Redressing an ancient land

I was encouraged to read in the latest edition of The Expository Times a wee reflection on Australia’s recent apology to the stolen generations (which I have posted about here, here, and here) by William Loader (Murdoch University, Perth) on ‘Australia’s Day of Apology to the Stolen Generations of its Indigenous Peoples (13th February 2008)’. The article begins with this moving poem:

The tears touch the red dust beneath our feet
changing the colour of our land.
The cries of children forcibly removed
and mothers running behind parting cars
echo today in Australia’s parliament.
The drought of denial is broken,
the stories heard at the highest level.
Old men and women, first peoples
– and some still in their thirties –
who bear the wounds, respond to heal the nation,
embracing the bipartisan apology,
bringing a coolamon, cradle for newborns,
container of nourishment,
to the heart of government,
a symbol of new beginning.

Rejoice, peoples of the world, in our tears!
Celebrate our pain, our being born again to new hope!
Watch over our grief and our setting out afresh
to bring justice and hope,
to walk and work with the ancient peoples of this land,
to rebuild a nation with reconciliation
and engagement which brings seeds to life,
sees the deserts bloom,
and builds firm trunks and mighty trees across our land.

The tears will dry.
The pain will always remain.
No equation can right the wrongs.
No need to fear or deny memory,
but only to welcome new possibilities,
let life burst from the burning,
fresh shoots from charred remains,
and the beauty of diversity and change
redress our ancient land.

Crucible

The Australian Evangelical Alliance has launched a new online journal for theology and ministry called Crucible. The stated aim is ‘to enhance creative thinking about the relationship of biblical and theological truths to the life, ministry and mission of the church. It is a forum for scholars and practitioners to publish material, interact and resource the Christian community’. The first issue includes the following articles, reviews and poems:

Mercy comes to us through judgement

Just spent a long weekend up in the Scottish Highlands salmon fishing, watching my 2-year-old daughter ceaselessly enjoy herself, reading Denney’s brilliant commentary on 2 Corinthians, drinking great whisky, and enjoying the rich company of some special friends. Does it get any better than that! Anyway, in the spirit of sharing all good things, here’s just one (long) paragraph of Denney’s extended discussion on 5:18–21 that was too good not to share:

No one who has felt the power of this appeal will be very anxious to defend the Apostolic Gospel from the charges which are sometimes made against it. When he is told that it is impossible for the doom of sin to fall on the Sinless One, and that even if it were conceivable it would be frightfully immoral, he is not disquieted. He recognises in the moral contradictions of this text the surest sign that the secret of the Atonement is revealed in it: he feels that God’s work of reconciliation necessarily involves such an identification of sinlessness and sin. He knows that there is an appalling side to sin, and he is ready to believe that there is an appalling side to redemption also a side the most distant sight of which makes the proudest heart quail, and stops every mouth before God. He knows that the salvation which he needs must be one in which God’s mercy comes through, and not over. His judgment; and this is the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. But without becoming controversial on a subject on which more than on any other the temper of controversy is unseemly, reference may be made to the commonest form of objection to the apostolic doctrine, in the sincere hope that some one who has stumbled at that doctrine may see it more truly. The objection I refer to discredits propitiation in the alleged interest of the love of God. “We do not need,” the objectors say, “to propitiate an angry God. This is a piece of heathenism, of which a Christian ought to be ashamed. It is a libel on the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose name is love, and who waits to be gracious.” What are we to say to such words, which are uttered as boldly as if there were no possible reply, or rather as if the Apostles had never written, or had been narrow-minded unreceptive souls, who had not only failed to understand their Master, but had taught with amazing perversity the very opposite of what He taught on the most essential of all points the nature of God and His relation to sinful men? We must say this. It is quite true that we have not to propitiate an offended God: the very fact upon which the Gospel proceeds is that we cannot do any such thing. But it is not true that no propitiation is needed. As truly as guilt is a real thing, as truly as God’s condemnation of sin is a real thing, a propitiation is needed. And it is here, I think, that those who make the objection referred to part company, not only with St. Paul, but with all the Apostles. God is love, they say, and therefore He does not require a propitiation. God is love, say the Apostles, and therefore He provides a propitiation. Which of these doctrines appeals best to the conscience? Which of them gives reality, and contents, and substance, to the love of God? Is it not the apostolic doctrine? Does not the other cut out and cast away that very thing which made the soul of God s love to Paul and John? “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” “God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us … Him that knew no sin He made to be sin on our behalf” That is how they spoke in the beginning of the Gospel, and so let us speak. Nobody has any right to borrow the words “God is love” from an apostle, and then to put them in circulation after carefully emptying them of their apostolic import. Still less has any one a right to use them as an argument against the very thing in which the Apostles placed their meaning. But this is what they do who appeal to love against propitiation. To take the condemnation out of the Cross is to take the nerve out of the Gospel; it will cease to hold men s hearts with its original power when the reconciliation which is preached through it contains the mercy, but not the judgment of God. Its whole virtue, its consistency with God’s character, its aptness to man’s need, its real dimensions as a revelation of love, depend ultimately on this, that mercy comes to us in it through judgment’. (pp. 200-2)

What is Worship?

Those who have appreciated the ministry of James Torrance will be encouraged to take note of this wee reflection on worship by Worldwide Church of God minister, Dr. Joseph Tkach. Good news is always worth reading/watching/listening to … and then sharing with others. Tkach writes:

Christians around the world participate in an act of worship that is known by several names, including the Lord’s Supper, the Eucharist, Communion, and even the New Testament Passover.

Whatever it may be called in any given Christian tradition, the eating of bread and drinking of wine is done in remembrance of Jesus as he commanded.

In Luke 22:19-20 (NIV), we read:

And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.

As we participate in this act of worship it helps to understand what Jesus meant in his command “in remembrance.” The Greek word used in the Gospel of Luke is anamnesis, a word of rich liturgical significance. It does not refer merely to recalling a past event. It points to remembering in such a way that we understand our actual participation in that past event.

And there is a specific reason for this kind of remembrance. Our own personal past, present and future are in fact fully enmeshed in the personal experience of Jesus Christ in his life, death, resurrection and ascension. Jesus Christ became human for our sakes, in our place and on our behalf. As our Creator and our Redeemer, he took up our cause in his own being by becoming human for us.

Authentic worship, therefore, does not originate with us, but rather with Jesus in whom every human being exists and has meaning.

Therefore our emphasis in worship is not upon ourselves, but upon Christ’s action on our behalf. As Scottish theologian James Torrance explained it: “Our response in faith and obedience is a response (this is “response” with a lower case “r”) to the Response (this “Response” is with an upper case “R”)already made for us by Christ…” (Torrance, J.B. The Vicarious Humanity of Christ appearing in The Incarnation, Torrance, T.F. (ed.) (Handsel Press, Edinburgh: 1981).

Our worship of God is authentic worship only because Jesus himself, as the representative human, the perfect human, in our place and on our behalf, worships God for us and in us.

Early Christian leaders made this same point. The fourth century church father Athanasius taught that there is a two-way movement in Jesus Christ. On the one hand, Jesus is God’s saving action toward us. He is the act of God the Father reaching down to deal with our sin and guilt and shame and emptiness. Jesus ministers the things of God to all humanity.

And on the other hand, Jesus is Man representing all humanity, responding perfectly to God on behalf of every human. He is not only God coming to man. He is man going to God, on our behalf and in our place.

Jesus is our perfect and permanent mediator and high priest. He is God acting for humanity, and he is the perfect human responding to God on our behalf. He offers to God on our behalf the perfect and complete Response of everything God wants and expects of humanity.

As the perfect human representing all humans, Jesus answers the Father not with rebellion, not with indifference, not with coldness or apathy, but with zeal and passion and obedience and sincere submission and true adoration. He is human for us, standing in for us, representing all humanity as he lives in true fellowship with God the Father and the Holy Spirit.

In other words, worship is really something we do with our lives as we live in Christ. It happens in every moment as we reflect Jesus Christ who lives within us. It happens when we read a story to our children, when we hug our parents, when we show kindness to another person.

And it happens whenever we eat and drink the Lord’s Supper. All this is participating in the very life of the Trinity and feeling the joy and love shared by the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Fifty Prayers by Karl Barth

Kent draws our attention to a  new translation of Fifty Prayers by Karl Barth. This is very exciting, not least because these prayers issue from the pen of one for whom prayer was the first and basic act of theological work.

Lord our God, when we are afraid, do not permit us to doubt! When we are disappointed, let us not become bitter! When we have fallen, do not leave us lying down! When we have come to the end of our understanding and our powers, do not leave us to die! No, let us then feel your nearness and your love, that you have promised to those whose hearts are humble and broken, and who fear your Word (pp. 11-12)

Slavoj Žižek and Hans Blix on Iraq, US Foreign Policy and Global Nuclear Bans

Recently Amy Goodman (leading reporter for Democracy Now) interviewed Slavoj Žižek on the Iraq War, the Bush Presidency, the War on Terror & More.

Part One: Transcript; Video; MP3

Part Two: Transcript; Video; MP3

Also, former Chief UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix (who is always great to listen to … if only more did!) talks about the USs Rush to War in Iraq, the Threat of an Attack on Iran, and the Need for a Global Nuclear Ban to Avoid Further Catastrophe.

Transcript; Video; MP3

CS Lewis on frightening children

‘Those who say that children must not be frightened may mean two things. They may mean (1) that we must not do anything likely to give the child those haunting, disabling, pathological fears against which ordinary courage is helpless: in fact, phobias. His mind must, if possible, be kept clear of things he can’t bear to think of. Or they may mean (2) that we must try to keep out of his mind the knowledge that he is born into a world of death, violence, wounds, adventure, heroism and cowardice, good and evil. If they mean the first I agree with them: but not if they mean the second. The second would indeed be to give children a false impression and feed them on escapism in the bad sense. There is something ludicrous in the idea of so educating a generation which is born to the … atomic bomb. Since it is so likely that they will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker’. – Clive S. Lewis, Of Other Worlds: Essays and Stories (San Diego: Harvest Books, 2002), 31.

Ray Anderson on theology as practical

Reading Ray Anderson is always good for the soul, the head, and the hands. He writes as one who is simultaneously clinician and patient – pointing ever away from himself to Christ as both God’s Act of reconciliation and God’s Word of revelation. Like all good theologians, Anderson does his theology apostle-like; that is, daily at the coalface with people in their doubt, grief, death, guilt and repentance. Not one word of the NT came from the pen of a cloistered cleric! NT theology was hammered out not from articles and commentaries and academic conferences but on the anvil of existential need, seeking at every turn to bring every situation under the scrutiny and grace, not of Scripture, but of Jesus Christ, mindful of the fact that Jesus did not come to preach the Gospel (or the Bible) so much as he came to make a Gospel to preach. Ray Anderson continues in this tradition … and that’s one reason why I love reading him.

Anyway, here’s a few sentences from his great introductory essay on practical theology:

‘What makes theology practical is not the fitting of orthopedic devices to theoretical concepts in order to make them walk. Rather, theology occurs as a divine partner joins us on our walk, stimulating our reflection and inspiring us to recognize the living Word, as happened to the two walking on the road to Emmaus on the first Easter (Lk 24) … At the center of the discussion of the nature of practical theology is the issue of the relation of theory to praxis. If theory precedes and determines practice, then practice tends to be concerned primarily with methods, techniques and strategies for ministry, lacking theological substance. If practice takes priority over theory, ministry tends to be based on pragmatic results rather than prophetic revelation … Barth, from the beginning, resisted all attempts to portray theory and praxis in opposition to one another, In his early Church Dogmatics he described any distinction between “theoretical” and “practical” as a “primal lie, which has to be resisted in principal”. The understanding of Christ as the light of life can be understood only as a “theory which has its origin and goal in praxis”‘. – Ray S. Anderson, The Shape of Practical Theology: Empowering Ministry with Theological Praxis (Downers Grove: IVP, 2001), 12, 14, 15.

Standard Operating Procedure

There’s a chilling-sounding new book out: Standard Operating Procedure, by Philip Gourevitch and Errol Morris. It’s the story of American soldiers who were sent to Iraq as ‘liberators’ only to find themselves working as jailers in Saddam Hussein’s old dungeons, responsible for implementing the sort of policy they were supposed to be fighting against. It is the story of a defining moment in the war, and a defining moment in our understanding of ourselves— – the story of the infamous Abu Ghraib photographs of prisoner abuse, as seen through the eyes, and told through the voices, of the soldiers who took them and appeared in them. It is the story of how those soldiers were at once the instruments of a great injustice and the victims of a great injustice.

Drawing on more than two hundred hours of Errol Morris’’s frank and intimate interviews with the soldier-photographers who gave us what have become the iconic images of the Iraq war, Standard Operating Procedure is a book that makes you see, and makes you feel, and above all makes you think about what it means to be human. It is an original book that stands to endure as essential reading long after the current war in Iraq passes from the headlines, and long after the current (and past) cronies in the US administration – and British and Australian Governments – have putted in their last golf ball laughing all the way that they have escaped the war crimes tribunals they so blatantly deserve to face, not to mention their copious violations of the Geneva Conventions. Americans, Brits and Aussies should (and many will) feel and bear the shame that attends such horrific actions.

Forsyth on True Catholicity

‘The true Catholicity is the evangelical, with the rich harmony of the new creature. Rising in the conscience, which is man’s true focus, it begins with his moral redemption; works by an inner freedom, develops the variety of the New Creation, rears round the regenerate conscience a symphony, not of mere individuals, but of vast magnitudes, and sets up nations that cohere in a universal kingdom’. – P.T. Forsyth, ‘Christianity and Nationality’. British Weekly, 9 July 1914, 385.

On theological education

In Theological Reflection and Education for Ministry: The Search for Integration in Theology, John Paver observes that the credit for the definitive catergorisation in modern theology and its attendant implications for the training of pastoral ministers lays with Schleiermacher. He writes:

‘… including theology in a research university could be seen as a betrayal of the educational revolution that the research university represented. Schleiermacher had to answer to these objections if theology was to have a place so he added another pole [to the “Berlin” type of theological education] by advocating that theological education should constitute professional education. His argument was partly sociological and partly philosophical-theological. Schleiermacher’s sociological argument was that every human society has sets of practices dealing with bodily, health, social order, and religious needs. These are socially necessary for the well-being of society as a whole and each of these requires properly trained leadership. Schleiermacher’s philosophical-theological argument proposed that religions such as Christianity do not rest on principles, but on a kind of initiation or insightful experience, which can be the subject of philosophical enquiry. hence, Christian theology can be a subject of Wissenschaft enquiry without threat or compromise to Christianity’s integrity or the integrity of the university’. – John E. Paver, Theological Reflection and Education for Ministry: The Search for Integration in Theology (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006), 8.

Paver’s essay is a significant contribution to the ever-burgeoning field of theological education, training for ministry practice, and pastoral supervision as a vehicle for theological reflection. Whether it justifies the £55 price tag is another story, but then that’s what libraries are for.

A new doctorate in Barthian studies

Adam John McIntosh was recently awarded a Doctor of Theology by the Melbourne College of Divinity for his thesis, ‘The Doctrine of Appropriation as an interpretative framework for Karl Barth’s ecclesiology of the Church Dogmatics’. The abstract reads:

Barth’s ecclesiology has been interpreted by Barth scholars primarily in terms of a christological ecclesiology. Although several scholars have noted the trinitarian shape to his ecclesiology, the importance of Barth’s doctrine of appropriation for his understanding of the church has not been thoroughly considered. Barth’s doctrine of appropriation is the conceptual framework within his doctrine of the Trinity for bringing to speech the particular works ad extra of the divine modes of being. This thesis employs Barth’s doctrine of appropriation as an interpretative framework for his ecclesiology of the Church Dogmatics. It is argued that Barth’s doctrine of appropriation fundamentally determines his ecclesiology insofar as the particular work of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit shape the principles of his ecclesiology. The thesis concludes that Barth’s ecclesiology is best understood from a triadic perspective as a patrological, christological and pneumatological ecclesiology. It is only in the perichoretic unity of these perspectives that Barth’s whole ecclesiology is to be grasped, without diminishing the particular perspective.

I’m yet to read it but it sounds great. If it really is as good as it sounds then I can only hope that it finds a publisher pronto. His supervisors were Dr Christiaan Mostert and Rev Bruce Barber.

On Bauckham’s criticism of Moltmann’s exegetical method

The November 2000 edition of International Journal of Systematic Theology includes Stephen N. Williams’ review of Richard Bauckham, ed., God Will Be All in All: The Eschatology of Jürgen Moltmann, a book I commended here. One of the things Williams’ review highlights is a tension between Bauckham and Moltmann’s exegetical method. Williams writes:

‘Substantively, the most glaringly problematic response is to Bauckham’s essay on time and eternity. This lengthy essay, it should be said, contains constructive material on eschatology and aesthetics which is well worth pondering. In its midst comes a complaint worded with surprising strength, that ‘what little exegesis’ Moltmann offers on the things of time and eternity ‘tends to be remarkably ignorant and incompetent’ engaging in ‘exegetical fantasy’, a ‘substitute for disciplined exegesis’ (pp. 179f.). Moltmann’s reply reveals what is perhaps the Achilles’ heel of his whole theology. Bauckham, he says, is a New Testament scholar and he is not; Bauckham is thus ‘bound to a literal exegesis and committed to the colleagues in his particular field’ whereas he himself must develop his own theological relationship to the texts; he (Moltmann) is a ‘hearer of the texts’ who ‘becomes a friend of the texts, who discusses with them what they are talking about’ but, unlike the biblical Richard Bauckhams of this world, the theologian, or theology, ‘is not subject to the dictation of the texts, or the dictatorship of the exegetes’ (p. 230). One does not need to hold a remotely traditional position on the role of scripture in theology to find the spectre of conceptual chaos looming over Moltmann’s formulations on this point. He has left himself with much to do in a future volume on norms and method in theology’.

Theodicy: The Justification of God – 10

HISTORY AND JUDGMENT

Study 10

A guest post by Trevor Faggotter

If we don’t change our course, we’ll end up where we’re headed. – Chinese proverb

Down one road lies disaster, down the other utter catastrophe. Let us hope we have the wisdom to choose wisely. – Woody Allen

Perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment (1 John 4:18b).

YESTERDAY, TODAY AND TOMORROW

In our reading of The Justification of God, from 1917, it is important that we distill the wisdom P.T. Forsyth imparts, and give application to the unique circumstances of our own day. Theology is best when it is doxology.[1] Praise to God – in thinking and serving anew amidst today’s world – is the life we are called to share in.  Forsyth saw the necessity of engaging in public affairs:

It has always been the bane of theology when it has been isolated from the course of public affairs, and left neutral to the issues of history – when it has been otherworldly.[2]

Take one example: oil consumption is one of our many pressing global problems – where injustice, politics, greed and war, are very real factors to reckon with.

March 31st, 2008 “It’s no secret anymore that for every nine barrels of oil we consume, we are only discovering one.”
– The BP Statistical Review of World Energy. The world is addicted to oil. In just 8 years, it’s projected the world will be consuming nearly 50,000 gallons of oil every second. By that time, the world won’t be able to meet the projected demand… for one simple reason: We’re using up oil at breakneck speed.[3]

Investors are advised to put their hopes and dollars into a variety of other forms of energy stocks, including solar power, steam-engines (water), nuclear fuel, and so on. But can a sage of yesteryear, like P.T. Forsyth, be of any use to us at this point? These were not his issues. Does his theology – his thought and Word concerning God carry any weight here? We say, ‘yes, it certainly does’. Thoughtfulness, trust, prayer and a working theodicy, are meant to serve us well, as we address the crisis in life and any overwhelming set of worldwide, or local circumstances in which we find ourselves placed.

FACING A FOREBODING FUTURE WITHOUT FEAR

Fear of what may happen in the future affects the way we live out our lives. Fear itself produces certain effects in the course of history. Self-preservation, greed, fear of other nations, cultures and of people generally; fear of engaging in community life, turning in upon oneself[4], the quest for meaning (in all the wrong places), the pursuit of a self-styled happiness, frustration and anger at the inability to achieve personal goals, and various reckless and harmful forms of personal and community abuse, hastening onwards unabated – such issues are very much the staple diet of many of today’s people. Underneath is all is the lifelong fear of death (Hebrews 2:15).

Undoubtedly the scientific, industrial and political search for practical and appropriate solutions must continue. But can overwhelming concern with such fear, be the wisest, and most urgent of pursuits? Proverbs 9:10 says, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding”. In his writings, Forsyth has been calling his readers to unearth more in the cross of Christ, than they have previously seen or known. Within our current history, we need to see the outworking of the cross as it bears upon the issues and thinking of all people within our global village:

The non-intervention of God bears very heavy interest, and He is greatly to be feared when He does nothing. He moves in long orbits, out of sight and sound. But He always arrives. Nothing can arrest the judgment of the Cross, nothing shake the judgment-seat of Christ. The world gets a long time to pay, but all the accounts are kept-to the uttermost farthing. Lest if anything were forgotten there might be something unforgiven, unredeemed, and unholy still.[5]

God has acted in human history, in grace, in Jesus Christ. The persistent deafness of the world to God, and to the redeeming message of the gospel is the reason for so much fear. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love (1 John 4:18). Unbelief in the gospel, and the refusal of Love’s given solution weighs heavily upon the global conscience, as also upon the national conscience, and of course, the personal conscience.

P.T. Forsyth never wrote a book on the conscience, but few seem to have understood it better than he did. He said that conscience makes us man, makes us one, and makes us eternal. He appears to be saying that of all creatures man is endowed the conscience, and without conscience he is not truly man. He is also saying that it is one of the most dynamic factors common to every human being, and that transcending class, language, race and creed it gives us that by which we can understand humanity – at least on the moral level. That is why Forsyth also said, ‘That which goes deepest to the conscience goes widest to the world‘. Nothing we do of right or wrong can relate only to this world, but to eternity, i.e. sin and wrongdoing meets its judgement in the eternal sphere, and not just in this world.[6]

THE CROSS: DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION

People still discuss the cross of Jesus. They reflect on the meaning of it all.

While they were talking and discussing, Jesus himself came near and went with them but their eyes were kept from recognizing him (Luke 24:15-16)

The Risen Jesus is present amidst the discussion, of life, and the cross, and its meaning, and it is He who interprets the things concerning himself, to those who need to know and to understand. Sharply admonished, new cross-insight evokes great joy (Luke 24:52).

Then he said to them. “Oh how foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all the prophets have declared?” (Luke 24:25b)

Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them all the things about himself in all the scriptures (Luke 24:27).

It is so important that we discuss the cross in our present-day context. There are five categories under which Forsyth discusses History and Judgment. Briefly, we note them:

1. Scriptural   2. Evangelical   3. Philosophical   4. Critical   5. Ironical[7]

1. SCRIPTURAL

Forsyth points us to a Psalm often used in churches as a call to worship, to sing a new song to the Lord. Psalm 96 finishes with the theme of joy, as all the trees of the forest sing for joy (Psalm 96:13b) at the Lord’s coming to judge the world with righteousness:

…and so God takes His own text, and preaches, to those that have ears to hear, judgment. His great sermons on crucial occasions are long, and deeply theological. Perhaps now we may grow in the mood to listen, and the skill to read His signs in the times. What is the Christian theology of public judgment? It is not great nations only, but modern civilisation that is at the bar. Does it stand before the judgment-seat of Christ?

In the Bible, in Christianity, the idea of judgment is not that of a remote and unearthly dies iræ[8]a notion which has become a demoralising dream, withdrawing religion from the midst of life. Judgment is the visitation of a Saviour. It comes into affairs. It means less destruction than reconstitution. It has a note of joy in it, the joy of harvest.[9]

Once again, Forsyth reminds us that the judgment in history is one of dilemma, choice and crisis, and not that of civilised progress and development. Christ’s death and resurrection is a movement, a build-up, to a crescendo of judgment, closing one world, opening another. He refers to the parable of the vineyard, and the last judgment being the last of a long train: Finally he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son’ (Matthew 21:37). The final wicked deed of crucifying Jesus was the last judgment. ‘But it always means the dawn of the kingdom more than the doom of the world.[10]

2. EVANGELICAL

Forsyth has said, ‘theology means thinking in centuries’, and this he does himself, when he surveys the Dark Ages, noting the missing element of teleology,[11] and its detrimental effects through the course of history. Theology lost the sense of history.

It is the mark of the Dark Ages and the Churches millennial slumber that theology departed from its historic base and lost the sense of history (my emphasis) in the wilds of speculation. This base and this sense we are only now recovering for faith. The first Christian principle was right, whatever we think of its first form. High history is not possible without the teleology which a final judgment supplies for all other crises. And Christianity alone, by this article of faith, makes a history of the world possible. It restores theology to history, and history to theology.[12]

He also notes that excluding the idea of atoning judgment leads to indifference, apathy and disbelief of judgment, and a light sense of spiritual wickedness.

That indifference is the symptom of a state of things in which the Cross loses its searching and universal, its ethical and public quality, and comes to be admired as heroic sacrifice, or sweetened to the taste of the piety of religious groups.[13]

There is an enormous amount of pessimism among people today. Forsyth is right to note that pessimismis erected into a creed upon the debris of the creeds of hope. So ends a religion of probabilities. Uncertainty denies Christ’s Victory. It fails to see Jesus’ significance, in his death for decisive judgement. Unbelief in what God has done, results in pessimism. A pessimist, being one who always looks on the worst side of life!

Evangelical faith has no timidity, concerning the basic facts, even amidst many doubters.

For faith we must have facts, and facts eternal and sure. We must have a fact, which ensures all the future because it contains it, creates it, and gives us the final settlement of the moral soul in advance.[14]

Facts Eternal and Sure

For Christian faith … that fact is Christ’s Cross, as a greater fact than all history, for which now all history moves. He is the last judgment, yesterday, today, and forever, the goal and justification of all the devious, dreadful ways of earth. The deepest thing, whether in progress or catastrophe, is its contribution to His denouement. Christ in His Cross is the theodicy of history, its crisis, its essential, and final, and glorious justice.

We noted in the previous study the importance, to our understanding, of Christ’s Words from the cross – My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46; Psalm 22) – the essence of these words really must be grasped. Geoffrey Bingham has written:

If he were not separated, then would sin have been really dealt with? If this alienation of the human spirit from God is the very essence of wrath, then was God’s wrath really poured out on the Cross upon sin, and was it borne by Christ, if he were not forsaken? The answer must surely be, ‘The wrath was poured out upon sin, and for man’s sake he was forsaken’… What we fail to understand is the utter desolation that is indicated by the cry. If to be forsaken is the utterness of suffering (and it is), then he actually has to suffer this. If some special knowledge tells him he is not essentially forsaken, then he does not suffer to the full. Let us understand this: he did suffer to the full. Failure to understand this cry is failure to understand the terrible nature of sin and the high wrath of the eternal God, who must destroy evil by His burning action of holiness.[15]

Jesus must know and bear the dreadful anger of God upon all sin, once, for all. It is only as a person by the Spirit, sees these facts that they can be truly at peace.

He must, as man, be taken from the Holy Presence and go out into the place of the damned. He must suffer it all, or not at all.[16]

Leon Morris concurs regarding this actual fact of forsaken-ness. The meaning of Jesus’ words, are that he was cut off from the Father.[17]

Another scholar, R.W. Dale would never allow that Christ only felt forsaken. He said,

‘I shrink from saying that even in my calmest and brightest hours I have a knowledge of God and the ways of God which is truer than Christ had, even in His agony. I dare not stand before His cross and tell Him that even for a moment He imagines something concerning God which is not a fact and cannot be a fact’.[18]

Forsyth alerts us to the wrecked world, where the mending requires something very deep:

Things are so profoundly out of joint that only something deeper than the wrecked world can mend them, only a God of love and power infinite, making his sovereignty good once for all, though mountains are cast into the sea. The only theodicy is not a system, but a salvation; it is God’s own saving Act and final judgment, incarnate historically and personally. The Cross of Christ, eternal and universal, immutable and invincible, is the moral goal and principle of nations and affairs.

If it seem ridiculous to say that a riot and devilry of wickedness like war is still not out of the providence of Christ’s holy love, it is because we are victims of a prior unfaith. It is because we have come to think it a theological absurdity to say that the Cross of Christ outweighs for God in awful tragedy, historic moment, and eternal effect a whole world ranged in inhuman arms. We do not really believe that it is Christ, ‘crucified to the end of the world’ (as Pascal says), that pays the last cost of war. That God spared not His own Son is a greater shock to the natural conscience than the collapse of civilisation in blood would be.

Again, Forsyth has nailed it. We too, in our day, have come to think it a theological absurdity to say that the Cross of Christ outweighs for God in awful tragedy, historic moment, and eternal effect a whole world ranged in inhuman arms. Theologians, preachers and churches – we have all too often failed to declare the whole counsel of God in this matter. We have been slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken.

For civilisation may deserve to collapse, if only because it crucified the Son of God, and crucifies Him afresh. But if God spared not His own Son, He will spare no historic convulsion needful for His kingdom. And if the unspared Son neither complained nor challenged, but praised and hallowed the Father’s name, we may worship and bow the head.[19]

3. PHILOSOPHICAL

The Church, with a last judgment remote, and an individualist salvation by private bargain at hand, has much failed in relating the Cross to history. And in so far it has been untrue to its Bible.

If the Church fails to relate the cross satisfactorily to history, where does it fail?

The bane of popular Christianity is that it has severed the Cross from the moral principle for which the world is built, from the creative leaven in active things, and has made it a second best, a supplementary device for the rescue of a section of mankind who occupy to it a certain relation of greater or less piety. Salvation, the Church, the kingdom become but the proceeds from a good sale of the wreck of creation.[20]

Creation – the key to open our understanding the Cross

Do we know and proclaim the wonder and joy of creation, redeemed in Christ? This is essential wisdom, at the heart of the gospel (Ephesians 3:9). Creation, our home, is the dwelling place of God, in Jesus Christ. The cross is not a supplementary device. It is at the heart of God’s purpose for creation. All too often the Church has held an escapist theology – a dualist approach to creation – whereby physicality is seen as inferior to spirituality. Many consider this creation should be abandoned to the rubbish dump, while a redeemed section of humanity fly away, to some safer, more homely place, for eternity. Where does that thinking really connect with present history? It doesn’t. As such, it is no real gospel, for creation in primary, and not salvation. If creation fails, God fails.[21]

Christianity does believe in a solution already real, however unseen. We now live amid the evolution of the final crisis and last judgment of the sempiternal[22] cross. All the moral judgment moving to effect in the career of souls, societies, and nations is the action of the Cross as the final, crucial, eternal Act of the moral power of the universe.[23]

We do well to recognise God’s judgments taking place now. We may hold a general faith that there is a fundamental distinction between right and wrong. But we are given in Christ something far more decisive than that. A frame of mind of blessed assurance, and confidence arises because God is the decisive Judge. There is finality to this age.

It is well that we should know that, as men or nations, we are daily registering our own judgment in the character our conduct is laying down, that we are creating our own Kharma, that we are writing two copies of our life at once – one of them, through the black carbon of time and death, in the eternal. And it elevates the whole conception of history to view it as at bottom the action, almost automatic, and therefore certain, of the divine judgment – so long as we can rise to think it is moral action with an end, and not incessant moral process.

All that is to the good. But the tendency is to lose, in the moral automatism, the sense of judgment as more than sure nemesis, as the work of a living and saving God who has already said His last and endless word in this kind. We tend to miss in judgment the incessant reaction of His personal and absolute holiness as the last creative power in all being, and the organising principle of its slow evolution through time. We are led to think more of the judgment than of the Judge. It then becomes hard, very often, to believe in judgment, or trace the justice at work at all. And we come out of the welter, perhaps, with little more at best than a general faith that there is a distinction between right and wrong, possibly even a fundamental one, but with no assurance which will win at last, whether the far end of it all will be a kingdom of God or a kingdom of Satan.[24]

The goal of creation, the regeneration, the new creation, the expulsion of all that is evil, the arrival of that which God always had in mind, gives present history deep significance.

It is now the moment to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers; the night is far-gone, the day is near (Romans 13:11b-12a).

4. CRITICAL

This section was particularly difficult for me to summarise. Forsyth makes reference to a famous phrase of the German philosopher and historian, Frederick Schiller: Die Weltgeschichte ist das Weltgericht. It means ‘History is the true criticism and last judgment of the world’. Forsyth concurs that this ‘is a great word’. But requests due caution:

But it may hide in it also a great fallacy. It may easily come to mean what is so false in recent pragmatism-that efficiency is the test of right, that only clear fitness survives, that nothing is to be held true till you see it works, that the only success is success. It does not do justice to the Christian idea.[25]

Many people, and politicians in particular are mere pragmatists: If something works, it must be right. The problem of this sort of thinking is that it leads us to see the world as simply an immediate ‘cause and effect’ environment. Here, the active role of God is almost superfluous. At best he becomes the Trustee of the moral order. People think of the world, then, as detached from God. Everything becomes relative. We speak of values, but there is no measuring stick. There is no longer any standard by which to measure whether things are improving or not. Life grows more complex … more busy, but more meaningless. Forsyth says: It has nothing to crystallise on.[26] Sounds hauntingly familiar. It describes much of our way of life, as it is lived in Australia, 2008, doesn’t it?

The ethical process in mere history has no real closes. The books are never made up. To what does it all move?[27]

Forsyth saw the danger of this approach, outworking in WW1, and well in advance of WW2. Already there were loud political appeals to a tutelary God – a guardian spirit -, but entire silence about Christ, his judgment or His kingdom. The result is tribalism.

What is the end result of such an approach today? Multiculturalism, at its best can be colourful, joyful, varied and mutually enriching. But mere multiculturalism, as a stable way of structuring society and community, may be a very dangerous, or disastrous. It is a world-Christ who is given for all nations of the world – for the blessing of all peoples.

5. IRONICAL

In many cases in life the important thing is not what is said but what is not said. That is what the experienced man is most concerned to interpret. That is what he comes either to distrust or to rely on most.[28]

This final section reminds me of a title ‘Finally comes the Poet’, by Walter Brueggemann. Forsyth’s dense theology becomes more like poetry. And we can grasp it!

When we have to reckon men up, or to revise our interviews with them, we may attach most weight not to the words we heard but to the one remark we expected but it did not come.[29]

Forsyth then builds upon this point with an illustration from creation:

It is so in nature. The stillness of the night often seems more full and more impressive than the bustle of the day. Its calm is a rebuke, or at least a monition, to the day’s passion and the day’s haste; the repose is full of subtle question. So as we rise in the scale and business of life the silence may be more eloquent and even active than the sound; and more is meant by reserve than by response. The criticism by silence can be as severe as any.

And then come a series of great insights he has been building toward – God’s laughter and smiles: (taking nothing from the seriousness of all our studies!)

God’s judgment on things and in things is not absent because it is still, and it is not out of action because it is not obvious nor obtrusive.[30]

If God do not yet intervene on earth He sits in heaven – sits and laughs. And His smile is inscrutable, and elusive, only not cruel: the smile of endless power and patience, very still, and very secure, and deeply, dimly kind. The judgment of God can be as lofty and sleepless as the irony of heaven over earth, or the irony of history upon earth. ‘Thou didst deceive me and I was deceived.’[31]

Heine[32] spoke daringly of the Aristophanes[33] of heaven. But that is not the smile that any Christian can see or credit over us. Yet it need not be either faithless or foolish to speak of the Socratic heavens. God seems so slow, so clouded, so fumbling in His ways; and His questions that do reach us seem so irrelevant, so naïve – but they are so dangerous.

The powers that delay but do not forget are not simple, impotent, or confused as they tarry. If fire do not fall from the heavens they yet rain influence down. There is a world of meaning in their gaze upon men whom they do not yet smite.

It is neither a stony nor a bovine[34] stare.

All the world is being summed up by that bland sky.

Its light is invisibly actinic[35] on earth.

What seems distance and irrelevance, weak and unweeting,[36] may well put us on our guard. The heavens are not so simple as they seem, nor is God so mocked as He consents to appear, and to appear for long. He gives our desire, and it shrivels our soul. Of our pleasant vices He is making instruments to scourge us. The passions, ambitions, and adventures of men go on to achieve their end through a riot of worldliness, wickedness, defiance, and guilt; but they are after all the levers for a mightier purpose than theirs, which thrives on their collapse. The wrath of man works the righteousness of God. Satan’s last chagrin is his contribution to God’s kingdom. The great agents of the divine purpose have often no idea of it. ‘Cyrus, my servant.’ [See Isaiah 45:1, 4]

One thing they do with all their might, but God accomplishes by them quite another. Julius Caesar never intended nor conceived the Roman Church; but it came by him, and he was murdered. His ambition was his death, but his great function was a thing vaster than the Roman Empire.

There is a certain truth (if we will be very careful with it) in the early Christian fantasy that Satan was befooled by the patient naïveté of Christ. That is the irony of history – when the very success of an idea creates the conditions that belie it, smother it, and replace it. Catholicism becomes the Papacy. The care for truth turns to the Inquisition. The religious orders, vowed to poverty, die and rot of wealth. A revival movement becomes a too, too prosperous and egoistic Church. Freedom as soon as it is secured becomes tyranny. Misfortune need not be judgment, nor need defeat; but victory may be. And defeat may be victory. The irony seems most cruel when it overtakes one who is the slave of no ambition but, like Socrates, is filled with the great idea, or like Christ with the Holy Ghost – men whose passion did not need to be overruled for the Kingdom of Heaven, but was purely and wholly engrossed with it. We are faced with the gigantic and ironic paradox of the Cross, which crushes the best to raise both them and the world.

If His words are acts, so is that slow smile. Heaven does not laugh loud but it laughs last – when all the world will laugh in its light. It is a smile more immeasurable than the ocean’s and more deep; it is an irony gentler and more patient than the bending skies, the irony of a long love and the play of its sure mastery; it is the smile of the holy in its silent omnipotence of mercy. The stillness of those heavens that our guns cannot reach is not a circumambient indifference, it is an irony of the Eternal power in sure control of human passion, a sleepless judgment on it, an incessant verdict, very active, mighty, and monitory for those that have ears to hear – yea, very merciful. Greater than the irony in history is the irony over it. Great is the irony of persecution by the Church, of cruelty coming from culture, of corruption from the very success of purity, of a colossal egoism in the wake of much self-denial. But greater and other is the irony of those skies that look down on the whole earth and make its ironies little-look down, so inert yet so ominous, so still yet so eloquent, so vacant yet so charged with the judgment that the Cunctator Maximus is incessantly passing on man – penetrating by its slow insistence, wearing earth down with its monotone of doom. We have that sublime, and ironic, and ceaseless judgment in the irony of Christ before Pilate – all Heaven taking sentence from rude Rome, the chief outcast of the world judging the world with the last judgment of its God … He moves in long orbits, out of sight and sound. But he always arrives.[37]


[1] Doxology – i.e. Praise to God (from Greek words, ‘doxa’ (glory) and ‘logos’ (word) – word of glory!

[2] P. T. Forsyth, The Justification of God, NCPI, 1988, p. 188

[3] http://www.energyandcapital.com/

[4] Martin Luther’s definition of sin – ‘to be turned in upon yourself’.

[5] Forsyth, p. 207.

[6] Geoffrey C. Bingham, The Conscience, Conquering or Conquered?, NCPI, Blackwood, 1980, 2001, p. xi.

[7] Forsyth, The Justification of God, p. 188-203.

[8] dies iræthe first words of a medieval Latin hymn describing the Last Judgment (literally `day of wrath’).

[9] Forsyth, p. 188-9.

[10] Forsyth, The Justification of God, p. 189.

[11] Teleology – we have previously discussed in Study 3 – Towards the Certain Goal.

[12] Forsyth, p. 190.

[13] Forsyth, p. 190.

[14] Forsyth, p. 193.

[15] Geoffrey C. Bingham, Christ’s Cross Over Man’s Abyss, NCPI, Blackwood, 1987, p. 68.

[16] Bingham, Christ’s Cross Over Man’s Abyss, p. 70.

[17] Leon Morris, The Cross in the New Testament, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1965, p. 45.

[18] R. W. Dale, The Atonement, London, 1902, p. xli.

[19] I believe it may have been David Brainerd, 1718-1747 (the missionary mentioned last week), who was able to praise and hallow the Father’s name even as his own family members were murdered, as he was dragged in a tortuous manner across a prairie, for his testimony to Jesus; all in the service of bringing the gospel to the North American Indians in Delaware.

[20] Forsyth, p. 198.

[21] See Geoffrey C. Bingham, Creation and the Liberating Glory, NCPI, Blackwood, 2004, p. 73.

[22]sempiternal – having no known beginning and presumably no end; “the dateless rise and fall of the tides”; “time is endless”; “sempiternal truth”; enduring forever;

[23] Forsyth, p. 198.

[24] Forsyth, p. 196.

[25] Forsyth, p. 199-200.

[26] Forsyth, p. 203.

[27] Forsyth, p. 201.

[28] Forsyth, p. 203.

[29] Forsyth, p. 203.

[30] Forsyth, p. 203-4; the other quotes that follow are from pp. 204-207, formatted for ease of reading.

[31] Jeremiah 20:7 – Jeremiah’s complaint against God.

[32] Heinrich Heine (1797-1856), a German poet who lived during the times of the French Revolution and the wars of Napoleon; his lyrics have inspired such composers as Mendelssohn, Schubert, and Schumann.

[33] Aristophanes – An Athenian playwright, some consider him the greatest ancient writer of satirical comedy. Surviving plays include: The Clouds (423) and Lysistrata (411).

[34] I think he means rather docile; certainly the stare of our brown-eyed Jersey cows was quite intelligent.

[35] Actinic: a display caused by chemical charges produced by radiant energy – especially in the visible and ultraviolet sector of the spectrum.

[36] Unweeting – unwitting; not knowing; unaware; not intended.

[37] Forsyth, p. 207.

Is Burma’s military junta diverting aid on ethnic grounds?

According to recent reports received by KHRG from residents of the Irrawaddy Delta, the SPDC has not only been restricting aid supplies and access by international humanitarian workers, but has also been doing so on the basis of ethnicity. Increasing reports on the military’s restrictions and misappropriation of aid supplies necessitate immediate international investigation, as all affected residents of the delta regardless of their ethnicity remain in urgent need humanitarian assistance. The regime’s obstructions of humanitarian aid increasingly appear to fall under the criteria of crimes against humanity. In such a case, the responsibility to protect this population falls on the international community.

The Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG) has received disturbing reports from ethnic-Karen residents of the Irrawaddy Delta that the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) is blocking the distribution of aid from getting into particular areas of the delta affected by Cyclone Nargis due to the fact that they are predominantly ethnic-Karen.  The Irrawaddy delta region as a whole is estimated to be more than 60% ethnic Karen with some villages largely or entirely populated by Karen residents.  Speaking to KHRG, one Karen resident from the delta said that it is because many of the villages are predominantly ethnic Karen and were formerly “populated totally by Karen” that “the regime is not interested in aid reaching the area.”

According to another report received by KHRG, “In the rural areas the SPDC are not allowing assistance to villagers…  The authorities have set up check points along the roads on the way to Labutta, Pathein [Bassein], Myaung Mya and Bogale in order to block relief from reaching those in desperate need.”  Labutta, a predominantly ethnic-Karen town, has reportedly been decimated by Cyclone Nargis; as has Bogale, which outside of the town centre is also predominantly Karen.  Myaung Mya, like Bogale, is predominantly ethnic Karen outside the town centre and in the surrounding countryside.  Bassein, while now largely populated by non-Karen residents, was previously a majority-Karen town and the surrounding villages remain heavily populated by Karen.

The SPDC’s hostile attitude to the Karen population in the delta may be due to the regime’s perception of ethnic difference being a threat to centralised military rule.  The delta region was also the location of an unsuccessful attempt in 1991 by the Karen National Union (KNU) and Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) to gain a foothold in the area.  At that time, there was heavy fighting between Karen forces and the Burma Army, especially around the town of Bogale and, as one resident explained to KHRG, the Karen community in the delta “was also the target of massive retaliatory actions by the Burma Army.”  As part of the then State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC)’s retaliation against civilians, “Villages were burned, helicopter gunships strafed villages and schools, and thousands of Karen community leaders, pastors and schoolteachers were arrested, sentenced en masse and imprisoned.[1] The event came to be known as the ‘Bogale Crisis’ and the SPDC’s distrust of the local Karen population likely still lingers.

The above statements by Karen residents living in the delta are, furthermore, supported by ongoing reports of aid restrictions and diversions in the area more generally.  Associated Press, for example, stated that

“Checkpoints manned by armed police were set up Tuesday [May 13th] on roads leading to the Irrawaddy River delta and all international aid workers and journalists were turned back by officers who took down their names and passport numbers. Drivers were interrogated… high-energy biscuits rushed in on the World Food Program’s first flights were sent to a military warehouse.”[2]

SPDC authorities also appear to be capitalising on the catastrophe by forcibly relocating affected communities out of the area.  According to a United Nations report on Tuesday, May 13th “Myanmar’s military regime is forcing cyclone survivors out of their devastated villages and into other parts of the country… There are a growing number of reports of families being forcibly displaced to non-affected townships.[3] Forced relocation of disparate civilian communities into consolidated population centres is a widespread practice which the Burma Army employs in Karen State to enforce military control over civilian populations.  The current forced relocations in the delta may likewise be intended to serve the purpose of increasing civilian control, rather than for the benefit of the affected population.

The SPDC’s current restrictions on international access into the delta have so far limited any opportunity for a more thorough investigation into whether aid is in fact being restricted and diverted on ethnic grounds.  Regardless of whether the SPDC is using ethnicity as a criterion for allowing access to humanitarian assistance, reports of ongoing military restrictions and diversions of aid more generally continue.  International observers must be allowed to access all affected areas to ensure that aid and assistance get through to survivors of Cyclone Nargis, irrespective of ethnicity.  Unless restrictions and the misappropriation of aid supplies cease, more civilians will face the unnecessary threat of starvation, disease and death.  Furthermore, as International Crisis Group Director Gareth Evans stated on Monday,

“If what the generals are now doing, in effectively denying relief to hundreds of thousands of people at real and immediate risk of death, can itself be characterised as a crime against humanity, then the responsibility to protect principle does indeed cut in.”[4]

The responsibility to protect principle affirms that when the government of a country is unwilling or unable to protect its citizens from war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing or genocide then this responsibility falls on the international community.  In relation to crimes against humanity, the responsibility to protect principle applies to “Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health” when committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against a civilian population.  As the military regime continues to obstruct aid efforts, their actions increasingly appear to be “intentionally causing great suffering“.  In such a case, the responsibility to protect principle applies.  The international community must not allow Burma’s military regime to deny crucial aid to affected populations, irrespective of the grounds on which they do so.  Applying the responsibility to protect principle in this case gives added leverage in challenging the regime’s increasingly disastrous restrictions on humanitarian assistance to the affected population.

Footnotes

[1] Conditions in the Irrawaddy Delta, KHRG, August 1995.

[2]UN warns another cyclone is forming near Myanmar,” Associated Press, May 14th 2008.

[3]Traffickers target child survivors of Myanmar cyclone: UN,” The Straits Times, May 14th 2008.

[4]Facing Up to Our Responsibilities,” Gareth Evans, The Guardian, May 12th 2008.

Source: KHRG

The Image of God

‘For [the Father] has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy’. – St Paul, Colossians 1:13-18.

Creation

We had not thought about it.
We were born. We lived to die.
All the while we lived we did not think.
When the casket came
We followed to the graveyard,
Solemn and thoughtful, still not knowing,
Not knowing why we were created,
Indeed, why anything had come to be.
Some of us remembered the country schoolyard,
Also the classroom, the teacher,
And the daily business of life.
In the afternoons we went home,
Played time and life along with the family,
Returning to the school next day.
These were the only things we knew,
And these without reflection.
So it has always been. Time comes and goes;
Sometimes a vagrant thought tickles the mind
And puzzles the otherwise restful innerness­
That hiddenness of our being­
Where thought perhaps both comes and goes,
And things are as always were­and will be.
What, then, is all this speculation
Concerning creation?
Creation­I think it must be this,
Though our teachers never told us so,

So busy they were being busy, or so
Busy being indolent and unspeculative­
Creation, I say, is a most powerful mystery,
Troubling the thought processes, puzzling us.
We know not what it is. All we know
Is that we’re here, though they tell me
Philosophers deny this fact, saying,
‘Man is insubstantial unreality,
A thought he’s had,
A figment of his mind’.
What’s a figment if but then
No proof of anything is possible?
Sometimes a moment comes­
An hour perhaps­when dullness dies,
New thoughts come wheeling on the wing,
Invading the untutored innerness,
And then we wake­if but for a moment,
A dazzling comprehension comes.
We wake and start, we puzzled stare,
We think the thoughts we never thought before.
That schoolyard bare, that afternoon,
The evening passed, the meal consumed,
And sleep again­these suddenly
Take form and motion, in the air
Bright thoughts bring flash and sparkle,
And we begin to think
Creation is the thought of mind.
‘Why are we here?’ we ask,
‘And how and what is here, and there?
What’s it for­all of this­and all for what?
Why anything and everything?’
‘Morons’, you say we are. Morons we are.
We know so little who know so much,
And all’s away, and little grasped.

No one can say the word ‘Create!’
And really understand its truth,
Its fact and being, all its form and life.
If this we learn­this much for now­
Perhaps we’re on the way to it,
To knowing and to seeing it,
To feeling and to being it. You say,
‘Oh, here we are, so quit it quick­
This foolish quest of knowing,
Finding out, round and about
The fact of this creation’.
We cannot quit who know it not.
We know we’re here, but how and why,
And why it is that we must die,
Are speculations rife and oft
From time’s beginning­so we hear.
The fact is this, the truth is this,
That we must know, and when we do
Creation’s truth will dazzle all,
And we’ll begin to hear
What God is saying to His world,
His dull and hazy, lazy world.

– Geoffrey C. Bingham, ‘Creation’, in Creation and the Liberating Glory (Blackwood: New Creation Publications, 2004), 259–61.

One Movie Meme

Byron has tagged me to contribute to the One Movie Meme, started by Ben and is now spreading like a bad strain of malaria, absorbing a ridiculous amount of bloggers’ actual movie time. Here goes:

1. One movie that made you laugh
A Day at the Races

2. One movie that made you cry

A Beautiful Mind

3. One movie you loved when you were a child
Phar Lap

4. One movie you’ve seen more than once
Legends of the Fall

5. One movie you hated
Pride & Prejudice (2005)

6. One movie that scared you
Der Untergang

7. One movie that bored you
V for Vendetta

8. One movie that made you happy
Erin Brockovich

9. One movie that made you miserable
Saving Private Ryan

10. One movie you weren’t brave enough to see
Pride & Prejudice – the second time or subsequent times (it’s almost on permanent play at our place)

11. One movie character you’ve fallen in love with
Sophie Magdalena Scholl

12. A movie that surprised you
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

13. The last movie you saw
The Hunting Party

14. The next movie you hope to see
I’m Not There

15. Now tag five people:

Daniel, Jim, Jon, Michael, & Steve

After War, Is Faith Possible?

Month after month, the amazing team at Wipf and Stock continue to make available an enormously helpful range of great books, not a few of which would simply be left to die (go out of print) if it were not for their ministries of discernment and resurrection. (Would that other publishing houses followed their lead!). They have recently announced the release of Geoffrey A. Studdert Kennedy’s After War, Is Faith Possible?: The Life and Message of Geoffrey “Woodbine Willie” Studdert Kennedy, edited by Kerry Walters. I have much appreciated being exposed to ‘Woodbine Willie’s’ thought in recent years, and very much look forward to reading this volume.

Here’s the wee endorsement from John Perry, SJ, Associate Professor, Arthur V. Mauro Center for Peace and Justice, St. Paul’s College, University of Manitoba:

Kerry Walters and Cascade Books deserve our thanks for retrieving for us in the twenty-first century, embroiled as we are in various violent conflicts, an accessible and coherent presentation of Studdert Kennedy’s early twentieth-century religious thought on war and its aftermath. Earning the nickname ‘Woodbine Willie’ from English soldiers he served as chaplain in the ‘Great War to end all wars,’ the cigarette-smoking padre knew firsthand the unspeakable horrors of war. He also knew that faith was not only possible after the hostilities ceased; it was necessary.

His was not a disembodied or privatized faith. He is especially helpful in linking the Eucharist with social justice. Although fellow Anglicans and interested Protestants may well treasure this collection of Studdert Kennedy’s writing, Roman Catholics like myself will appreciate his passionate love for the poor, wounded, and dying Christ and his commitment to the church, where he and others can insist that, indeed, after war faith is possible.