The Puritan Dilemma

I finished reading The Puritan Dilemma: The Story of John Winthrop by Edmund S. Morgan, who used to be Professor of History at Yale.

Many caricaturize Puritans as drab people who mostly lead drab lives, except perhaps for insidious witch-hunting, who insisted on austere living. Professor Morgan instead presents them as real people who made the daunting decision to settle a new land, and faced a variety of challenges as they did so, especially John Winthrop, the elected governor of the Massachusetts Bay Company.

Imagine if you wanted to escape the evils of society to set up a new land where God's will and law would be followed - to be an example to the rest of the world. How would you divide the land, set up the government, set up the churches? What would be the relationship between the state and the church, between the government in Massachusetts and England, between the churches in Massachusetts and England, between believers and non-believers in Massachusetts? The Puritans, under the leadership of Winthrop, worked out solutions to these problems, though not perfectly, yet in ways that affect us down to this day, as we still graple with many of these issues, as Mr. Morgan explains in this excellent book.

The Puritans, who were part of the Church of England, but wanted to purify it, had to work through issues of separtism (those who simply wanted to separate from the Church of England), presbyterianism, and congregationalism. They also had to work through issues about what to forbid without winding up forbidding what God did not forbid. Through it all, Morgan presents a history of real people working through these real problems, with the gamut of the wise and foolish, the far and short sighted, the impetuous and the patient, and at times, these traits appeared in the same person, including Winthrop, though overall, he proved to be an admirable, though not perfect, leader of this new country.

Unity and Diversity

Whatever we believe, as we look out on this world (or the cosmos), we observe an incredible diversity, in the animal kingdom, in the plant world, in geology and topography, in the planet and stars. So we wonder if there is a unity to this diversity, on various levels, and on an ultimage level. Greek philosophy focused on this question. Modern science focuses on this question, so that for the final years of his life, Albert Einstein tried to find an ultimate unity theory that would tie everything in science together, which he called a unified field theory. He died before he found that unity theory. Some scientists press on in this quest. Some think they have found it in string theory, but no one has yet come up with a testable experimental prediction, and so string theory remains outside of science for now and only an interesting theory.

However, even if someone found a unified field theory, this would still not be an ultimate unity of everything, it would be limited to science.

When the early Church Fathers met to discuss the nature and doctrine of the Trinity in Nicene, they realized that in the Trinity, a perfect answer existed to the problem of unity and diversity. They did not come up with the Trinity to solve this problem. Instead, they realized that the unity of the One God, with the diversity of the Three Persons of God, meant that unity and diversity eternally existed on the highest order of existence, and was fundamental to the entire creation.

So it makes sense at every level of creation to find various levels of unity and diversity, including a wide range of diversity yet still with unity.

This thinking on unity and diversity helps me in thinking about the Body of Christ, the Church. Some worry about the diversity they see in the Church. I mostly rejoice in it. There is unity in the head of the Church, who is Jesus Christ. Yet there is plenty of room for diversity in various denominations, associations, fellowships, and local churches, reflecting various traditions and flavors of Christianity, as long as orthodoxy is maintained.

The Nicene Creed states a basic orthodoxy, as well as states the highest order of unity and diversity within the Trinity. It does not get lost in some of the more minor doctrinal issues. That is why almost all Christian churches agree on the Nicene Creed, or at least do not dispute it. The Nicene Creed is not the only early church creed almost all Christian Churches agree on, but it the most well known one.

So I hope and pray that while we in the Church do not overlook our differences, we can appreciate them as part of the diversity in the Body unified under our Lord Jesus Christ, the head of the Church.

White Christmas, Holiday Inn & Irving Berlin

Saw White Christmas again for the upteenth time. This time, I noticed that not only was the song White Christmas written by Irving Berlin, but all the songs in the movie were written by him. Impressive. I also saw or heard a note that the song originally appeared in Holiday Inn, filmed about 10 years earlier - most notable for the songs in it, especially the introduction of White Christmas, which had a profound impact on the troops serving abroad and mostly not at home during Christmas in the war years. So I also took the time to watch Holiday Inn, and again noticed Irving Berlin wrote all the music. So though I had heard about Irving Berlin, I decided to look some more into him.

Turns out Irving Berlin (Israel Baline), a Jewish immigrant from Russia, is considered one of the greatest songwriters in America. Amoung the many songs he wrote include Blue Skies, Putting On The Ritz, Easter Parade, God Bless America, Annie Get Your Gun, This Is The Army, and many others. He wrote between 1250 and 1500 songs, 25 of which became number one hits. His songs appear in 15 films. Irving Berlin's creative contribution to our culture probably affects us more than we know, and makes up a part of Americana enmeshed in our subconscious. I intend to take the time to listen to more of his music, and I hope you will as well, even if he might seem to be somewhat of an old hat to some these days.

Seal Soul

I recently listened to an album (CD) by Seal simply titled Soul. In it, he covers 12 classic soul songs in an outstanding manner. I really enjoyed it. I came across it because I was looking through my local online library catalog for artists who covered Peopel Get Ready, since I recently saw the Original Kingdom Travelers perform a great rendition of it at the First Presbyterian Church in Petaluma.

The tracks are:

1. A Change is Going to Come

2. I Can't Stand the Rain

3. It's a Man's Man's Man's World

4. Here I Am (Come and Take Me)

5. I've Been Loving You Too Long

6. It's All Right

7. If You Don't Know Me By Now

8. Knock On Wood

9. I'm Still In Love With You

10. Free

11. Stand By Me

12. People Get Ready

Return to Rome - Beckwith

I finished reading "Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic." It tells the story of the President of the Evangelical Theological Society who resigned when he decided to return to a full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. Francis Beckwith initially planned to wait till he finished his term as President of the ETS. However, his plan got a kick in the pants when his nephew asked Francis to become his sponsor for his confirmation. In order to be a sponsor, Francis had to be a full Catholic, which he understood to mean in his case, he had to return to full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, which he had been contemplating for a while, but which he speeded because of his nephew's request.

Beckwith, a professor at Baylor, grew up a Catholic, but left in his teens. He relates in the book how he became an evangelical in his later teens, with many ties to Maranatha ministries, but also eventually attending attending Fordham, a Jesuit college where he received a doctorate. He later taught at Whittier College and Trinity International University before settling at Baylor.

Beckwith relates how many of his evangelical friends think he became a traitor, though some remain friends. I am an evangelical who doesn't think he is a traitor. I think of Catholicism as a branch of Christianity, much as Walter Martin did. Though many pressured him, as an expert on cults, he refused to declare Roman Catholicism as a cult. Though there are differences between Roman Catholicism and Protestants (including non-denominational churches who are usually Protestant, though they claim to be neutral), I tend to think they have much more in agreement than they disagree, especially since they agree on all points in Nicene Creed, which I have touched on before in this blog.

I was baptized a Roman Catholic in infancy, took First Communion, was confirmed, and participated as an alter boy, before departing as a Catholic in my early teens. I was saved as an evangelical in my late teens, so there is much I can relate to in Beckwith's story. Though I initially tended to reject my Catholic heritage for some time, I am reconnecting with it in my later life, and tending to find the differences are not as great as I once thought, especially in light of the Joint Declaration on Justification, and some of the documents issued by Evangelicals and Catholics Together. I do not mean to minimize the differences that still exist, but to put them in their context.

First of all, I am Christian, regardless of the denominational differences. I would rather focus on the similarities and unities, especially on the basis of something like the Nicene Creed, rather than focus on what I consider the minor differences, relative to all to what all the branches agree on in something like the Nicene Creed. I do not agree with everything in Beckwith's book, which I might describe in another post in this blog.

However, I hope to do what I can in my brief life to promote a Historic Christianity that brings unity to Body of Christ based on an orthodox faith based on doctrines expressed in the Apostolic and Nicene Creed based on the teachings of Jesus, the apostles, and the Church Fathers.

The Bridge Over the River Kwai

I recently finished reading The Bridge Over the River Kwai by Piere Boulle. I decided to read the book because I have enjoyed the film by the same name directed by David Lean. I usually read the book that forms the basis for a film after watching the film. I find when I read the book first, and then watch the film, I am usually disappointed. However, if I see the film first, and then read the book, with all the extra details, I enjoy that much better.

Part of the enjoyment is to see how the film differs from the book. I don't think a filmaker has to slavishly follow a book. They are two different mediums. What works well in a book sometimes doesn't work that well in a film. In addition, as an artist, the filmaker has the freedom to make his own choices.

So, for example, one major difference between the book and film - in the book, the bridge was not blown up. The screenwriters and David Lean felt this wouldn't work as well on film, so they decided to have the bridge blown up spectaularly.

Another example - in the book, Shears is British and the leader of the commando group (No. 1). In the film, Shears is an American (played by William Holden), and is not in charge of the group, except briefly while Warden is too injured to command. Probably the filmmakers needed a well-known American actor to guarantee box office success, and so a part was rewritten for an American role. The role was enhanced by having Shears escape from Kwai prison camp, which never happened in the book.

Some get mad that the filmaker has deviated from the book. However, Boule deviated from history in order to write a good fiction book, though some history underlies the story. The Japanese did build a death railway through Burma. Of the Western prisoner of war who worked on it, most were French, including Boule himself for a time until he escaped. Nicholson and the other officers at the camp were mostly drawn from French officers Boule knew. The conditions of those who worked on the railway were much worse than depicted in the book or the film.

A bridge was built over the River Mae Klong, not the River Kwai. (This was an honest mistake by Boule.) After the film, many tourists came to Thailand looking for the bridge over the River Kwai. To fix the problem, the Thai government renamed the Mae Klong River so the tourists could find the Bridge over the River Kwai (though it is called the River Kwae).

Nicene Creed - Part 3

The third part of the Nicene Creed deals with the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. The Nicene Council of 325 did not include this section which was added by the Council at Constantinople in 381, which also modified the rest of the original creed as set forth at Nicene in 325. Therefore, the complete Nicene Creed is sometimes called the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. (There was also a small addition in the 6th Century, which I will discuss in a later post.) As in the first part, and the second part, I have broken down the Creed line by line, and placed a one or two word summary next to it of the doctrine that line expounds on.

THE NICENE CREED - Part 3 - Pneumatology

WE BELIEVE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT, THE LORD, THE GIVER OF LIFE - Trinity - The Holy Spirit

WHO PROCEEDS FROM THE FATHER AND THE SON - Double Procession

WHO WITH THE FATHER AND THE SON IS WORSHIPPED AND GLORIFIED - Worship of the Holy Spirit as God

WHO HAS SPOKEN THROUGH THE HOLY PROPHETS - Inspiration of Scripture

WE BELIEVE IN ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH - The Universal Church - Apostolic Teaching (Ecclesiology)

WE ACKNOWLEDGE ONE BAPTISM FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS - Efficacy of Baptism - Sins Forgiven

WE LOOK FOR THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD - Resurrection of the Dead (Eschatology)

AND THE LIFE OF THE WORLD TO COME - The New Heavens and Earth

Again, in a few short statements, the Nicene Creed sets forth the essential nature and work of the Holy Spirit, and includes a few brief statements about the Church and the end times, which all orthodox churces affirm.

Back to Part 2.

Start at Part 1.

Nicene Creed - Part 2

The second part of the Nicene Creed deals with the second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, and thus expounds on Christology - the study of the person of Jesus Christ. As in the first part, I have broken down the Creed line by line, and placed a one or two word summary next to it of the doctrine that line expounds on.

THE NICENE CREED - Part 2 - Christology

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,- Deity of Christ

the only Son of God - Trinity - Son

eternally begotten of the Father, - Christ the Eternal Son

God from God, Light from Light - In Relation to the Father

true God from true God, - Fully God

begotten, not made, - Not Part of Creation

of one Being with the Father - One in Essence (Substance)

through him all things were made. - Word (Logos) Creation

For us and for our salvation - Salvation (Soterology) - Personal

he came down from heaven, - Descension From Heaven

was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary - The Incarnation and The Virgin Birth

and became truly human. - Humanity of Christ

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate - Crucifixion - Historical

he suffered death and was buried. - Actual Death & Burial

On the third day he rose again - Resurrection

in accordance with the Scriptures; - Prophetic Fulfillment

he ascended into heaven - Ascension

and is seated at the right hand of the Father. - Authority and Lordship of Christ

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, - The Return of Christ - Final Judgment (Eschatology)

and his kingdom will have no end. - Kingdom of God

Again, in a few short succinct statements, the Nicene Creed sets forth the words and works of Jesus Christ, and covers the essential doctrines all orthodox churches assert about such matters as His deity and humanity, the virgin birth, His eternal nature, the Incarnation, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, His return, and the Final Judgment.

On to Part 3 (which focuses on the role of the Holy Spirit)

Back to Part 1

Nicene Creed Part 1

The first part of the Nicene Creed deals with God the Father, and can be thought of dealing with Theology properly (Theos - God / ology - the study of). I have broken down the Creed line by line, and placed next to it a summary of what point of doctrine that line succintly summarizes.

THE NICENE CREED - Part 1 - Theology

WE BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, - Monotheism

THE FATHER, THE ALMIGHTY - Trinity - Father - Omnipotent

MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH - Creation/Creator

OF ALL THAT IS, SEEN AND UNSEEN - Unified Creation

In a few short statements, the Nicene Creed proclaims the One God created everything, whether seen or unsee, declares him to be omnipotent, and introduces the Trinity by focusing initally on the Father.

On to Part 2 (focus on the Son, Jesus Christ)

On to Part 3 (focus on the Holy Spirit)

Back to Intro

Nicene Creed - Intro

I think the Nicene Creed contains one of the greatest statements in Christianity. Whether Protestant or Catholic, it represents a statement they all agree with, and is often stated aloud in church service in both traditions, or at least acknowledged as a statement of basic Christian beliefs. More importantly, each statement coincides with one of the great doctrines of the Historic Christianity.

In the next few blogs, I am going to post the words of Nicene Creed, and relate them to the doctrines they correspond to in Historic Christianity.

Before doing that, I want to give a brief background to it.
Though some attribute the Creed to Emperor Constantine's efforts, Constantine was urged to call the Council by bishops concerned by the teachings of Arius, who affirmed that even though Jesus was divine, God created him, and so he was less than the Father. The bishops by an overwhelming vote, not only asserted that Jesus was God, but that he existed eternally with the Father. Later, at a 2nd Council, they also asserted that the Holy Spirit was also God, and the Creed we have today is usually a combination of both Councils of bishops.

The Creed forms the basis for an explicit statement of the Trinity. While some assert this doctrine was only formed at these Councils, the New Testament in many passages implies the Trinity, which was

acknowledged in the Church way before the Nicene Council. The Trinity answers many deep philosophical questions and problems the ancients asked. The Trinity, as well as the Nicene Creed, was not developed by the Church fathers to respond to these questions. Rather, as they studied these questions, and as they studied Scripture, they realized that the Scripture had the answer to the problems of unity and diversity explored in ancient philosophy, and so they excitedly put forward the Trinity as answer to these problems.

Go on and study Part 1 of the Nicene Creed.