I call upon You, Lord, God of Abraham and God of Isaac and God of Jacob and Israel, You who are the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who, through the abundance of your mercy, was well-pleased towards us so that we may know You, who made heaven and earth, who rules over all, You who are the one and the true God, above whom there is no other God; You who, by our Lord Jesus Christ gave us the gift of the Holy Spirit, give to every one who reads this writing to know You, that You alone are God, to be strengthened in You, and to avoid every heretical and godless and impious teaching.

St Irenaeus of Lyons, Against the Heresies 3:6:4


Wednesday, May 22, 2013

The Case for Reciting Creeds in Worship with Albert Aymer



[Albert] Aymer has a message for churches doing all they can to make worship relevant and contemporary. “Remember that worship transcends time and space,” he urges.

One of the best ways to do that is to use creeds in worship.  Continue reading at the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship.  

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

The Trinitarianism of Ephesians 4:4-6, a Chiastic Creed



A few daring theologians in our day are carefully teasing out some of the “Trinitarian metaphysics” from especially certain creedal and doxological New Testament passage, not least Tom Wright and Peter Leithart.  This is not new, though.

St. Irenaeus, in Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching, quotes in part Ephesians 4:4—6, which reads:
There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

From this text, he concludes, “...because ‘above all’ is the Father, and ‘through all’ is the Word—since through Him everything was made by the Father—while ‘in us all’ is the Spirit, who cries ‘Abba, Father,’ and forms man to the likeness of God” (I:5). 

Granted, within this creedal remark of St. Paul, Irenaeus picks up on the unmistakable Trinitarian formula, “One Spirit...one Lord (Jesus)...one God and Father.”  What is interesting, and certainly out of sorts with much of the rationalistic exegesis common this side of the Enlightenment, is that Irenaeus continues his Trinitarian reasoning throughout the following three prepositional phrases of verse six.  Before we dismiss Irenaeus’ exegesis as a byproduct of the old quadriga, the four-folded methodology, or some other highly subjective approach, judged through our modernistic rationalism, we should revisit St. Paul.

When we return to the text, we find an interesting chiasmus, which would point to the same conclusion that Irenaeus so naturally draws.  Look at the structure of this creed.

4:4       A. One Spirit
4:5              B. One Lord (Jesus)
4:6a                   C. One...Father
4:6b                   C. Over all
                   B. Through all
            A. In all

Granting that this text is likely a creedal formula, and that it is naturally structured in terms of a chiasm, I for one tend to think that Irenaeus’ Trinitarian conclusion is spot one.  It is further supported by the patristics’ hermeneutical key, the regulae fidei, the creedal Rule of Faith, which Irenaeus stresses in the early sections of the same work. 

Our ancient fathers in the faith did not pretend or deceive themselves into believing that they came to the text without any pre-drawn conclusions, much less without having a deep, deep precommitment.  Neither did they strive to recognize their precommitments so as to avoid them during exegesis, which all our hermeneutical textbooks caution us to do.  Rather the singular precommitment that ruled exegesis—sometimes for better or worse—was the regulae fidei, which matured into what we know today as the Apostle’s Creed.  For them, a robust Trinitarianism was the presupposition of all exegesis (and all of life), not merely its conclusion.  Perhaps we should put our fathers’ landmark back where we found it (Prov. 22:28).  Thankfully, some are.


Monday, May 20, 2013

Jesus', the New-True Adam's, Wilderness Probation

As the heading suggests, I’m cautious of the title “the temptation” for its restrictive connotations. The ‘the’, in ‘the temptation’, seems to indicate that the whole of Jesus’ cosmic level struggle against Satan, sin, and the wicked world system in its defiant rebellion toward God is summed up in the forty days and nights in the wilderness. We know, however, that this is not the case. There are, perhaps, even greater problems if we are to place the accent on the ‘temptation’ of ‘the temptation’, as it averts attention away from the event’s divine purpose in God’s redemptive program and poises our focus on merely a single perspective and design for the event, namely Satan’s. In so viewing it, from the vantage of Satan’s schematic purposes, we are bound to be deprived of much of the critical theological content and the particularly messianic nature of the trial.

Probation is, I believe, the best designation for this inaugural event in Jesus’ Messiahship, for it better represents the Father’s design, the Son’s dealings, and the Holy Spirit’s “driving” (Mk 1:12). And it is these that form the intention or purpose underlying the entire experience. Moreover, probation resonates with the allusive OT paradigms the gospel writers were both assuming and including: Adam’s probation in the Garden (per Lk, and maybe in Mk as “he was with the wild beasts...[harmoniously perhaps?]” 1:13; cf. Is 11:6—9; 32:14—20; 65:25; Hos 2:18), and Israel’s first exodus in all three of accounts, which is obvious from Jesus’ citations from Deut 6 and 8. Thus, the weight and results from the failings of both Adam and Israel, as ‘sons of God’ who were created to accomplish all God’s will on earth, were coming to bear on the only Son of God, the second Adam, the true Israel. His obedient submission to the Father throughout this probative period would thus test and prove what kind of Messiah he would be, therefore, determining the entire course of redemption. The meaning of the wilderness experience of Jesus was the means of demonstrating and defining the Father’s purposes for the Son’s Messiahship, being conferred upon Jesus at the baptism through the Holy Spirit’s anointing and the Father’s declarative pronouncement (“My Son...well pleased”). The Son, upon successfully passing this probative period through submission and suffering (Deut 8:2), would enter into the Father’s messianic mission as Victor in the full power of the Spirit.

The broader context of the passage in all three gospels is, in general, identical: (1) the baptism/Father’s pronouncement; (2) the 40 days in the wilderness; and (3) Jesus’ victorious return onto the public scene, “in the power of the Holy Spirit,” to begin his messianic mission. This consistency is coupled with language in every account that clearly connects the baptism to the probation. The authors, then, intend the two to be treated as a unit; the latter can only be understood in light of the former.

The voice of the Father at the baptism not only declared Jesus’ Sonship, but also defined it. The words: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” brings together to critical strands of messianic expectation from the OT. “This is my beloved Son...” is surely drawn from Ps 2:7, which describes Yahweh’s coming Anointed One, the hope and fulfillment of the everlasting Davidic covenant. It is more than mere coincidence that the very next verse of this Psalm (v. 8) speaks of the Father’s promise to the Son, “Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.” Thus, it should not surprise us that Satan’s final assault (per Mt) came in a similar form to the very same promise. It is not as though Satan’s offering Jesus the same thing (Mt 4:8—9) as the Father, “the nations...their glory,” was tempting in itself. Consider the weight of this dilemma—seemingly same promise, one from the Father of Light, the other from the father of lies. It appears the there would be little, if any, struggle in the rational mind when faced with such a choice. But Matthew treats this as the climax of the battle; the very point on which redemption swings. But how can this be?

This question draws us back again to the Father’s voice at the baptism, namely to the second clause: “...with whom I am well pleased.” This allusion points back to Is 42:1ff, a passage that Matthew cites directly in 12:18—21, as does Luke, twice (1:79; 2:32; with allusions in Acts 3:26; 4:27). The opening pericope of this chapter (Is 42:1—9) begins a section of Isaiah known as the suffering Servant songs. Here Yahweh’s Servant is identified with a role of suffering, meekness, and humiliation, one that finally ends in the disgraceful death in Ch. 53, an end administered by none other than the Servant’s “well pleased” Father. This depiction of the hoped for anointed Messiah, although an accepted vein within 1st century messianism, seems to stand in stark contrast, if not out right contradiction, to the exalted, victorious anointed Davidic King of Ps 2! These two streams of messianic hope—humiliation-Servant/exaltation-King—converging in the same figure were formerly inconceivable in Jewish eschatology. However, it is precisely this paradox that informs a right understanding of the wilderness phase of Jesus’ Messiahship and answers the question above regarding Matthew’s final temptation. Concerning the question, the weightiness of Satan’s offer of the glory of the nations was to seemingly grant Jesus his rightful exaltation as the Messiah, thus attaining, at least in part, the end goal of his messianic work while altogether avoiding the demanded humiliation, suffering, and death that were part and parcel of the Father’s plan for his Son/Messiah. Thus, the questions facing Jesus at every point in the wilderness probation were, what kind and, whose Messiah would he be?

This, I believe, explains best the perspective and burden of Jesus in the crisis. The perspective of the Father, as this would be, for his Son, a time of testing, trial, that is, probation. Even Satan’s perspective is best illuminated from this angle. Satan’s primary objective was not to bring uncertainty directly upon Jesus’ Sonship or even his sinlessness; but, at first subtle then in sudden desperation, an attempt to derail or, better, abort the Father’s plan to establish his Messianic King, his kingdom, and consequently destroy the very works of the Devil himself (I Jn 3:8). Satan’s awareness of the ultimate doom he would face as a result of Jesus’ success, which began principally at the end of the wilderness probation, is also revealed in his citation of Ps 91:11—12. While Satan rightly observes the promise of special providence for the trusting One of Ps 91, he must too have been fully aware of the promise of v. 13 as well, “...the serpent you will trample underfoot!” (cf. Lk 10:19; Mk 16:18; Gen 3:15).

Unlike Adam, who failed in a state of perfection; Jesus, cloaked in humiliation, came out unscathed from his struggle on a sin torn battlefield! More than that, Adam’s success would have kept him from suffering loss; Jesus’ success first recovered Adam’s loss, and then gained the Messiah’s mantle. Hence, in the desert wilderness Jesus proved what was in his heart—humble, absolute trust in the Father’s promises—the kind of submissive obedience God requires of all people, yet never given by a person before, was offered up by Jesus in the harshest of conditions, thus gaining his Messiahship and our much needed righteousness! Our True Joshua, leading us in to conquer the Promise Land (II Cor 2:14)!

Monday, May 13, 2013

Kermit Gosnell Found Guilty on Three First-Degree Murder Charges

The jury in the murder trial of abortion practitioner Kermit Gosnell returned a verdict and found him guilty on three of the four first-degree murder charges he faced.

Gosnell was found guilty of killing Baby A, Baby C and Baby D and found not guilty of killing Baby E. He was also convicted on hundreds of lesser charges ranging from infanticide to running a corrupt organization.

The guilty verdict on these three counts subjects the abortion “doctor” to the potential he will face the death penalty when a second jury considers his sentencing on the convictions. At minimum Gosnell will face three life terms in prison. The jury that will be tasked with sentencing Gosnell on the convictions will begin its work on May 21.

Gonell was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of patient Karnamaya Mongar, who died after a botched abortion. And he was found guilty on most of the more than 200 counts of violating Pennsylvania’s informed consent law.

In total, Gosnell was found guilty of 21 out of 24 felony counts of illegal abortions beyond the 24 week limit and found guilty on all but 16 of 227 misdemeanor counts of violating the 24-hour informed consent law.

One local reporter covering the trial indicated Gosnell “heard verdict passively, with small bitter faced smiles.” A Fox news reporter added, “Our Fox producer in the courtroom says Gosnell looked mad when the verdicts were read.”

Multiple reports indicate an assistant prosecutor sobbed as the verdict was read. Continue reading at LifeNews.com...

Sunday, May 12, 2013

Behold This Fowl! Our First Ever Rose-breasted Grosbeak



“Behold the fowls of the air,” commanded Jesus (Matt. 6:26).  John Stott remarked, “Jesus was an acute observer of nature” (The Birds our Teachers: Biblical Lessons from a Lifelong Bird-Watcher, p. 14).  These things being so, today we were blessed to both obey and imitate Jesus!  For the first time in nearly twenty years of birding, we had the distinct pleasure to acutely observing the first Rose-breasted Grosbeak that we remember ever seeing. 

While walking across the deck late this morning, I caught a flash of black and white near the suet feeder hanging above a sitting bench in the southeastern corner of the yard.  I nearly dismissed it at being our regular Mockingbird; thankfully, though, I took a second glance.  I hollered to Fanny to grab the glasses, hopefully suggesting it might be a Grosbeak.  Sure enough!

I could hardly make the positive identification before Fanny’s head gradually appeared in the lower rim of my binocular picture.  Typically, she had already begun her stealthy stalk toward the unsuspecting bird.  Perhaps more than any other situation, Fanny’s one-eighth of Cherokee blood is evidenced when there is a beautiful bird in the yard and her Kodak Z990 is in hand.  She slowly moves across the lawn seemingly without even bending a clover stem (it is almost creepy to watch!).  It can also be frustrating, as Israel and I are satisfied after a shot or two.  However, neither we nor the dogs are allowed to come out of the house, until Fanny is convinced that the bird has left the area and is never, ever, ever returning...lest she misses one last opportunity for a shot! Ugh.

Today was worth the wait.  She was able to pull off these and many other remarkable pictures. 

Then this evening, he returned again.  He relaxingly feasted on some more suet, while we were working the garden beds a mere twenty foot from the feeder.  He spent about ten minutes with us and was off again.  This jewel doesn’t normally summer in our region, so we are probably just a brief stop on the spring migration trip.  What a joy!

Because our fowl friend is still in molting, I would suggest clicking the link above and seeing the bird in full plumage in order to fully appreciate the brilliant handiwork of our incomprehensible Creator God!



Small Pleasures

While doing a little fly fishing at Otter Lake on the Parkway yesterday, Israel spotted this little fella on the hiking trail.  His shell was smaller than a silver dollar.  

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Rogation Days

The days between now and Ascensiontide are called Rogation days because they are set aside as days of prayer. Rogation comes from a Latin word meaning to ask or pray, and we certainly have much to pray about at this time. Naturally, agriculturally oriented societies spend much of their Rogation prayers asking God to bless their herds and crops so they will have the food they need. In more industrial societies people ask God to bless them with "honourable industry." Surely, as the Prayer Book reminds us, all can pray for sound learning, pure manners and to be saved from violence, discord, confusion, pride, arrogancy, and every evil way. Of course, it is important for those in industrial societies to remember that they, too, depend on the fruit of the earth for their sustenance. Therefore let them pray earnestly for good weather and a bountiful harvest. Floods and drought have already affected much of the world's food supply this year. Let us beseech God to deliver us from them, lest there be shortage and need...
"Almighty God, Lord of heaven and earth; We beseech thee to pour forth thy blessing upon this land, and give us a fruitful season; that we, constantly receiving thy bounty, may give thanks unto thee in thy holy Church; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."  ~Collect for The Rogation Days
Helpful words from Bishop Dennis Campbell