thing about all languages of mankind is that they each have a word that designates a "Supreme Being" of some sort, from which all things come, and to whom all things refer back. Of course, false religious systems over the course of human history have corrupted that, but it is still inherent to the nature of man nonetheless. To see where that comes from, all we have to do is look at the fact that all human language, like all human origins, come from one source. That source is referred to in Genesis 11:1 - "Now the whole earth had one language and one speech." However, as the post-diluvian settlement of Noah's descendants took place in one location - the Plain of Shinar in Mesopotamia, near where the ancient city of Babylon would rise - they began to have an inflated sense of self-importance, and therefore God had to scatter them, as we read later in verses 7-8 of the same chapter. With this scattering the nations of the earth, and their languages, had their origin. Also, with that, many vestigial elements of the origins of mankind went with each culture, and in the course of time they were re-interpreted and corrupted. One of those things was the concept of God - it came with man from the Garden of Eden and was integrated into his speech. And, the word God has special significance, as we will now see.
There are some facts to note here. First, God called upon man and revealed Himself. In doing so, he also made a covenant with man - man was able to take possession of the word God and utilize it when referring to the Supreme Being, the Creator. God however is not what the proper name of God really is - God rather denotes nature (what He is) rather than His person (who He is). Therefore, "name" in the original sense embodies the essential nature of the person bearing the name - the name stands for its bearer. Therefore, although God's name is not God in all reality and probability, He allows man to use this name God, and therefore by doing so God Himself has entered into the name. That simply means then that He dwells in its power, and by man's own inherent nature it stands in the midst of human history, even when some segments of our race as humanity seek to remove it (problem is, they can't!). Therefore, when man enters into a covenant with God, the name enters man and works within, even down to the roots of one's individual being.
However, God's own commandments order that this name God should not be used in vain. It is not something that we can flippantly throw around, nor is it to be used as a projectile of our own violence and hatred. Remember those little things called the Ten Commandments? Well, in Exodus 20:7, we see that this command not to take the Lord's name in vain is the third and pivotal commandment of the Decalogue - judgment is promised for those who defy the commandment too. The Jews invested such awe into God's name that to this day many devout Jews refuse to even write it out - in many Jewish texts, you see the name written as G-d, which is their expression of keeping this command. Other words though are used for God's name, one being YHWH, which simply translates as "I AM." Another name from old is the plural Elohim, which literally translates as "Lords" although we tend to contextualize the singular "Lord" The latter is based on some places in the account of Creation in Genesis where you hear God dialoguing as He engages in the act of creation by saying "Let us..." This is an early affirmation of the fact that God is triune - three persons, yet one nature - and although many Jews don't accept that fact, it forms an important cornerstone for orthodox Christian theology for us.
There are reasons we reverence the name of God, and those are included in the attributes of His name. First, the name of God is transient, meaning that it is at the mercy of the fluctuation of existence (bearing on humanity's endowed free will, in other words). Second, it is mighty, meaning it is to be held in honor. However, the propensity to misuse it is also a reality, as it can be desecrated in this context as an object of cursing. Third, it is to be addressed by prayer and adoration. However, at times, it is also spoken thoughtlessly, blasphemously, in doubt, and destructively, even if unintentional. At the risk of sounding politically-incorrect and judgmental here, I want to include a personal observation about regarding certain groups. In the US, the large African-American population is often marked in its speech by religious jargon, so much so that at times it can lose its meaning. I know there are many fine African-American Christians, and like all Christians they are brethren and I know many of them well and highly respect them - what I am about to say doesn't apply to them in any way or fashion. However ,I have noted among many African-American people this tendency to drop religious jargon, including a "thank ya Jezuz!" into practically everything - in many cases, it is sometimes used flippantly, and in inappropriate context. I would challenge the church leadership of this community to address and educate these people about the holiness of the name of God, and to be more careful about how it is used as well as the context, because a great risk is entailed with not taking seriously the name of God - it is in a sense taking the name of the Lord in vain, which as we see does carry consequences. Therefore, the name should be used in reverence, and not blasphemously either - it is a cliche statement, but very true, that "God's last name is not damn." Also, the name of God should be "hallowed." "Hallow" is an Old English word that simply means "holy," and unlike the humorous story of the young boy from Sunday School who ran home to his mother, "Hallow" is not a proper name. In that amusing little story, the boy runs home excited and tells his dad, "Daddy, we learned God's first name today!" The father replies "Really Timmy? What did you learn." Timmy replies, "The pastor kept praying 'Our Father who are in heaven, Howard be thy name!" As cute as that little tale is, it illustrates unfortunately an ignorance in our society today - we have moved so far away from God and his commands that we don't even realize what a simple prayer says. The name of God is holy - it can only be felt, consented to, drank from, or if hostile to it, resisted. It stands for a special quality of his living being, all that is proper to him alone. Therefore, we are inwardly to embrace the name of God, which can permeate and transform us. And, we can do it in a more profound way, which I will discuss in closing.
John 1:1 tells us in the original Greek that Jesus was "the Word from the beginning, and that from the beginning the Word was with God and the Word Was God." The word here is Logos, and what it denotes is a "word of authority." This "Word" has a name, and it is Y'shua, meaning "YHWH (I AM) the salvation." Jesus is the name of God that we are inwardly to embrace by allowing Him to enter into us, both through a personal confession and through the sacramental life of the Church, and as we do so, He will permeate and transform us. Therefore, we understand then that the ultimate Word of God is Himself now a person - Jesus Christ - and as a person He indwells us and restores the true meaning of the fact that all refers back to Him, and all comes from Him - He is, therefore the "Alpha and Omega," (Revelation 1;7 NKJV) as well as being the "Author and finisher of our faith" (Hebrews 12:12 NKJV). And, Jesus, being fully God and fully man, is holy, and is due the reverence we pray in the petition "Hallowed be Thy name." God bless each of you until next time.
Sunday, April 5, 2015
The Lord's Prayer Part 3 - "Our Father Who Art In Heaven 2"
When Romano Guardini wrote the book on the Lord's Prayer that is the basis of this study, he devoted 2 chapters of it to just the invocation of it - "Our Father, Who art in heaven." This study deals with the third chapter of the Guardini book as it relates to our recent parish Bible study on it. Many have remarked how this has helped them to look somewhat differently at the way they pray the Lord's Prayer, and indeed it has also helped me understand it personally in a new way as well. So, with that being in the way of introduction, I wanted to share the thoughts as I presented them in our parish Bible study on Palm Sunday this year (2015).
In the third chapter, Guardini emphasizes that first of all it doesn't matter where it starts from, but the movement of the heart can rise to God. It is not constrained by time, condition, or circumstance, as there is always a way leading to God. The way, of course, is through the Holy Spirit, who via our relationship with Christ indwells us and convicts us to communicate with God directly, as by the shed Blood of Jesus Christ we now can, as Scripture proclaims to us, "boldly approach the throne" (Hebrews 4:16). It is in Christ that we are made righteous before the Father, and thus we now can address Him as "Father." Hence, the prayer Jesus taught us. Being that through Jesus is the only and right way (John 14:6), it stands to reason then that there are wrong ways too, which Guardini also talks about in this chapter. However, I have simplified what Guardini says in the form of certain wrong approaches with which man tries to approach God.
We begin first with the ancient Greeks. After studying a lot of philosophy, I have come to the conclusion that God led the Greeks in such a way as to prepare the world for the spread of the Gospel utilizing their culture and language - it was God's purpose, therefore, to allow Alexander of Macedon to conquer the known world, and later for the Romans to adopt much of Hellenistic culture in their hinterlands - after the Romans were Christianized under Constantine, as a matter of fact, the Roman Empire in the East essentially became Greek! Indeed, my own spiritual mentor, the Greek Orthodox priest and herald of renewal, Fr. Eusebius Stephanou, once remarked that the Greeks too were in a sense a "Chosen people," much like the Jews, in that God used them by equipping them with a philosophy and language best suited for expressing ultimate, metaphysical reality (Eusebius Stephanou, "The Orthodox Church and Israel," published 2014 by St. Symeon Orthodox Renewal Center and accessed 1/2/2015 at stsymeon.org/28-the-orthodox-church-and-israel.html.). The problem with the Greeks however was the same as with most non-Christian religions - they have a certain amount of the truth (or, in the case of philosophers such as Plato, they ask the right questions) but the truth they have has been corrupted and obscured in many cases. As Guardini points out on page 18 of his text, there is something in our nature which leads us to seek God, and we are often compelled to ask the right questions, but often it is our human reasoning that gets in the way and corrupts it. Fortunately for the Greeks, the light of Christianity eventually illumined their people, and thankfully most of the Greek people are Christianized. And, in a big way, they have Aristotle and Plato to thank for asking those questions, as well as the Apostle St. Paul, who in Acts 17:19-34 used this Greek propensity to witness Christ to them, and many believed there including St. Dionysius the Areopagite (verse 34). It goes back to Romans 8:28 - "all things work together for good to those who love God and are called according to His purpose."
The "heavenly father" concept was also something believed as a vestige of truth among pagan nations, although the idea of who or what this was ended up falling into corrupted understanding. What ancient pagan religions understood as a "heavenly father" was something quite different from what Christ taught, and their faulty understanding came to be manifest in two forms. The first, which we know as pantheism, saw this "heavenly father" as an all-embracing, all-pervading, powerful "goodness." Plato's Republic has one of the most vivid examples of this, because Plato spoke of it in Book VII, when he said "...it's useful to search for the beautiful and the good." Guardini would rightly say that this "Good" Plato talked about had a core, and that would be Zeus, and he notes on page 21 that other cultures have different names for this too. However, the error made by these pagan religions was one in which they saw this "good" or "heavenly father" as something pervasive and powerful, yet lacking personal interest in the human condition; he describes this attitude as a "cold indifference." In other words, to cultures like this and the religious systems that define them, the "heavenly father" is to be found in oneself, in a rock, a tree, a dog, etc. It is also not some dualistic force, as we see many early Indo-Iranian religious systems believing in (deities such as Ahura-Mazda among the ancient Persians, and the Shiva/Krishna deity among Hindus). This is the first error of those who have not come to know Christ and His teachings.
The second error is one of mere "deism," which is something that became quite popular during the Enlightenment era of American history, as many of the Founding Fathers of the US subscribed to it. the "deist" version of the "heavenly father" amounts to a deadbeat dad essentially - like a turtle or snake, he lays the egg and his offspring have to fend for themselves. This has often been also called "Clockwinder Theology" because it asserts that God set the universe in motion and then stepped back to basically let it run itself. This fallacy is also as heretical as the pantheism of the pagans, and neither is what Christ means.
What Jesus means essentially when He addresses God as "Our Father" is this - it pleases God to make mankind, the crowning glory of His creation, His children. If we look on page 20 of Guardini's text, we see it there - He with whom Jesus speaks is who God is, His Father. And, when we see Jesus, we see the Father (John 14:9) because God is as Jesus, in being and in actions. God is then our Father through a gracious decree - starting with Jesus, Psalm 2:7 prophetically tells us that "the Lord has said to Me, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten You..." And, we call him "Father" because of what Christ said to us - Galatians 4:7 tells us that once we receive Christ in baptism, we "are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, than an heir of God through Christ." And John 1:12 - "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name; who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." That last phrase is what Guardini is talking about on page 22 when he says "it does not belong in our nature and our being that we can say 'Father' to God; it is by His grace that He has made us so." (Guardini, The Lord's Prayer, p. 22). It is therefore imperative that we understand that the mystery of the Fatherhood of God is not to be confused with human reasoning, because we do not become children of God via integration with the natural world, but it is by our faith in God's grace, as personified in Christ. Therefore, it is important to also remember that faith is not only a blessed certainty, but it is something we learn through practice - confessing God as "our Father" rather than "my Father," for instance, in our petitions. We learn, therefore, from the attitude of Christ to speak to God as "Father." and by praying the "gateway" - Thy will be done - with this, we learn to conform the attitude of our heart to the teaching of Christ, and growth results. Our faith is a living faith, and must be practiced on a daily basis to keep it vibrant - the Apostle St. James said it when he wrote that "faith without works is dead," (James 2:20) and it produces fruit (see Galatians 5:22-23). Therefore, it is not possible to call the non-Christian our "brother," because they are not of the same Father we are until they are reborn through the confession of faith in Jesus Christ and the waters of baptism.
Note too that we pray "Our Father," and not "my Father." If we put too much stock in the "sovereign individual," as contemporary society (even some forms of Christianity - noting the "positive/affirmation theology" of people like the late Robert Schuller and the current superstar of the megachurch world, Joel Osteen) and this over-emphasis on the importance of one's uniqueness can lead to a type of paganism which makes the self an idol. Once we decide to follow Christ, the "sovereign individual" ceases to exist - that is the "old man" it speaks of in Scripture being put to death in the waters of baptism (Colossians 3:9). The only real "sovereign individual" is God Himself. Now, does that mean we deny our individual identity? Not at all - the dignity of the human person is something that is inherent to Christianity more than it is in any other religion, but that dignity is realized and perfected in Christ alone, who becomes the Lord of our lives. Also, it doesn't mean that we cannot have a personal faith either, but rather that we as persons are part of a greater plan of God's kingdom as a community, and as a community we are not just part of some random crowd that Jesus sweepingly called "His children" - we become His children through sacramental grace, and that can only be dispensed through the office of His Holy Church. That also doesn't mean that God looks upon us en masse either - He created us as individuals, is concerned about us as individuals, and addresses us as individuals. And, we approach Him as our unique selves, the way He created us, but also in sincerity and humility. But, at the same time, we are a communion of brethren, and have an integral part as individuals in that communion (Romans 12:4-5). That being said, the "Christian plural," as understood in this context is not us as part and parcel of an indiscriminate multitude, but rather it is a balance of unity and differentiation, fellowship and individual dignity, and both the close association with others in the Body as well as the privacy of reserve in personal relationship with Christ. So, while God is indeed my Father, it is not up to me to arrogantly address Him in the singular, but rather understanding that I am part of a Body, and as part of that Body I address God as "Our Father!" May God, Our Father, bless each and every one of you this Paschal season.
In the third chapter, Guardini emphasizes that first of all it doesn't matter where it starts from, but the movement of the heart can rise to God. It is not constrained by time, condition, or circumstance, as there is always a way leading to God. The way, of course, is through the Holy Spirit, who via our relationship with Christ indwells us and convicts us to communicate with God directly, as by the shed Blood of Jesus Christ we now can, as Scripture proclaims to us, "boldly approach the throne" (Hebrews 4:16). It is in Christ that we are made righteous before the Father, and thus we now can address Him as "Father." Hence, the prayer Jesus taught us. Being that through Jesus is the only and right way (John 14:6), it stands to reason then that there are wrong ways too, which Guardini also talks about in this chapter. However, I have simplified what Guardini says in the form of certain wrong approaches with which man tries to approach God.
We begin first with the ancient Greeks. After studying a lot of philosophy, I have come to the conclusion that God led the Greeks in such a way as to prepare the world for the spread of the Gospel utilizing their culture and language - it was God's purpose, therefore, to allow Alexander of Macedon to conquer the known world, and later for the Romans to adopt much of Hellenistic culture in their hinterlands - after the Romans were Christianized under Constantine, as a matter of fact, the Roman Empire in the East essentially became Greek! Indeed, my own spiritual mentor, the Greek Orthodox priest and herald of renewal, Fr. Eusebius Stephanou, once remarked that the Greeks too were in a sense a "Chosen people," much like the Jews, in that God used them by equipping them with a philosophy and language best suited for expressing ultimate, metaphysical reality (Eusebius Stephanou, "The Orthodox Church and Israel," published 2014 by St. Symeon Orthodox Renewal Center and accessed 1/2/2015 at stsymeon.org/28-the-orthodox-church-and-israel.html.). The problem with the Greeks however was the same as with most non-Christian religions - they have a certain amount of the truth (or, in the case of philosophers such as Plato, they ask the right questions) but the truth they have has been corrupted and obscured in many cases. As Guardini points out on page 18 of his text, there is something in our nature which leads us to seek God, and we are often compelled to ask the right questions, but often it is our human reasoning that gets in the way and corrupts it. Fortunately for the Greeks, the light of Christianity eventually illumined their people, and thankfully most of the Greek people are Christianized. And, in a big way, they have Aristotle and Plato to thank for asking those questions, as well as the Apostle St. Paul, who in Acts 17:19-34 used this Greek propensity to witness Christ to them, and many believed there including St. Dionysius the Areopagite (verse 34). It goes back to Romans 8:28 - "all things work together for good to those who love God and are called according to His purpose."
The "heavenly father" concept was also something believed as a vestige of truth among pagan nations, although the idea of who or what this was ended up falling into corrupted understanding. What ancient pagan religions understood as a "heavenly father" was something quite different from what Christ taught, and their faulty understanding came to be manifest in two forms. The first, which we know as pantheism, saw this "heavenly father" as an all-embracing, all-pervading, powerful "goodness." Plato's Republic has one of the most vivid examples of this, because Plato spoke of it in Book VII, when he said "...it's useful to search for the beautiful and the good." Guardini would rightly say that this "Good" Plato talked about had a core, and that would be Zeus, and he notes on page 21 that other cultures have different names for this too. However, the error made by these pagan religions was one in which they saw this "good" or "heavenly father" as something pervasive and powerful, yet lacking personal interest in the human condition; he describes this attitude as a "cold indifference." In other words, to cultures like this and the religious systems that define them, the "heavenly father" is to be found in oneself, in a rock, a tree, a dog, etc. It is also not some dualistic force, as we see many early Indo-Iranian religious systems believing in (deities such as Ahura-Mazda among the ancient Persians, and the Shiva/Krishna deity among Hindus). This is the first error of those who have not come to know Christ and His teachings.
The second error is one of mere "deism," which is something that became quite popular during the Enlightenment era of American history, as many of the Founding Fathers of the US subscribed to it. the "deist" version of the "heavenly father" amounts to a deadbeat dad essentially - like a turtle or snake, he lays the egg and his offspring have to fend for themselves. This has often been also called "Clockwinder Theology" because it asserts that God set the universe in motion and then stepped back to basically let it run itself. This fallacy is also as heretical as the pantheism of the pagans, and neither is what Christ means.
What Jesus means essentially when He addresses God as "Our Father" is this - it pleases God to make mankind, the crowning glory of His creation, His children. If we look on page 20 of Guardini's text, we see it there - He with whom Jesus speaks is who God is, His Father. And, when we see Jesus, we see the Father (John 14:9) because God is as Jesus, in being and in actions. God is then our Father through a gracious decree - starting with Jesus, Psalm 2:7 prophetically tells us that "the Lord has said to Me, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten You..." And, we call him "Father" because of what Christ said to us - Galatians 4:7 tells us that once we receive Christ in baptism, we "are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, than an heir of God through Christ." And John 1:12 - "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name; who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." That last phrase is what Guardini is talking about on page 22 when he says "it does not belong in our nature and our being that we can say 'Father' to God; it is by His grace that He has made us so." (Guardini, The Lord's Prayer, p. 22). It is therefore imperative that we understand that the mystery of the Fatherhood of God is not to be confused with human reasoning, because we do not become children of God via integration with the natural world, but it is by our faith in God's grace, as personified in Christ. Therefore, it is important to also remember that faith is not only a blessed certainty, but it is something we learn through practice - confessing God as "our Father" rather than "my Father," for instance, in our petitions. We learn, therefore, from the attitude of Christ to speak to God as "Father." and by praying the "gateway" - Thy will be done - with this, we learn to conform the attitude of our heart to the teaching of Christ, and growth results. Our faith is a living faith, and must be practiced on a daily basis to keep it vibrant - the Apostle St. James said it when he wrote that "faith without works is dead," (James 2:20) and it produces fruit (see Galatians 5:22-23). Therefore, it is not possible to call the non-Christian our "brother," because they are not of the same Father we are until they are reborn through the confession of faith in Jesus Christ and the waters of baptism.
Note too that we pray "Our Father," and not "my Father." If we put too much stock in the "sovereign individual," as contemporary society (even some forms of Christianity - noting the "positive/affirmation theology" of people like the late Robert Schuller and the current superstar of the megachurch world, Joel Osteen) and this over-emphasis on the importance of one's uniqueness can lead to a type of paganism which makes the self an idol. Once we decide to follow Christ, the "sovereign individual" ceases to exist - that is the "old man" it speaks of in Scripture being put to death in the waters of baptism (Colossians 3:9). The only real "sovereign individual" is God Himself. Now, does that mean we deny our individual identity? Not at all - the dignity of the human person is something that is inherent to Christianity more than it is in any other religion, but that dignity is realized and perfected in Christ alone, who becomes the Lord of our lives. Also, it doesn't mean that we cannot have a personal faith either, but rather that we as persons are part of a greater plan of God's kingdom as a community, and as a community we are not just part of some random crowd that Jesus sweepingly called "His children" - we become His children through sacramental grace, and that can only be dispensed through the office of His Holy Church. That also doesn't mean that God looks upon us en masse either - He created us as individuals, is concerned about us as individuals, and addresses us as individuals. And, we approach Him as our unique selves, the way He created us, but also in sincerity and humility. But, at the same time, we are a communion of brethren, and have an integral part as individuals in that communion (Romans 12:4-5). That being said, the "Christian plural," as understood in this context is not us as part and parcel of an indiscriminate multitude, but rather it is a balance of unity and differentiation, fellowship and individual dignity, and both the close association with others in the Body as well as the privacy of reserve in personal relationship with Christ. So, while God is indeed my Father, it is not up to me to arrogantly address Him in the singular, but rather understanding that I am part of a Body, and as part of that Body I address God as "Our Father!" May God, Our Father, bless each and every one of you this Paschal season.
Thursday, March 26, 2015
The Lord's Prayer Part 2 - Our Father Who Art in Heaven I
As we continue our study of the Lord's Prayer, based on the structure of Romano Guardini's book, it is time to examine the first petition of the prayer, "Our Father, Who Art in Heaven." This will be the first of two parts exploring this petition, as there seems to be a lot packed into it. So, we will begin.
The words themselves point us in the direction of heaven, as our gaze goes upward and our face seeks to meet that of another, God the Father. It is a deeper dimension than that though, in that the movement of man's heart is compelled to find its way to the heart of God. The ironic thing about this however is that our sins have hidden His face from us (Isaiah 59:2) yet here is Jesus, God in the flesh, telling us all of a sudden to address God in such a way as to seek his face! Why is that? Quite simply, we must remember that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God," (Romans 3:23) and that "there is none righteous, no not one" (Romans 3:10), because of what happened in Genesis 3, namely the Fall. God is holy and righteous, and in his sight no wickedness or sin can share presence. So, why did Jesus all of a sudden say that we can petition the Father face-to-face?? Here it is - "having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 5:1). As to how this happened, it was when Jesus died on a cross, restoring life to us through His atoning death and resurrection, and that blood we believe covered a multitude of sins (I John 2:2). As Catholic Christians, we would take this a step further by saying that the piercing of Jesus' side in John 19:34 that brought forth water and blood symbolized our new life in Christ by the sacraments of Holy Baptism (the water) and the Holy Eucharist (the Blood) - as Adam birthed his bride Eve from his side when God took the rib (Genesis 2:21-23), so the new Adam, Jesus Christ, brought forth His bride, the Church, with the flowing of blood mingled with water from His side. As we are now the Bride of Christ as the Church, we can also boldy approach the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16), and this petition of the Our Father affirms that from the mouth of Jesus Himself. However, this is not just a mere intellectual exercise, but rather we live these petitions in spirit because words are movements of the heart and of the mind.
We need to remember that God is a Who, and not a mere "what." For many years, many of us have prayed the Lord's Prayer wrong, saying often at the opening petition "Our Father which art in heaven." The reason this is wrong is that it reduces God, as so many false religions do, to the status of an abstract force instead of the person he is, and this depersonalization of God does violence to him as a being, a person - God is being qua being exemplified, a being totally transcendant yet personal at the same time. When we correctly address God as a "Who" rather than a "which," it instills into our own being an awareness of someone above and all-pervading. All we see in creation points to something else - creation is enveloped by something that transcends it, something mysterious yet profoundly familiar. That someone is the Holy, the Divine - God! In the Sanctus Hymn ("Holy, Holy, Holy") that we sing at Mass every Sunday just prior to the Communion of the Faithful, we profess this truth - "Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory - Hosanna in the Highest!"
That proclamation is also found in Scripture in two places - first, directly in Isaiah 6:3, and it is also found indirectly in Revelation 4:8. Another place that affirms this truth in Scripture is Psalm 24:1 - "The earth is the Lord's and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein." However, we must remember also that God the Father is not merely an authority we are touched by, but also possesses a countenance we are now called to look upon. Being justified by Christ's atoning Death and Resurrection, we have that communion with the Father we need, but we must also remember some other things too. First, God is not some touchy-feely goosebumpy thing, nor is he a big demiurge up there ready to whack us with a stick when we make a mistake either - God too has a heart, and it is to that heart which we are to turn. In short, thanks to God's love for us that even cost him the life of his only-begotten Son, we can address God as a person rather than an abstraction!
Despite this fact though, we need to also remember Who we address and not take that for granted. God's allowing us to approach him in this way is not a privelege or a right; it is a gift. He first called us, addressing us as persons. In doing so, he gives us a face (nature) with an inclination to turn toward him. Therefore, in addressing God directly, we are capable of seeking His face. We do this in such a simple way though that it is unfathomable to our human wisdom - the "Our Father" tells us in effect to simply address ourselves to Him who is in heaven, and our prayers will reach Him. James 5:16 reminds us that "the effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much," and in Psalm 37:23 we are also told that "the steps of a good (righteous) man are ordered by the Lord, and he delights in His way." And, finally in Proverbs 17:28 we are assured that "He hears the prayer of the righteous." In other words, location is irrelevant, as He is omnipresent. Time is irrelevant, because God transcends the time/space dimension we live in. And, experience and state of mind on our part are irrelevant, because God is simply bigger than us! Thankfully for us too, God has a great deal more patience than we often give him credit for, because I know that even my own prayers at times can be frantic, and yes, I am not too proud to admit that on more than one occasion I have fought with God - many times it was a one-way battle though with me doing the tongue-lashing, yet God always makes everything turn out despite my own limitations (praise be to Him for His mercy too, believe me!). When God says "effective and fervent," he is talking about the prayer from the heart that sincerely seeks Him, and thankfully perfection is not a prerequisite for talking to God, which leads to the next point. This righteousness - where does it come from? In Romans 3:10 we are given the glaring reminder that "there is none righteous, no not one," and the reason for that is in Romans 3:23 - "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Yet, we are told about all these blessings that righteous men receive in the other verses we discussed, so what is that about?? 2 Corinthians 5:21 gives us that answer - "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him!" Again, through Christ do we receive the righteousness to boldly yet in humility approach the throne of grace, and although our earth-bound thoughts often take things for granted, it is an immeasurable marvel to know that God is accessible from anywhere, anytime, and in any human condition we may find ourselves subjected. Thus, that is why we can address God the Father as a person, and can do so simply.
Now, what about the "art in heaven" part of the petition? First, although God is everywhere and in all happenings, He is also transcendant - he is not "in" his creation, as a heresy called panentheism teaches (via Jurgen Moltmann and others, this has also permeated some sectors of Christianity unfortunately) but rather is He who is alone in himself. What on earth does that mean?? For some, it means heaven is a dimension, and although it is that, I personally would hold that it is also a real location somewhere in the universe too. Guardini doesn't invest a lot of detail debating where heaven's location is, but rather he focuses on what it must be, and there are four things that he notes:
1. Heaven is infinitely pure and holy.
2. Heaven is absolutely calm and hidden.
3. Heaven is strange yet familiar
4. Heaven is beautiful and blessed.
Heaven is, in Guardini's explanation, the inaccessibility of God, His "otherness," but it is also our ultimate homeland, a place of origin. So, that tells us what this invocation is to mean then.
We ourselves start from the place we are when we pray this petition, and in the hour we live and what we are engaged in. The God we seek is in heaven, and distinct from all else. To address him, we raise our minds above the earth, and that is because God must be granted his 'otherness." And, that leads to a discussion of some important issues.
We as human beings tend to think certain ways, and when it comes to God it gets us into some hot water. Therefore, when we pray this prayer, invoking "Our Father who art in heaven," we have to come to the admission that God is not necessarily like things, time or ourselves. We don't prescribe to Him what He is supposed to be like according to our preferences, yet we must agree that he is one who is of Himself. That being said, we have to prepare ourselves for the fact that God is going to be different from our own expectations of Him. I believe the Thomistic approach of viewing this, as prescribed by the late Fr. Norris Clarke in his seminal text The One and the Many (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2001) is the best way, in that it affirms that God is love, truth, etc., but on a far more greater level than we as human beings can understand. We know that He is all those things, but not how. We know, for religious purposes, that God is supreme wisdom, love, power, etc., but we don't know the details (Clarke, p. 233-235). Therefore, being we are created in the imago Dei, we hold that God has those attributes which we share, but that they are in the most pure form with God. That being said, we need to now discuss some cautions Guardini deals with at the end of the chapter, as they are important.
Guardini notes on page 16 of his text that human beings have this propensity to defend themselves against God, and one of the ways we tend to do this is create God in our own image, making him innocuous by projecting man's own image upon God instead of seeking a true face-to-face encounter. Much of this is embodied in the way popular culture views Jesus, God the Son. Because He was human too, it is a temptation to try to paint Him like we want Him to be, and one of the most glaring examples was one I came across a few years ago in a New Testament class of all places at my former university, and I call this one the "Caveman Jesus:"
The words themselves point us in the direction of heaven, as our gaze goes upward and our face seeks to meet that of another, God the Father. It is a deeper dimension than that though, in that the movement of man's heart is compelled to find its way to the heart of God. The ironic thing about this however is that our sins have hidden His face from us (Isaiah 59:2) yet here is Jesus, God in the flesh, telling us all of a sudden to address God in such a way as to seek his face! Why is that? Quite simply, we must remember that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God," (Romans 3:23) and that "there is none righteous, no not one" (Romans 3:10), because of what happened in Genesis 3, namely the Fall. God is holy and righteous, and in his sight no wickedness or sin can share presence. So, why did Jesus all of a sudden say that we can petition the Father face-to-face?? Here it is - "having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 5:1). As to how this happened, it was when Jesus died on a cross, restoring life to us through His atoning death and resurrection, and that blood we believe covered a multitude of sins (I John 2:2). As Catholic Christians, we would take this a step further by saying that the piercing of Jesus' side in John 19:34 that brought forth water and blood symbolized our new life in Christ by the sacraments of Holy Baptism (the water) and the Holy Eucharist (the Blood) - as Adam birthed his bride Eve from his side when God took the rib (Genesis 2:21-23), so the new Adam, Jesus Christ, brought forth His bride, the Church, with the flowing of blood mingled with water from His side. As we are now the Bride of Christ as the Church, we can also boldy approach the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16), and this petition of the Our Father affirms that from the mouth of Jesus Himself. However, this is not just a mere intellectual exercise, but rather we live these petitions in spirit because words are movements of the heart and of the mind.
We need to remember that God is a Who, and not a mere "what." For many years, many of us have prayed the Lord's Prayer wrong, saying often at the opening petition "Our Father which art in heaven." The reason this is wrong is that it reduces God, as so many false religions do, to the status of an abstract force instead of the person he is, and this depersonalization of God does violence to him as a being, a person - God is being qua being exemplified, a being totally transcendant yet personal at the same time. When we correctly address God as a "Who" rather than a "which," it instills into our own being an awareness of someone above and all-pervading. All we see in creation points to something else - creation is enveloped by something that transcends it, something mysterious yet profoundly familiar. That someone is the Holy, the Divine - God! In the Sanctus Hymn ("Holy, Holy, Holy") that we sing at Mass every Sunday just prior to the Communion of the Faithful, we profess this truth - "Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory - Hosanna in the Highest!"
That proclamation is also found in Scripture in two places - first, directly in Isaiah 6:3, and it is also found indirectly in Revelation 4:8. Another place that affirms this truth in Scripture is Psalm 24:1 - "The earth is the Lord's and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein." However, we must remember also that God the Father is not merely an authority we are touched by, but also possesses a countenance we are now called to look upon. Being justified by Christ's atoning Death and Resurrection, we have that communion with the Father we need, but we must also remember some other things too. First, God is not some touchy-feely goosebumpy thing, nor is he a big demiurge up there ready to whack us with a stick when we make a mistake either - God too has a heart, and it is to that heart which we are to turn. In short, thanks to God's love for us that even cost him the life of his only-begotten Son, we can address God as a person rather than an abstraction!
Despite this fact though, we need to also remember Who we address and not take that for granted. God's allowing us to approach him in this way is not a privelege or a right; it is a gift. He first called us, addressing us as persons. In doing so, he gives us a face (nature) with an inclination to turn toward him. Therefore, in addressing God directly, we are capable of seeking His face. We do this in such a simple way though that it is unfathomable to our human wisdom - the "Our Father" tells us in effect to simply address ourselves to Him who is in heaven, and our prayers will reach Him. James 5:16 reminds us that "the effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much," and in Psalm 37:23 we are also told that "the steps of a good (righteous) man are ordered by the Lord, and he delights in His way." And, finally in Proverbs 17:28 we are assured that "He hears the prayer of the righteous." In other words, location is irrelevant, as He is omnipresent. Time is irrelevant, because God transcends the time/space dimension we live in. And, experience and state of mind on our part are irrelevant, because God is simply bigger than us! Thankfully for us too, God has a great deal more patience than we often give him credit for, because I know that even my own prayers at times can be frantic, and yes, I am not too proud to admit that on more than one occasion I have fought with God - many times it was a one-way battle though with me doing the tongue-lashing, yet God always makes everything turn out despite my own limitations (praise be to Him for His mercy too, believe me!). When God says "effective and fervent," he is talking about the prayer from the heart that sincerely seeks Him, and thankfully perfection is not a prerequisite for talking to God, which leads to the next point. This righteousness - where does it come from? In Romans 3:10 we are given the glaring reminder that "there is none righteous, no not one," and the reason for that is in Romans 3:23 - "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Yet, we are told about all these blessings that righteous men receive in the other verses we discussed, so what is that about?? 2 Corinthians 5:21 gives us that answer - "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him!" Again, through Christ do we receive the righteousness to boldly yet in humility approach the throne of grace, and although our earth-bound thoughts often take things for granted, it is an immeasurable marvel to know that God is accessible from anywhere, anytime, and in any human condition we may find ourselves subjected. Thus, that is why we can address God the Father as a person, and can do so simply.
Now, what about the "art in heaven" part of the petition? First, although God is everywhere and in all happenings, He is also transcendant - he is not "in" his creation, as a heresy called panentheism teaches (via Jurgen Moltmann and others, this has also permeated some sectors of Christianity unfortunately) but rather is He who is alone in himself. What on earth does that mean?? For some, it means heaven is a dimension, and although it is that, I personally would hold that it is also a real location somewhere in the universe too. Guardini doesn't invest a lot of detail debating where heaven's location is, but rather he focuses on what it must be, and there are four things that he notes:
1. Heaven is infinitely pure and holy.
2. Heaven is absolutely calm and hidden.
3. Heaven is strange yet familiar
4. Heaven is beautiful and blessed.
Heaven is, in Guardini's explanation, the inaccessibility of God, His "otherness," but it is also our ultimate homeland, a place of origin. So, that tells us what this invocation is to mean then.
We ourselves start from the place we are when we pray this petition, and in the hour we live and what we are engaged in. The God we seek is in heaven, and distinct from all else. To address him, we raise our minds above the earth, and that is because God must be granted his 'otherness." And, that leads to a discussion of some important issues.
We as human beings tend to think certain ways, and when it comes to God it gets us into some hot water. Therefore, when we pray this prayer, invoking "Our Father who art in heaven," we have to come to the admission that God is not necessarily like things, time or ourselves. We don't prescribe to Him what He is supposed to be like according to our preferences, yet we must agree that he is one who is of Himself. That being said, we have to prepare ourselves for the fact that God is going to be different from our own expectations of Him. I believe the Thomistic approach of viewing this, as prescribed by the late Fr. Norris Clarke in his seminal text The One and the Many (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2001) is the best way, in that it affirms that God is love, truth, etc., but on a far more greater level than we as human beings can understand. We know that He is all those things, but not how. We know, for religious purposes, that God is supreme wisdom, love, power, etc., but we don't know the details (Clarke, p. 233-235). Therefore, being we are created in the imago Dei, we hold that God has those attributes which we share, but that they are in the most pure form with God. That being said, we need to now discuss some cautions Guardini deals with at the end of the chapter, as they are important.
Guardini notes on page 16 of his text that human beings have this propensity to defend themselves against God, and one of the ways we tend to do this is create God in our own image, making him innocuous by projecting man's own image upon God instead of seeking a true face-to-face encounter. Much of this is embodied in the way popular culture views Jesus, God the Son. Because He was human too, it is a temptation to try to paint Him like we want Him to be, and one of the most glaring examples was one I came across a few years ago in a New Testament class of all places at my former university, and I call this one the "Caveman Jesus:"
I am not sure what on earth the artist had in mind for making this abomination, but to me it makes our Lord look like a boneheaded retard who can't tie His own shoes, and that borders on the blasphemous. In the efforts of many to "humanize" Jesus and God, making them thus more culturally-relevant, this sort of thing happens frequently. As Guardini correctly notes, stuff like this is not God, but rather a projection of man's self upon God. It is, in essence, trying to re-create God in man's image, and that is insulting to the Holy One who created the whole universe and everything in it. Equally offensive though is this picture, which I call the "Hippie Jesus," and it is unfortunately a portrait that has shaped many's image of Christ for centuries:
Although generally we tend to be a little less offended at the second than the first, fact is neither of them I believe represent the true Jesus. Will you go to hell if you have these pictures in your home? Not at all - as long as you're not worshipping the picture, I think it is fine, although that first picture is just in bad taste! It is time for us to maybe get back to worshipping God as He is, where He is, rather than trying to project our images onto Him. The opening petition of the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father, who art in heaven," exhorts us to do just that - we are, in essence, praying "I want you God, as you are in yourself." As God said to Moses in Exodus 3:14, "I AM WHO I AM," so should we approach God. His Hebrew title YHWH, as a matter of fact, means simply that - "I AM!" When Jesus came, the name He took for Himself at the Annunciation, Y'shua, actually also translates to "I am the salvation." Jesus IS our salvation, and as part of the Godhead, it means that God too is our salvation. Therefore, when we address "our Father, who art in heaven," we are addressing the very source of our salvation, as well as the fact that He in Himself is our homeland - and as Matthew 11:28-30 tells us, it is in this "homeland" that is God that we find our rest. And, this concludes the teaching for now, but I hope it edifies your spirit.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
The Lord's Prayer Part 1 - "Thy Will Be Done"
Preface - I am going to be posting here for the next several weeks a series of studies I am doing at our parish church on Sunday mornings, and the first is an in-depth study of the Lord's Prayer using Romano Guardini's 1932 classic The Lord's Prayer (New York: Random House, 1958; republished by Sophia Institute Press, Manchester, NH - this is the English edition). When the parish embraced the idea of a weekly Bible study, I felt the need to "go back to the basics," and felt this book was a good place to start.
Romano Guardini (1885-1968) is one of the premiere theological masters of the Roman Catholic tradition, and as a theologian and philosopher, he has exerted a great deal of influence over many, including the late Pope John Paul II (then Karol Wojtyla) who actually wrote a graduate thesis in his younger years on Guardini's personalist philosophical position. I was personally introduced to Guardini's material in a graduate Theology class at Franciscan University of Steubenville, and his orthodoxy, as well as his ability to bridge theology and philosophy, drew me to his work. I now use it extensively in my own research.
The material presented here is based on an outline of the chapter, which I will expound upon, much as I did when I taught this material to our parish class.
The "Lord's Prayer," as it is often called, is a very integral part of our devotional and liturgical tradition as Anglo-Catholic Christians, and it is also viewed by the author of the text, Fr. Guardini, as a 55-word catechism. In this series of studies on Guardini's classic text, we will be taking a phrase at a time from this essential petition, and examining it in detail for its theological richness. The way the text is set up, Guardini felt it best when he wrote the book to start with the phrase "Thy will be done," as he calls it a "gateway phrase" to the rest of the prayer. It is that now which we will talk about at length.
On page 4, Guardini says that we are exhorted to ask that God's will be done due to the fact it is something worth asking for. It is precious for which we have to ask, as well as holy and salutary (meaning giving all due respect to Him of which we ask). With that being said, it is important now to discern what God's will is, and in following pages Guardini states five things:
1. His holy intention - both for the world in general and for us in particular.
2. His eternal counsel.
3. The fruit of his wisdom.
4. The force of his stern decrees
5. The loving desire of his heart.
God's will, therefore, is the epitome of the divine glory and perfection, and our very existence is dependant on whether God's will is accomplished in our own life. And, that leads to the evident tension which our own sinful nature ensnared us with at the time of the Fall.
On page 5, Guardini says that although the Christian prays that God's will be done, it therefore must be possible that his will may not be done. What does that mean?? It is really quite simple - God gave humanity free will, and therefore at times human free will can come into conflict with God's will. At this point, I want to reference a later Catholic theologian, Cardinal Jean Danielou, who in his classic 1965 text Prayer as a Political Problem (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965) notes on page 102 that Christianity doesn't merely consist of just "knowing" God, as any religion can have that as its objective, but rather that men know God truly. This means discerning the will of God and following it. As such then, Guardini continues, God's will is rightly called a "should," a probability rather than a promise. In other words, here is what Guardini is saying - God's will is there, and it is the way God intended man to live, but the free will factor must be considered when dealing with humanity as persons in themselves. Some things are God's will and don't require petitioning, for instance - the sun rises, the sun sets, and the natural laws of the universe are in operation because God willed them to be so - Descartes had it right when he said God is a God of science, for true scientific principle is part of God's creation. What Guardini calls on page 6 the "character of inevitability" applies to this as well, and as far as the teaching of the Church goes, it is affirmed in the fact that what is called in metaphysics the Principle of Sufficient Reason, a dynamic principle, is formulated as saying that "every being has sufficient reason for its existence." (Clarke, W. Norris. The One and the Many. Notre Dame, IN: the University of Notre Dame Press, 2001. p. 21). What that means is that God will is the sufficient reason for our existence, and God has spoken that will through two great "books:" One is called by Fr. Norris Clarke "The Book of Nature," which has created things speaking to us directly, and the other is "The Book of Revelation," which is where God, through Scripture and the Holy Tradition of the Church's teaching (together called the Deposit of Faith, or Fidei Depositum) himself reveals to us his own inner nature and his free gifts and special plans for humanity (Clarke, p. 7). It must be understood that Revelation perfects nature, but can only do so when this petition, "Thy Will Be Done," becomes the prayer of the heart, which is the whole premise of Guardini's point on this subject. Also, Nature will never be opposed to Revelation (this is called philosophically the Principle of Non-Contradiction) because again, God created Nature, and it always bears evidence of his creative will. Therefore, as Guardini notes, in the cases of the sun rising and setting, the seasons changing, etc., God's will is entrusted to the course of nature he created. This is also affirmed in Scripture in several places, notably Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 and Matthew 5;45.
However, there is a difference when it comes to higher and exalted things, and none is more higher and exalted on the earth and in God's created order than man himself - God created us in his image (Genesis 1:27) and man was given dominion by God over the earth as part of God's intended will (Genesis 1:28-30). However, when man fell and the sting of sin infected humanity, it became a possibility that man could actually obstruct God's will. Therefore, in order to bring God's will to fruition, it cannot come through the compelling force of nature, but rather through something that arises in man's inner being - the origin of that must be in faith and revelation, and come from the heart, and intellect, is rooted in love, and must be freely accepted by man's free will. The only thing that can make this work is a purity of heart and willful cooperation of man. It means man has some conditions to meet as well:
1. A recognition of truth
2. Creation of noble works
3. A just order in society, etc.
A pure and willing spirit is not guaranteed by compulsion - as Guardini notes on page 8, providence and destiny don't take the same course with man as the rising sun and falling rain, but are linked to man's active willingness. However, on the negative, this willingness can also be threatened by indolence, self-seeking, vanity, and apathy, and if it is, man is in rebellion against God's will and can obstruct it in his own life. The freedom of the human heart and will, therefore, are what produce the nobility of character that allows man to accept God's will. What this means therefore, is that the human will has both positive and negative:
1. The human will harbors good, constructive, and elevating powers.
2. However, it can also entertain corrupting, degrading, and disruptive forces.
Due to man's Fall, he is prone to evil and his free will often counters God's will, hence making God's will in danger of contradiction. As a principle, the higher the nature of what God wills, the more it is imperiled. Also, the nobler something is desired by God's will, the less assurance is evident that it will be done and the more frail the divine will appears on earth. However, God has a plan regardless, and although the desire for his redemptive love on the part of his creation appears singularly ineffective, there is a slight possibility of its fulfillment. The paradox of the Christian, therefore, is that he knows the way of the world, and although original sin was washed away in the waters of the baptismal font, the propensity to sin makes the Christian have a realization that in his own ways he can do things that can contradict God's will, which is why the grace of salvation is constantly renewed through a spirit that is responsive to God's Holy Spirit. God doesn't force man to conform to his will, and never has - however, there are consequences we bring on ourselves when we don't follow the will of God. This is therefore the paradox and struggle of the Christian life.
However, the hope is very encouraging. For one thing, the self-will of man doesn't substitute for the will of God, and due to that, it is only through divinely-sanctioned grace that the mystery of God's will can be accomplished through (not by!) man. Therefore, the accomplishment of God's will must be granted by the same God who demands its fulfillment, and only the free will of the Christian who prays the prayer, "Thy will be done." It is the responsibility of the Christian therefore to understand the mysterious nature of God's will, including the truth that it can only be accomplished by the gracious gift of the same God. God's will is not sent either as a lifeless force, but rather he infuses it with his power - we are given that when the Holy Spirit indwells us. And, the power (called the "power from on high" in Acts 1:8) is what brings the salvation of mankind (via the Gospel message of Christ's mission - see Romans 1:16) to those who choose to believe and accept it. The glory of God and the salvation of mankind, therefore, are one in that they are the same work of the Holy Spirit. In time, the will of God will be the standard by which mankind will be judged - in the end, in other words, God's will prevails. Therefore, the petition "Thy will be done," has a significance in that it assures the Christian of that restoration of what God intended us to be, and by bringing our will into harmony and submission to God's, we are assured of his ultimate salvation so long as we walk in that will and don't deviate from it. Therefore, Guardini calls this petition the "gateway" because everything else rests upon how we respond to God's will, and therefore it is the axis of this prayer.
Romano Guardini (1885-1968) is one of the premiere theological masters of the Roman Catholic tradition, and as a theologian and philosopher, he has exerted a great deal of influence over many, including the late Pope John Paul II (then Karol Wojtyla) who actually wrote a graduate thesis in his younger years on Guardini's personalist philosophical position. I was personally introduced to Guardini's material in a graduate Theology class at Franciscan University of Steubenville, and his orthodoxy, as well as his ability to bridge theology and philosophy, drew me to his work. I now use it extensively in my own research.
The material presented here is based on an outline of the chapter, which I will expound upon, much as I did when I taught this material to our parish class.
The "Lord's Prayer," as it is often called, is a very integral part of our devotional and liturgical tradition as Anglo-Catholic Christians, and it is also viewed by the author of the text, Fr. Guardini, as a 55-word catechism. In this series of studies on Guardini's classic text, we will be taking a phrase at a time from this essential petition, and examining it in detail for its theological richness. The way the text is set up, Guardini felt it best when he wrote the book to start with the phrase "Thy will be done," as he calls it a "gateway phrase" to the rest of the prayer. It is that now which we will talk about at length.
On page 4, Guardini says that we are exhorted to ask that God's will be done due to the fact it is something worth asking for. It is precious for which we have to ask, as well as holy and salutary (meaning giving all due respect to Him of which we ask). With that being said, it is important now to discern what God's will is, and in following pages Guardini states five things:
1. His holy intention - both for the world in general and for us in particular.
2. His eternal counsel.
3. The fruit of his wisdom.
4. The force of his stern decrees
5. The loving desire of his heart.
God's will, therefore, is the epitome of the divine glory and perfection, and our very existence is dependant on whether God's will is accomplished in our own life. And, that leads to the evident tension which our own sinful nature ensnared us with at the time of the Fall.
On page 5, Guardini says that although the Christian prays that God's will be done, it therefore must be possible that his will may not be done. What does that mean?? It is really quite simple - God gave humanity free will, and therefore at times human free will can come into conflict with God's will. At this point, I want to reference a later Catholic theologian, Cardinal Jean Danielou, who in his classic 1965 text Prayer as a Political Problem (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965) notes on page 102 that Christianity doesn't merely consist of just "knowing" God, as any religion can have that as its objective, but rather that men know God truly. This means discerning the will of God and following it. As such then, Guardini continues, God's will is rightly called a "should," a probability rather than a promise. In other words, here is what Guardini is saying - God's will is there, and it is the way God intended man to live, but the free will factor must be considered when dealing with humanity as persons in themselves. Some things are God's will and don't require petitioning, for instance - the sun rises, the sun sets, and the natural laws of the universe are in operation because God willed them to be so - Descartes had it right when he said God is a God of science, for true scientific principle is part of God's creation. What Guardini calls on page 6 the "character of inevitability" applies to this as well, and as far as the teaching of the Church goes, it is affirmed in the fact that what is called in metaphysics the Principle of Sufficient Reason, a dynamic principle, is formulated as saying that "every being has sufficient reason for its existence." (Clarke, W. Norris. The One and the Many. Notre Dame, IN: the University of Notre Dame Press, 2001. p. 21). What that means is that God will is the sufficient reason for our existence, and God has spoken that will through two great "books:" One is called by Fr. Norris Clarke "The Book of Nature," which has created things speaking to us directly, and the other is "The Book of Revelation," which is where God, through Scripture and the Holy Tradition of the Church's teaching (together called the Deposit of Faith, or Fidei Depositum) himself reveals to us his own inner nature and his free gifts and special plans for humanity (Clarke, p. 7). It must be understood that Revelation perfects nature, but can only do so when this petition, "Thy Will Be Done," becomes the prayer of the heart, which is the whole premise of Guardini's point on this subject. Also, Nature will never be opposed to Revelation (this is called philosophically the Principle of Non-Contradiction) because again, God created Nature, and it always bears evidence of his creative will. Therefore, as Guardini notes, in the cases of the sun rising and setting, the seasons changing, etc., God's will is entrusted to the course of nature he created. This is also affirmed in Scripture in several places, notably Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 and Matthew 5;45.
However, there is a difference when it comes to higher and exalted things, and none is more higher and exalted on the earth and in God's created order than man himself - God created us in his image (Genesis 1:27) and man was given dominion by God over the earth as part of God's intended will (Genesis 1:28-30). However, when man fell and the sting of sin infected humanity, it became a possibility that man could actually obstruct God's will. Therefore, in order to bring God's will to fruition, it cannot come through the compelling force of nature, but rather through something that arises in man's inner being - the origin of that must be in faith and revelation, and come from the heart, and intellect, is rooted in love, and must be freely accepted by man's free will. The only thing that can make this work is a purity of heart and willful cooperation of man. It means man has some conditions to meet as well:
1. A recognition of truth
2. Creation of noble works
3. A just order in society, etc.
A pure and willing spirit is not guaranteed by compulsion - as Guardini notes on page 8, providence and destiny don't take the same course with man as the rising sun and falling rain, but are linked to man's active willingness. However, on the negative, this willingness can also be threatened by indolence, self-seeking, vanity, and apathy, and if it is, man is in rebellion against God's will and can obstruct it in his own life. The freedom of the human heart and will, therefore, are what produce the nobility of character that allows man to accept God's will. What this means therefore, is that the human will has both positive and negative:
1. The human will harbors good, constructive, and elevating powers.
2. However, it can also entertain corrupting, degrading, and disruptive forces.
Due to man's Fall, he is prone to evil and his free will often counters God's will, hence making God's will in danger of contradiction. As a principle, the higher the nature of what God wills, the more it is imperiled. Also, the nobler something is desired by God's will, the less assurance is evident that it will be done and the more frail the divine will appears on earth. However, God has a plan regardless, and although the desire for his redemptive love on the part of his creation appears singularly ineffective, there is a slight possibility of its fulfillment. The paradox of the Christian, therefore, is that he knows the way of the world, and although original sin was washed away in the waters of the baptismal font, the propensity to sin makes the Christian have a realization that in his own ways he can do things that can contradict God's will, which is why the grace of salvation is constantly renewed through a spirit that is responsive to God's Holy Spirit. God doesn't force man to conform to his will, and never has - however, there are consequences we bring on ourselves when we don't follow the will of God. This is therefore the paradox and struggle of the Christian life.
However, the hope is very encouraging. For one thing, the self-will of man doesn't substitute for the will of God, and due to that, it is only through divinely-sanctioned grace that the mystery of God's will can be accomplished through (not by!) man. Therefore, the accomplishment of God's will must be granted by the same God who demands its fulfillment, and only the free will of the Christian who prays the prayer, "Thy will be done." It is the responsibility of the Christian therefore to understand the mysterious nature of God's will, including the truth that it can only be accomplished by the gracious gift of the same God. God's will is not sent either as a lifeless force, but rather he infuses it with his power - we are given that when the Holy Spirit indwells us. And, the power (called the "power from on high" in Acts 1:8) is what brings the salvation of mankind (via the Gospel message of Christ's mission - see Romans 1:16) to those who choose to believe and accept it. The glory of God and the salvation of mankind, therefore, are one in that they are the same work of the Holy Spirit. In time, the will of God will be the standard by which mankind will be judged - in the end, in other words, God's will prevails. Therefore, the petition "Thy will be done," has a significance in that it assures the Christian of that restoration of what God intended us to be, and by bringing our will into harmony and submission to God's, we are assured of his ultimate salvation so long as we walk in that will and don't deviate from it. Therefore, Guardini calls this petition the "gateway" because everything else rests upon how we respond to God's will, and therefore it is the axis of this prayer.
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
R.I.P., Carpenter's Home
Sunday I was reading a story in the Lakeland Ledger that immediately got my attention because it is big news - the famed Carpenter's Home Church building is coming down after 30 years. The story had originally been prefaced on February 17th, but the new one claimed front-page coverage. This is significant not only in the history of Lakeland itself, but for many people it has a personal dimension, and I am no exception.
Much of what was taught at Carpenter's Home over the years was stuff I would not personally agree with, and there has been some controversy with the megachurch over the years too. Despite that, however, a part of my own history has Carpenter's Home in it, and I wanted to talk about that here. I was never a member, nor did I attend, Carpenter's Home - nonetheless, I am involved in its legacy.
First though, a little about the history of this famous and sometimes notorious church. Lakeland has always been a sort of church-going "mecca" for decades, and for some reason the Assemblies of God has had roots here since the beginning - it has a college (Southeastern University), its district offices, several affilliated churches, and of course the largest megachurch in all Florida; Carpenter's Home was the latter. However, Carpenter's had humble beginnings, as its history goes back to what was then the original First Assembly of God in Lakeland. First Assembly was founded in 1921, and it met in a building on Lemon Street we now know as the "old stone church." This is where my first intersection with Carpenter's history comes. When Barb and I first came here in 1992 and I started my classwork at Southeastern, I was a member then of the Foursquare denomination and we desperately needed a church to attend. So, upon looking, I found one - it was called Family Praise and Worship Church, and was pastored by Rev. Gene Pansler (the son of the former Vice President of Southeastern, the late Dr. Clarence Pansler). Family Praise and Worship Church at that time met in "The Old Stone Church" on Lemon Street, so I got to know that building well. Over the years, as First Assembly expanded, the property of "The Old Stone Church" was acquired by the Shelton family, and they were the ones who leased it to Rev. Pansler when he made the decision to affilliate with Foursquare and start a church here. Unfortunately, the Foursquare congregation only lasted a few years until it closed, but its presence in the historic building kept it around for a while longer. Unfortunately, no extant photos of it could be found to show here, and I am not sure if it even is still there or not, but it is significant to see that a functioning congregation of some sort lasted all those years.
Around 1964, First Assembly had grown to the point that it needed a bigger building, and it purchased a large parcel of land between Main Street and Rose Street just east of downtown Lakeland, and there it built a larger building. Two years later, in 1966, its most notable pastor, Rev, Karl Strader, took the reins of the First Assembly congregation and it grew more. Strader, who at 83 is still very active, also drew some fire because of his more "charismatic" teaching, which included among other things a great emphasis on personal prophetic ministry and other things the soon-burgeoning Charismatic movement would be noted for. As a matter of fact, he was noted as a sort of "maverick" in the Assemblies of God (Stephen Strang, "Strader, Karl David," in Burgess, McGee, and Alexander, The Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements {Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988}p. 833) despite his progress at growing a huge congregation which Gary White in his Ledger article Sunday rightly said anticipated the rise of the large megachurches later. The growth was so phenomenal, as a matter of fact, that it compelled Strader and the church leadership to plan in the early 1980's a larger facility, and that is where the current building came into the picture. The Main Street property was later acquired by another congregation, a Word/Faith church affilliated with Kenneth Hagin's ministry called Family Worship Center, and they too became a large church - they still occupy the property today, although since they have had to build two new large sanctuaries to accomodate their crowds too.
It was in 1985 that the new facilities, located in north Lakeland near US 98 North, were opened, and this facility was the biggest anyone had seen to this point - it seated 10,000 people. In addition, a school (Evangel Christian School) was started, as well as a radio station (WCIE) and a large retirement complex (Carpenter's Home Estates). This is the building which is also today being demolished. Both Barb and myself had a lot of history with Carpenter's at this juncture too, as in 1986 at a concert Barb received what is called the "baptism of the Holy Spirit," with evidence of tongues. Interesting enough, I was having a spiritual transformation of my own over 1000 miles away, when earlier in 1986 I was born again and baptized in water. It would be three more years before I received the Pentecostal experience in a whole different way and another place, but all of that factored into how we ended up in Lakeland in the first place. Carpenter's continued to have a few issues even in its heyday in the new mammoth sanctuary, as soon Strader attracted attention from the local Assemblies of God district for some of his more controversial teachings, and the result of those was a church split in 1989 from which sprang Victory Assembly - Victory acquired land a couple of miles away on Griffin Road and built a sizeable church of its own, which today is itself a megachurch. Later, in 1992, a controversy surrounding a Ponzi scheme involving Daniel Strader (Pastor Strader's son) landed him in jail for a length of time and also affected the church's publicity negatively. Then, in the same year, a controversial South African evangelist by the name of Rodney Howard-Browne began holding revival meetings there which evolved into the "Holy Laughter" movement, and this in turn created some problems due to its excesses. To be honest, Barb and I attended some of those meetings in 1993, and I was not overly impressed - the theatrics seemed staged to me, and people were "falling under the power" more out of a Pavlovian response than they were to a real moving of the Spirit, and the general irreverence displayed for things holy was almost blasphemous. This led to a slow decline of the famed megachurch in the late 1990's, and by 2005 the membership of the church had dropped to about 10-15% of what it used to be, compelling them to sell the facilities to another rising megachurch organization, Without Walls in nearby Tampa, which was founded in the early 1990's by Randy and Paula White (now divorced) who had Church of God roots. Without Walls, however, soon was in its own decline, and by 2011 the great edifice stood vacant. And, today it is slated to be demolished. It is a tragic ending to the story.
I also share another part of my own story with Carpenter's Home, in that from 1995 to 1997 I worked as a security officer there. Given the immense size of the congregation and the active schedule of concerts featuring a lot of superstars of Christian music, security became a necessity. When I was hired on in April 1995, I was mostly assigned to the adjacent Carpenter's Estates (the retirement community), but did work some concerts and other events at the church too. Carpenter's, despite its controversy and excesses, did provide a great service to many of us Southeastern students then, and although the job didn't pay much, it still was sufficient to pay the bills. Many of my co-workers, as well as a couple of my ranking supervisors, were actually my classmates. The experience of working there also helped me to meet a number of fascinating people, which was a blessing in itself. However in time I moved on, and it soon became apparent that the church was declining and couldn't maintain the security detail it had, so it was later dissolved.
Carpenter's Home was also where I walked the aisle and received my Bachelor's degree in 1996. For many years, it was a tradition for Southeastern to hold its commencement services at Carpenter's Home (Strader, to his credit, always supported Southeastern and its mission back in the day, which is why so many of us students were given good employment opportunities there too), and that continued to be the case I believe up to the early 2000's, when the venue was changed to Victory Church nearby. Today though, I am not even sure Victory is the venue anymore, as Southeastern has itself in recent years seemed (at least to me) to disconnect itself from many of the local Assemblies congregations that once supported it, which is an unfortunate story for another time.
To give some concluding thoughts, Carpenter's was an institution in Lakeland for many years, and ironically had the congregation still been around today, I am sure they would have had quite the celebration for their 30th anniversary - Gary White, in the Ledger article, also made that observation. The tragic saga of Carpenter's Home though is one that many should learn from, because there are lessons. First, bigger is not always better - often, with large megachurches, they lose a lot of what made them into the great institutions they become, and as they do so, there is no place to go but down. Second, excesses can do more harm than good, despite intentions and sincerity. In my many years of involvement personally with the Pentecostal tradition, I can say honestly that I have seen it all - and, some of that involved some pretty bizarre stuff. Excesses are a lot like a triple-fudge layer cake though - it may taste good, but if you indulge in a lot of it you will end up dying of some diabetic-related malady. The Holy Spirit still operates today - God is immutable, and that includes the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead. But, we also need to exercise good discernment skills too, lest we fall into some potentially dangerous trap. Pastor Strader now lives at the Estates he helped build, and by all indications he is still vibrant and active at age 83. And, a remnant of Carpenter's still exists in Lakeland, just to the north of the original sanctuary - it is called Ignited Church, and is pastored by Stephen Strader, Karl's son. Ignited doesn't draw near the crowds it used to, as it has a more modest facility and unfortunately is prone to some of the same excesses that brought down the original church - a few years back, Ignited tried to re-create the "Laughing Revival" of years previous by inviting an offensive, foul-mouthed, tattoo-covered bully by the name of Todd Bentley to conduct "revival meetings," but it was to no avail. Bentley, like so many other charlatans, quacks, and slick-talkers before him, soon generated his own controversy and the "revival" ended with no fanfare or fizzle. I only hope that Stephen Strader and his pastoral staff will learn to exercise a little more discernment regarding who steps onto their sanctuary platform, because the last thing Lakeland needs is another hyped-up "revival." In recent years, Lakeland has become sort of a "burned-out" district in regard to religious phenomena - there are still solid churches and individual Christians of all denominations to be found, but they are not quite like they used to be. It is sad really, because the once-great spiritual legacy this town had is something that could enrich those who learn about it. However, with charlatans, showmen, and others faking revivals to put money in their own pockets, much of the newer generation here has grown cold - and Southeastern has even followed suit, because for all the talk of creating a distinct Pentecostal identity you hear on that campus, it has yet to be put into practice, especially with professors in the Religion Department there who have their own agendas and don't really concern themselves with the spiritual formation of the students they teach. Is there hope for a true spiritual renewal in Lakeland, that can bring back some of the good legacy of the past? With God, all things are obviously possible, but it's not totally up to God - people need to have a desire for it. Maybe one day God will have mercy and make it happen, as there may still be hope for Lakeland yet.
This sort of concludes my own chronicle of the ending of a great legacy of a famous church in Lakeland, and the good thing is that many o of us who have had some involvement with the old Carpenter's Home will preserve the best of what it was. God be with you until next time.
Much of what was taught at Carpenter's Home over the years was stuff I would not personally agree with, and there has been some controversy with the megachurch over the years too. Despite that, however, a part of my own history has Carpenter's Home in it, and I wanted to talk about that here. I was never a member, nor did I attend, Carpenter's Home - nonetheless, I am involved in its legacy.
First though, a little about the history of this famous and sometimes notorious church. Lakeland has always been a sort of church-going "mecca" for decades, and for some reason the Assemblies of God has had roots here since the beginning - it has a college (Southeastern University), its district offices, several affilliated churches, and of course the largest megachurch in all Florida; Carpenter's Home was the latter. However, Carpenter's had humble beginnings, as its history goes back to what was then the original First Assembly of God in Lakeland. First Assembly was founded in 1921, and it met in a building on Lemon Street we now know as the "old stone church." This is where my first intersection with Carpenter's history comes. When Barb and I first came here in 1992 and I started my classwork at Southeastern, I was a member then of the Foursquare denomination and we desperately needed a church to attend. So, upon looking, I found one - it was called Family Praise and Worship Church, and was pastored by Rev. Gene Pansler (the son of the former Vice President of Southeastern, the late Dr. Clarence Pansler). Family Praise and Worship Church at that time met in "The Old Stone Church" on Lemon Street, so I got to know that building well. Over the years, as First Assembly expanded, the property of "The Old Stone Church" was acquired by the Shelton family, and they were the ones who leased it to Rev. Pansler when he made the decision to affilliate with Foursquare and start a church here. Unfortunately, the Foursquare congregation only lasted a few years until it closed, but its presence in the historic building kept it around for a while longer. Unfortunately, no extant photos of it could be found to show here, and I am not sure if it even is still there or not, but it is significant to see that a functioning congregation of some sort lasted all those years.
Around 1964, First Assembly had grown to the point that it needed a bigger building, and it purchased a large parcel of land between Main Street and Rose Street just east of downtown Lakeland, and there it built a larger building. Two years later, in 1966, its most notable pastor, Rev, Karl Strader, took the reins of the First Assembly congregation and it grew more. Strader, who at 83 is still very active, also drew some fire because of his more "charismatic" teaching, which included among other things a great emphasis on personal prophetic ministry and other things the soon-burgeoning Charismatic movement would be noted for. As a matter of fact, he was noted as a sort of "maverick" in the Assemblies of God (Stephen Strang, "Strader, Karl David," in Burgess, McGee, and Alexander, The Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements {Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988}p. 833) despite his progress at growing a huge congregation which Gary White in his Ledger article Sunday rightly said anticipated the rise of the large megachurches later. The growth was so phenomenal, as a matter of fact, that it compelled Strader and the church leadership to plan in the early 1980's a larger facility, and that is where the current building came into the picture. The Main Street property was later acquired by another congregation, a Word/Faith church affilliated with Kenneth Hagin's ministry called Family Worship Center, and they too became a large church - they still occupy the property today, although since they have had to build two new large sanctuaries to accomodate their crowds too.
The immense 10,000-seat Carpenter's Home sanctuary
It was in 1985 that the new facilities, located in north Lakeland near US 98 North, were opened, and this facility was the biggest anyone had seen to this point - it seated 10,000 people. In addition, a school (Evangel Christian School) was started, as well as a radio station (WCIE) and a large retirement complex (Carpenter's Home Estates). This is the building which is also today being demolished. Both Barb and myself had a lot of history with Carpenter's at this juncture too, as in 1986 at a concert Barb received what is called the "baptism of the Holy Spirit," with evidence of tongues. Interesting enough, I was having a spiritual transformation of my own over 1000 miles away, when earlier in 1986 I was born again and baptized in water. It would be three more years before I received the Pentecostal experience in a whole different way and another place, but all of that factored into how we ended up in Lakeland in the first place. Carpenter's continued to have a few issues even in its heyday in the new mammoth sanctuary, as soon Strader attracted attention from the local Assemblies of God district for some of his more controversial teachings, and the result of those was a church split in 1989 from which sprang Victory Assembly - Victory acquired land a couple of miles away on Griffin Road and built a sizeable church of its own, which today is itself a megachurch. Later, in 1992, a controversy surrounding a Ponzi scheme involving Daniel Strader (Pastor Strader's son) landed him in jail for a length of time and also affected the church's publicity negatively. Then, in the same year, a controversial South African evangelist by the name of Rodney Howard-Browne began holding revival meetings there which evolved into the "Holy Laughter" movement, and this in turn created some problems due to its excesses. To be honest, Barb and I attended some of those meetings in 1993, and I was not overly impressed - the theatrics seemed staged to me, and people were "falling under the power" more out of a Pavlovian response than they were to a real moving of the Spirit, and the general irreverence displayed for things holy was almost blasphemous. This led to a slow decline of the famed megachurch in the late 1990's, and by 2005 the membership of the church had dropped to about 10-15% of what it used to be, compelling them to sell the facilities to another rising megachurch organization, Without Walls in nearby Tampa, which was founded in the early 1990's by Randy and Paula White (now divorced) who had Church of God roots. Without Walls, however, soon was in its own decline, and by 2011 the great edifice stood vacant. And, today it is slated to be demolished. It is a tragic ending to the story.
I also share another part of my own story with Carpenter's Home, in that from 1995 to 1997 I worked as a security officer there. Given the immense size of the congregation and the active schedule of concerts featuring a lot of superstars of Christian music, security became a necessity. When I was hired on in April 1995, I was mostly assigned to the adjacent Carpenter's Estates (the retirement community), but did work some concerts and other events at the church too. Carpenter's, despite its controversy and excesses, did provide a great service to many of us Southeastern students then, and although the job didn't pay much, it still was sufficient to pay the bills. Many of my co-workers, as well as a couple of my ranking supervisors, were actually my classmates. The experience of working there also helped me to meet a number of fascinating people, which was a blessing in itself. However in time I moved on, and it soon became apparent that the church was declining and couldn't maintain the security detail it had, so it was later dissolved.
Carpenter's Home was also where I walked the aisle and received my Bachelor's degree in 1996. For many years, it was a tradition for Southeastern to hold its commencement services at Carpenter's Home (Strader, to his credit, always supported Southeastern and its mission back in the day, which is why so many of us students were given good employment opportunities there too), and that continued to be the case I believe up to the early 2000's, when the venue was changed to Victory Church nearby. Today though, I am not even sure Victory is the venue anymore, as Southeastern has itself in recent years seemed (at least to me) to disconnect itself from many of the local Assemblies congregations that once supported it, which is an unfortunate story for another time.
To give some concluding thoughts, Carpenter's was an institution in Lakeland for many years, and ironically had the congregation still been around today, I am sure they would have had quite the celebration for their 30th anniversary - Gary White, in the Ledger article, also made that observation. The tragic saga of Carpenter's Home though is one that many should learn from, because there are lessons. First, bigger is not always better - often, with large megachurches, they lose a lot of what made them into the great institutions they become, and as they do so, there is no place to go but down. Second, excesses can do more harm than good, despite intentions and sincerity. In my many years of involvement personally with the Pentecostal tradition, I can say honestly that I have seen it all - and, some of that involved some pretty bizarre stuff. Excesses are a lot like a triple-fudge layer cake though - it may taste good, but if you indulge in a lot of it you will end up dying of some diabetic-related malady. The Holy Spirit still operates today - God is immutable, and that includes the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead. But, we also need to exercise good discernment skills too, lest we fall into some potentially dangerous trap. Pastor Strader now lives at the Estates he helped build, and by all indications he is still vibrant and active at age 83. And, a remnant of Carpenter's still exists in Lakeland, just to the north of the original sanctuary - it is called Ignited Church, and is pastored by Stephen Strader, Karl's son. Ignited doesn't draw near the crowds it used to, as it has a more modest facility and unfortunately is prone to some of the same excesses that brought down the original church - a few years back, Ignited tried to re-create the "Laughing Revival" of years previous by inviting an offensive, foul-mouthed, tattoo-covered bully by the name of Todd Bentley to conduct "revival meetings," but it was to no avail. Bentley, like so many other charlatans, quacks, and slick-talkers before him, soon generated his own controversy and the "revival" ended with no fanfare or fizzle. I only hope that Stephen Strader and his pastoral staff will learn to exercise a little more discernment regarding who steps onto their sanctuary platform, because the last thing Lakeland needs is another hyped-up "revival." In recent years, Lakeland has become sort of a "burned-out" district in regard to religious phenomena - there are still solid churches and individual Christians of all denominations to be found, but they are not quite like they used to be. It is sad really, because the once-great spiritual legacy this town had is something that could enrich those who learn about it. However, with charlatans, showmen, and others faking revivals to put money in their own pockets, much of the newer generation here has grown cold - and Southeastern has even followed suit, because for all the talk of creating a distinct Pentecostal identity you hear on that campus, it has yet to be put into practice, especially with professors in the Religion Department there who have their own agendas and don't really concern themselves with the spiritual formation of the students they teach. Is there hope for a true spiritual renewal in Lakeland, that can bring back some of the good legacy of the past? With God, all things are obviously possible, but it's not totally up to God - people need to have a desire for it. Maybe one day God will have mercy and make it happen, as there may still be hope for Lakeland yet.
This sort of concludes my own chronicle of the ending of a great legacy of a famous church in Lakeland, and the good thing is that many o of us who have had some involvement with the old Carpenter's Home will preserve the best of what it was. God be with you until next time.
Saturday, January 3, 2015
Some Theological Thoughts To Begin the Year
As I was writing in my personal journal last night, some things came to me that I wanted to expound upon and share. It is kind of a new twist on a Scripture that many are familiar with, and today I want to talk about that a little, as some fresh insight hit me as I was doing my periodic journal entry.
Isaiah 5:20 is a prophetic and very stern warning from God himself through the voice of his prophet that says this: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil. Who put light for darkness and darkness for light. Who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" If we look over now in 2 Timothy 3, a couple of verses stand out here which could be a commentary by the Apostle St. Paul on Isaiah's dire warning. Let's look at verse 5 first - "but having a form of godliness and denying the power thereof." Secondly, let's drop down to verse 7 - "always learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." Finally, that second verse is complimentary to Romans 1:22 - "professing to be wise, they became fools." The preceding verses give the foundation to the following commentary you are about to read, and I want to take things in a slightly different direction on this.
When I was in high school, one of the major literary works I was required to read and memorize in part was a passage from William Shakespeare's classic play Julius Caesar. It is found in Act 3, and is Anthony's speech after Caesar is assassinated by Brutus. The famous quote is "the evil men do lives after them, but the good is oft interred with their bones." I remember having to memorize that line from the play, and to this day I can still recite the whole first half of this speech. However, there is an odd spiritual truth to be found in this quote that got my attention based on a few recent firestorms I faced during the month of December, and as I reflected upon those facts, something came together. If we take Isaiah 5:20 as truth and a relevant warning for today (which I do personally) it means that oftentimes a good legacy may be given a tainted interpretation by a culture that is gazing through the lens of its own evil. In other words, something that is in reality good is labeled evil by a culture which seems to think what is evil is good. When 2 Timothy 3 opens, its very first verse warns that in the latter days perilous times will come. First, we need to examine what the word perilous means, because it also pops up again later in Ephesians 6:13 in reference to the "evil day" in that verse. The root of "perilous" is the word peril, which Webster's New World Dictionary notes comes from the root Latin word experiri, meaning "to try." The definition of "peril" follows as being "a danger, exposure to harm or injury, Looking back in my own published study of Ephesians as I discussed the "evil day," I noted also that a similar Greek word, parasku, meaning "a time of preparation or trial," is used, and I can see a connection. So, based on that knowledge, I would posit that the "perilous times" noted in 3 Timothy 1 and the "evil day" of Ephesians 6 are one and the same in this case. And, it is also where many theologians get the idea of the 7-year Tribulation (or a "trying time," if you will) at the end of days from. So, in essence, if looked at in this context perilous times then denotes that Christians will be tested, and many will fail, hence "falling away," or apostasy. In using Scripture to interpret Scripture, it is important to understand that one thing does build upon something already said, especially when it comes to multiple passages by the same writer (in this case, the Apostle Paul). Earlier in the Apostle's epistles, Paul also notes an important need for discernment - Christians need to know what is what, especially when it comes to cultural trends and the truth behind much of what secular culture accepts in order to inform better so that the believer would not be deceived by things the culture says is OK. One trait of the end-times generation, however, is going to be an increasing tendency to call virtue vice, and vice virtue - things that were traditionally considered good, in other words, would be called evil, and things traditionally understood as evil will all of a sudden be celebrated as good. Let me ask you now this question - are we not seeing that today?? Take this whole "gay marriage" issue for instance - although homosexuality is nothing new as it has always plagued humanity, the difference is that it was rightly perceived as unnatural and even evil in the past. Nowadays, it is celebrated as something good, and never in human history has a group practicing a sinful behavior been all of a sudden given the same status as an ethnic group! And, it isn't just with homosexual activity either - other sins are equally touted by the entertainment industry - this Miley Cyrus character, with her filthy and shameless "twirking" on stage, was practically wooed and wowed by the press, while her practical twin, the no-talent twirp Justin Bieber, practically can do any stupid thing he wants and is still a pop icon (that situation prompted a very good joke from Michael Buble recently on his Christmas special, when he introduced himself as "the Canadian singer that didn't egg your house this year."). Then, lets look at the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman incident and the Ferguson riots of recent note. Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown were nothing but street thugs engaged in drug use, criminal activity, and just degenerate behavior, yet they are touted as "heroes" and the responsible cop who was within his legal jurisdiction to defend himself (in the Ferguson case) is made to look like the bad guy. The stupid thing about all that was that it was turned into a race issue because Trayvon and Michael Brown happen to be Black - God forbid we hold them accountable for committing violent crimes, because as Al Sharpton shrilly whines, that is "racist." The thing is, however, a lot of Black crimes, many violent and some against other Blacks, get little attention because of that fear of being labelled a "racist." As Colin Flaherty says in his excellent chronicle of this stuff entitled White Girl Bleed a Lot (Washington, DC: WND Books, 2013), many Blacks are engaging across the country in mob violence and are partaking of a dangerous sport called "the Knockout Game," and its object is to find a defenseless White, Asian, or Hispanic guy, punch him in the face as hard as you can, and then proceed to beat the living crap out of the poor guy until either your arms get tired or he is rendered unconscious (Flaherty, p. 13). But, our culture will call the victim "evil" and the perpetrators "heroes" largely due to a mentality that Thomas Sowell notes in his book Black Rednecks and White Liberals (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005) - Sowell (who himself is African-American) could have easily addressed Ferguson 9 years before it happened when he astutely observes on page 250 of his book that the failure of any particular people to achieve is often transformed verbally into a denial of "access" or "opportunity" to them by others (in this case, it is repeated ad nauseum by race-baiters like Sharpton, Jackson, and their unofficial mentor, Black Liberation theologian James Cone - Cone's racism ranks up there with Hitler and David Duke, but he is touted as a "theological master" even in some supposedly "Christian" colleges while real theologians such as Francis Schaeffer and Romano Guardini are ignored.). What that means is a shirking of personal responsibility, and especially in this current day, it has no relevance, yet it is bought into by agitators and politicians. So, in the name of "deprivation," depravity is just sort of glossed-over as a bi-product of a supposed disadvantaged existence. At some point, I have another theory as to why many Blacks behave as they do and fail to raise their kids right, because I see a direct correlation between bad Black behavior and the abortion industry, but that is a discussion best suited for another article in the near future. For now, the argument that deprivation causes depravity, and therefore ought to be just shrugged off even by the victims, is a case of calling evil "good." And, the consequence is that those who stand up against it will be labelled "racist" and "evil" by the powers-that-be, and hence Shakespeare's words take a sinister new meaning - a legacy labelled evil lives well after the person accused of it (take Robert E. Lee as a perfect example!) but their good attributes are often taken to the grave with their corpse and forgotten about. Trayvon Martin, for instance, is a "hero" and martyr for one reason and one reason only - the color of his skin. Yet, there are real martyrs of terrorism - many who died in 9/11, for instance - whose legacies have been forgotten for exactly the same reason - many people who were killed in 9/11 at the World Trade Center were just normal, hard-working folks who loved their families and wanted to make a good life for them, but because they have White skin they are not worth anyone's consideration. So, while Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin's names have gone household, how many 9/11 victims can you name? Probably, like myself, you know none, and that is sad. It is almost as if Shakespeare spoke prophetically, didn't he?
This racial unrest has also created persecution against Jews, veterans, and other groups, and that leads me to another part of this discussion. When I was a kid, I remember reading excerpts of a book by an Argentinian journalist of Jewish heritage by the name of Jacobo Timerman entitled Prisoner Without a Name, Cell Without a Number. The book, written in 1981, chronicles Timerman's incarceration in an Argentine prison during the time of the proto-fascist regime of Juan Peron there, and he was imprisoned because he spoke out against things he felt were unjust. In the prison, it was quickly discovered that Timerman was also Jewish by heritage, which led to a lot of persecution for that. Again, over 30 years prior to Ferguson, Timerman almost prophetically details what has happened, and the potential danger it poses, as he writes the following:
If we cared to formulate a historical equation, we could say that the conditions do exist: a profound political crisis, an economic crisis with an annual 170% rate of inflation that has lasted several years, impotence on the part of political parties to come up with a minimally coherent response, the incapacity of the Jewish community to face straightforwardly its own reality, a totalitarian mentality among the majority sectors of the population, with a serious tendency toward messianic beliefs. If the outbreak of anti-Semitism has not until now assumed greater and more pronounced characteristics, this is because the balance of power within the armed forces has been under permanent debate in recent years, with the moderates weighing the potential international repercussions and concliding that these would be hard to withstand. (Jacobo Timerman, Prisoner Without a Name, Cell Without a Number {New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1981} p. 70)
Much of what Timerman describes applies to the volatile Argentinian political situation of the mid-1970's, but there are some things we need to think about today. First, a profound political crisis - America, in 2015, is more divided than it has ever been, and people are discontented. Second, impotence on the part of political parties - for the most part, in 21st-century America, Republicans and Democrats look the same, and say almost anything to get into office but then do little once they get there. And anti-Semitism - there has been a rise in that recently on many college campuses, and also there is a general bias against conservative Christians, military veterans, and others which seems to owe a lot of its impetus to the current President, Barack Hussein Obama. And, racial tensions - not since the 1960's in the US has racial tension been so high, but now it is the reverse - Blacks discriminating against others. And, then the toltalitarian mentality among majority sectors of the population - call that "political correctness" these days, and the fact that anyone who has an opposing viewpoint from the majority is often subjected to character assassination and even outright threats. Again, the distinction between evil and good has become blurred, and what is called "evil" by the majority driven by the totalitarian madness of political-correctness is often not evil at all, but it paints a bad stigma - the "evil" men do live after them, and the good is oft interred with their bones; good things are downplayed, recast as evil, and forgotten about, in other words (calling evil good and good evil). I too have been a victim of this myself, ironically from those calling themselves "Christian." If you make a stand for the Holy Scriptures or the historic teachings of the Church, I have learned that you need to be prepared to be labeled as a "Greek fossil," a "worshipper of dead white males," or accused of being "antiquated" and "lacking in critical thinking skills" because you make a stand for truth. That is almost to be expected of the secular world, but of churches too??? However again, Scripture speaks about this when it tells us that many will fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, and indeed that has happened. A lot of it, ironically, is not coming from the average layman either, but rather from academic elites - we turn again to 2 Timothy 3:7, which as you recall says this - "Always learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth." For many academic elites - even those who are professed Christians - this has become all too true: many of them, in the name of "well-roundedness" (a term they don't fully comprehend, by the way) have become blind to the plain facts that are right before their eyes, or as Romans 1:22 says, they profess wisdom but are in reality fools. Many of these academics are more enamoured of the letters predicating their names (such as Ph.D., etc) and are academic fundamentalists when it comes to the proper documentation of a Tourabian note in a dissertation, but they have no issues taking great liberties at practicing historical and doctrinal revisionism. Many colleges that were once solidly Evangelical, as a matter of fact, now embrace Religion faculty that are openly Marxist (or at least Marxist-sympathizing) and anti-Semitic (many self-professed Bible scholars would not shed a tear if Hitler were resurrected and started murdering Jews again, and would probably give him a blessing doing it - they do so today with Islamic terrorists), as well as also promoting heresies like Universalism and proto-Nestorian doctrine that diminishes Jesus's divinity. But, when you call them on these things that are clearly wrong, they make you look like the bad guy and you are slandered and maligned because you stand for truth. I have come to a conclusion or two about that, and want to discuss that now.
Recently, I had a very heated discussion with a former classmate of mine at my old university I transferred out of due to the many issues I have discussed. Although seemingly a nice and personable guy, this particular student showed who he really was when I confronted him about his personal relationship with Christ. Curious enough, I hear a lot of theological and academic jargon (again, ad nauseum) out of this person, but he's never really said why he is a Christian. He is also one of these people who actually entertains ideas in class that Jesus is still somehow imperfect (to me, even suggesting this is a risk of falling into heresy, and it also puts one's salvation on the line), which honestly raised suspicions about his own relationship to Christ when I heard him do that openly in class. For confronting this guy about his Christian testimony, I was called "idiotic," "evil," (hmmm...I ask about your relationship with Christ, and that is evil?? Sounds like Isaiah's prophecy to me!) and essentially he told me he didn't want anything to do with me - that is a fine Christian attitude from a guy claiming to be studying God's word, isn't it? Well, I gave him his wish - I promptly "de-friended" him on social media (which was the forum of this discussion) and the Holy Spirit reminded me of the verse about casting pearls before swine - if your own witness is just going to be tread underfoot and called "evil," then you move on and let God do the conviction, as it is not your job. I sowed the seed, and it is now up to him to respond. Despite a lot of academic accolades and his supposed "Christian" service, this young man doesn't have a true relationship with Christ, and it is my prayer that the Holy Spirit works in him. Sometimes too, it is good to just take a step back, smile sweetly at such people, and say, "wait and see." This is one of several examples over the years of many I have encountered who have the form of godliness down pat, but lack the substance of relationship to make it come to life for them. Many Christian college campuses, I have come to conclude, are nowadays potential mission fields, and in many cases the Religion students (and faculty!) are in need of the Cross - they have intellectualized so much that they confuse their "critical thinking" and "interpretive grids" with their Christian experience, and they are not the same. In a lot of ways, they are in more serious trouble than the outright secularist Millenial who frequents Starbucks, listens to Justin Bieber, and wears skinny jeans (or ball-crunchers, as I prefer to call them). And, it is this religious crisis I believe marks the "perilous times" of a great "falling away," where the distinctions between what is good and what is evil are so blurred that much evil is justified even in Christian circles today. Which is why those of us who do have the relationship with Christ need to undergird ourselves and make sure we have fortified armor against these influences, lest we too be taken down by them.
I have said enough for today, but what was said is a needed message for the times we live in. Many reading this may labor under the same delusions that my former classmate professed, and if so, let me ask you - what is your testimony of Christ in your life?? Do you have a relationship with Christ, or are you just interested in using religion as a justification for some of your own presuppositions about certain issues? Jesus is about transformation, and His message is radically countercultural - the "political-correctness" and postmodernism of today stands in stark opposition to the crystal-clear teachings of Christ and His Church, and no matter how some slick Biblical "scholar" in his fancy bow-tie, skinny jeans, and with a wagon-train of letters predicating his surname tries to reconcile and revise it to conform to culture, it will be an exercise in futility despite how correctly said "scholar" cites a Tourabian note reference or uses academic jargon to make himself sound more important than he is to intimidate the layperson in the pew of the church he identifies with. No, academic jargon and predicating letters and degrees don't build the Church, nor do they have the authority to re-write Christian doctrine and Biblical principle the Church has accepted and authenticated as truth for over 2000 years. I have quoted my own saying many times, which is an elaboration of a famous quote of the great theologian Tertullian, that the blood of martyrs and the sweat and tears of prayer warriors are what built the Church, yet theologians worshipping a train of letters predicating their surnames attempt to destroy it. I have nothing personal against theologians, as I myself claim to be one, but a pitfall many theologians have is trying to box in and contextualize plain truths revealed to great martyrs and saints of the Church over centuries to "make relevant" their own perceptions of those writings to a culture they are too eager to conform to. My own desire is to never forget where I come from, despite what my own academic accomplishments are, because I have a duty to uphold Church teaching at all costs, and it is not my place to re-interpret it to fit into the current agendas of this society. God bless you all, and may 2015 be a productive and blessed year for you.
Isaiah 5:20 is a prophetic and very stern warning from God himself through the voice of his prophet that says this: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil. Who put light for darkness and darkness for light. Who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" If we look over now in 2 Timothy 3, a couple of verses stand out here which could be a commentary by the Apostle St. Paul on Isaiah's dire warning. Let's look at verse 5 first - "but having a form of godliness and denying the power thereof." Secondly, let's drop down to verse 7 - "always learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." Finally, that second verse is complimentary to Romans 1:22 - "professing to be wise, they became fools." The preceding verses give the foundation to the following commentary you are about to read, and I want to take things in a slightly different direction on this.
When I was in high school, one of the major literary works I was required to read and memorize in part was a passage from William Shakespeare's classic play Julius Caesar. It is found in Act 3, and is Anthony's speech after Caesar is assassinated by Brutus. The famous quote is "the evil men do lives after them, but the good is oft interred with their bones." I remember having to memorize that line from the play, and to this day I can still recite the whole first half of this speech. However, there is an odd spiritual truth to be found in this quote that got my attention based on a few recent firestorms I faced during the month of December, and as I reflected upon those facts, something came together. If we take Isaiah 5:20 as truth and a relevant warning for today (which I do personally) it means that oftentimes a good legacy may be given a tainted interpretation by a culture that is gazing through the lens of its own evil. In other words, something that is in reality good is labeled evil by a culture which seems to think what is evil is good. When 2 Timothy 3 opens, its very first verse warns that in the latter days perilous times will come. First, we need to examine what the word perilous means, because it also pops up again later in Ephesians 6:13 in reference to the "evil day" in that verse. The root of "perilous" is the word peril, which Webster's New World Dictionary notes comes from the root Latin word experiri, meaning "to try." The definition of "peril" follows as being "a danger, exposure to harm or injury, Looking back in my own published study of Ephesians as I discussed the "evil day," I noted also that a similar Greek word, parasku, meaning "a time of preparation or trial," is used, and I can see a connection. So, based on that knowledge, I would posit that the "perilous times" noted in 3 Timothy 1 and the "evil day" of Ephesians 6 are one and the same in this case. And, it is also where many theologians get the idea of the 7-year Tribulation (or a "trying time," if you will) at the end of days from. So, in essence, if looked at in this context perilous times then denotes that Christians will be tested, and many will fail, hence "falling away," or apostasy. In using Scripture to interpret Scripture, it is important to understand that one thing does build upon something already said, especially when it comes to multiple passages by the same writer (in this case, the Apostle Paul). Earlier in the Apostle's epistles, Paul also notes an important need for discernment - Christians need to know what is what, especially when it comes to cultural trends and the truth behind much of what secular culture accepts in order to inform better so that the believer would not be deceived by things the culture says is OK. One trait of the end-times generation, however, is going to be an increasing tendency to call virtue vice, and vice virtue - things that were traditionally considered good, in other words, would be called evil, and things traditionally understood as evil will all of a sudden be celebrated as good. Let me ask you now this question - are we not seeing that today?? Take this whole "gay marriage" issue for instance - although homosexuality is nothing new as it has always plagued humanity, the difference is that it was rightly perceived as unnatural and even evil in the past. Nowadays, it is celebrated as something good, and never in human history has a group practicing a sinful behavior been all of a sudden given the same status as an ethnic group! And, it isn't just with homosexual activity either - other sins are equally touted by the entertainment industry - this Miley Cyrus character, with her filthy and shameless "twirking" on stage, was practically wooed and wowed by the press, while her practical twin, the no-talent twirp Justin Bieber, practically can do any stupid thing he wants and is still a pop icon (that situation prompted a very good joke from Michael Buble recently on his Christmas special, when he introduced himself as "the Canadian singer that didn't egg your house this year."). Then, lets look at the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman incident and the Ferguson riots of recent note. Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown were nothing but street thugs engaged in drug use, criminal activity, and just degenerate behavior, yet they are touted as "heroes" and the responsible cop who was within his legal jurisdiction to defend himself (in the Ferguson case) is made to look like the bad guy. The stupid thing about all that was that it was turned into a race issue because Trayvon and Michael Brown happen to be Black - God forbid we hold them accountable for committing violent crimes, because as Al Sharpton shrilly whines, that is "racist." The thing is, however, a lot of Black crimes, many violent and some against other Blacks, get little attention because of that fear of being labelled a "racist." As Colin Flaherty says in his excellent chronicle of this stuff entitled White Girl Bleed a Lot (Washington, DC: WND Books, 2013), many Blacks are engaging across the country in mob violence and are partaking of a dangerous sport called "the Knockout Game," and its object is to find a defenseless White, Asian, or Hispanic guy, punch him in the face as hard as you can, and then proceed to beat the living crap out of the poor guy until either your arms get tired or he is rendered unconscious (Flaherty, p. 13). But, our culture will call the victim "evil" and the perpetrators "heroes" largely due to a mentality that Thomas Sowell notes in his book Black Rednecks and White Liberals (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005) - Sowell (who himself is African-American) could have easily addressed Ferguson 9 years before it happened when he astutely observes on page 250 of his book that the failure of any particular people to achieve is often transformed verbally into a denial of "access" or "opportunity" to them by others (in this case, it is repeated ad nauseum by race-baiters like Sharpton, Jackson, and their unofficial mentor, Black Liberation theologian James Cone - Cone's racism ranks up there with Hitler and David Duke, but he is touted as a "theological master" even in some supposedly "Christian" colleges while real theologians such as Francis Schaeffer and Romano Guardini are ignored.). What that means is a shirking of personal responsibility, and especially in this current day, it has no relevance, yet it is bought into by agitators and politicians. So, in the name of "deprivation," depravity is just sort of glossed-over as a bi-product of a supposed disadvantaged existence. At some point, I have another theory as to why many Blacks behave as they do and fail to raise their kids right, because I see a direct correlation between bad Black behavior and the abortion industry, but that is a discussion best suited for another article in the near future. For now, the argument that deprivation causes depravity, and therefore ought to be just shrugged off even by the victims, is a case of calling evil "good." And, the consequence is that those who stand up against it will be labelled "racist" and "evil" by the powers-that-be, and hence Shakespeare's words take a sinister new meaning - a legacy labelled evil lives well after the person accused of it (take Robert E. Lee as a perfect example!) but their good attributes are often taken to the grave with their corpse and forgotten about. Trayvon Martin, for instance, is a "hero" and martyr for one reason and one reason only - the color of his skin. Yet, there are real martyrs of terrorism - many who died in 9/11, for instance - whose legacies have been forgotten for exactly the same reason - many people who were killed in 9/11 at the World Trade Center were just normal, hard-working folks who loved their families and wanted to make a good life for them, but because they have White skin they are not worth anyone's consideration. So, while Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin's names have gone household, how many 9/11 victims can you name? Probably, like myself, you know none, and that is sad. It is almost as if Shakespeare spoke prophetically, didn't he?
This racial unrest has also created persecution against Jews, veterans, and other groups, and that leads me to another part of this discussion. When I was a kid, I remember reading excerpts of a book by an Argentinian journalist of Jewish heritage by the name of Jacobo Timerman entitled Prisoner Without a Name, Cell Without a Number. The book, written in 1981, chronicles Timerman's incarceration in an Argentine prison during the time of the proto-fascist regime of Juan Peron there, and he was imprisoned because he spoke out against things he felt were unjust. In the prison, it was quickly discovered that Timerman was also Jewish by heritage, which led to a lot of persecution for that. Again, over 30 years prior to Ferguson, Timerman almost prophetically details what has happened, and the potential danger it poses, as he writes the following:
If we cared to formulate a historical equation, we could say that the conditions do exist: a profound political crisis, an economic crisis with an annual 170% rate of inflation that has lasted several years, impotence on the part of political parties to come up with a minimally coherent response, the incapacity of the Jewish community to face straightforwardly its own reality, a totalitarian mentality among the majority sectors of the population, with a serious tendency toward messianic beliefs. If the outbreak of anti-Semitism has not until now assumed greater and more pronounced characteristics, this is because the balance of power within the armed forces has been under permanent debate in recent years, with the moderates weighing the potential international repercussions and concliding that these would be hard to withstand. (Jacobo Timerman, Prisoner Without a Name, Cell Without a Number {New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1981} p. 70)
Much of what Timerman describes applies to the volatile Argentinian political situation of the mid-1970's, but there are some things we need to think about today. First, a profound political crisis - America, in 2015, is more divided than it has ever been, and people are discontented. Second, impotence on the part of political parties - for the most part, in 21st-century America, Republicans and Democrats look the same, and say almost anything to get into office but then do little once they get there. And anti-Semitism - there has been a rise in that recently on many college campuses, and also there is a general bias against conservative Christians, military veterans, and others which seems to owe a lot of its impetus to the current President, Barack Hussein Obama. And, racial tensions - not since the 1960's in the US has racial tension been so high, but now it is the reverse - Blacks discriminating against others. And, then the toltalitarian mentality among majority sectors of the population - call that "political correctness" these days, and the fact that anyone who has an opposing viewpoint from the majority is often subjected to character assassination and even outright threats. Again, the distinction between evil and good has become blurred, and what is called "evil" by the majority driven by the totalitarian madness of political-correctness is often not evil at all, but it paints a bad stigma - the "evil" men do live after them, and the good is oft interred with their bones; good things are downplayed, recast as evil, and forgotten about, in other words (calling evil good and good evil). I too have been a victim of this myself, ironically from those calling themselves "Christian." If you make a stand for the Holy Scriptures or the historic teachings of the Church, I have learned that you need to be prepared to be labeled as a "Greek fossil," a "worshipper of dead white males," or accused of being "antiquated" and "lacking in critical thinking skills" because you make a stand for truth. That is almost to be expected of the secular world, but of churches too??? However again, Scripture speaks about this when it tells us that many will fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, and indeed that has happened. A lot of it, ironically, is not coming from the average layman either, but rather from academic elites - we turn again to 2 Timothy 3:7, which as you recall says this - "Always learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth." For many academic elites - even those who are professed Christians - this has become all too true: many of them, in the name of "well-roundedness" (a term they don't fully comprehend, by the way) have become blind to the plain facts that are right before their eyes, or as Romans 1:22 says, they profess wisdom but are in reality fools. Many of these academics are more enamoured of the letters predicating their names (such as Ph.D., etc) and are academic fundamentalists when it comes to the proper documentation of a Tourabian note in a dissertation, but they have no issues taking great liberties at practicing historical and doctrinal revisionism. Many colleges that were once solidly Evangelical, as a matter of fact, now embrace Religion faculty that are openly Marxist (or at least Marxist-sympathizing) and anti-Semitic (many self-professed Bible scholars would not shed a tear if Hitler were resurrected and started murdering Jews again, and would probably give him a blessing doing it - they do so today with Islamic terrorists), as well as also promoting heresies like Universalism and proto-Nestorian doctrine that diminishes Jesus's divinity. But, when you call them on these things that are clearly wrong, they make you look like the bad guy and you are slandered and maligned because you stand for truth. I have come to a conclusion or two about that, and want to discuss that now.
Recently, I had a very heated discussion with a former classmate of mine at my old university I transferred out of due to the many issues I have discussed. Although seemingly a nice and personable guy, this particular student showed who he really was when I confronted him about his personal relationship with Christ. Curious enough, I hear a lot of theological and academic jargon (again, ad nauseum) out of this person, but he's never really said why he is a Christian. He is also one of these people who actually entertains ideas in class that Jesus is still somehow imperfect (to me, even suggesting this is a risk of falling into heresy, and it also puts one's salvation on the line), which honestly raised suspicions about his own relationship to Christ when I heard him do that openly in class. For confronting this guy about his Christian testimony, I was called "idiotic," "evil," (hmmm...I ask about your relationship with Christ, and that is evil?? Sounds like Isaiah's prophecy to me!) and essentially he told me he didn't want anything to do with me - that is a fine Christian attitude from a guy claiming to be studying God's word, isn't it? Well, I gave him his wish - I promptly "de-friended" him on social media (which was the forum of this discussion) and the Holy Spirit reminded me of the verse about casting pearls before swine - if your own witness is just going to be tread underfoot and called "evil," then you move on and let God do the conviction, as it is not your job. I sowed the seed, and it is now up to him to respond. Despite a lot of academic accolades and his supposed "Christian" service, this young man doesn't have a true relationship with Christ, and it is my prayer that the Holy Spirit works in him. Sometimes too, it is good to just take a step back, smile sweetly at such people, and say, "wait and see." This is one of several examples over the years of many I have encountered who have the form of godliness down pat, but lack the substance of relationship to make it come to life for them. Many Christian college campuses, I have come to conclude, are nowadays potential mission fields, and in many cases the Religion students (and faculty!) are in need of the Cross - they have intellectualized so much that they confuse their "critical thinking" and "interpretive grids" with their Christian experience, and they are not the same. In a lot of ways, they are in more serious trouble than the outright secularist Millenial who frequents Starbucks, listens to Justin Bieber, and wears skinny jeans (or ball-crunchers, as I prefer to call them). And, it is this religious crisis I believe marks the "perilous times" of a great "falling away," where the distinctions between what is good and what is evil are so blurred that much evil is justified even in Christian circles today. Which is why those of us who do have the relationship with Christ need to undergird ourselves and make sure we have fortified armor against these influences, lest we too be taken down by them.
I have said enough for today, but what was said is a needed message for the times we live in. Many reading this may labor under the same delusions that my former classmate professed, and if so, let me ask you - what is your testimony of Christ in your life?? Do you have a relationship with Christ, or are you just interested in using religion as a justification for some of your own presuppositions about certain issues? Jesus is about transformation, and His message is radically countercultural - the "political-correctness" and postmodernism of today stands in stark opposition to the crystal-clear teachings of Christ and His Church, and no matter how some slick Biblical "scholar" in his fancy bow-tie, skinny jeans, and with a wagon-train of letters predicating his surname tries to reconcile and revise it to conform to culture, it will be an exercise in futility despite how correctly said "scholar" cites a Tourabian note reference or uses academic jargon to make himself sound more important than he is to intimidate the layperson in the pew of the church he identifies with. No, academic jargon and predicating letters and degrees don't build the Church, nor do they have the authority to re-write Christian doctrine and Biblical principle the Church has accepted and authenticated as truth for over 2000 years. I have quoted my own saying many times, which is an elaboration of a famous quote of the great theologian Tertullian, that the blood of martyrs and the sweat and tears of prayer warriors are what built the Church, yet theologians worshipping a train of letters predicating their surnames attempt to destroy it. I have nothing personal against theologians, as I myself claim to be one, but a pitfall many theologians have is trying to box in and contextualize plain truths revealed to great martyrs and saints of the Church over centuries to "make relevant" their own perceptions of those writings to a culture they are too eager to conform to. My own desire is to never forget where I come from, despite what my own academic accomplishments are, because I have a duty to uphold Church teaching at all costs, and it is not my place to re-interpret it to fit into the current agendas of this society. God bless you all, and may 2015 be a productive and blessed year for you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Now that we have examined the story of Noah in-depth, what we begin to see as we launch into Genesis 10 is that the population begins to inc... -
Introduction I was actually not planning on doing a sixth article in the series, but so much information necessitated its creation. The g... -
For many years I have followed the ministry of Perry Stone, who at one time was an up-and-coming televangelist who in recent years has m...