The Craw

Of liturgy and such

Click here to an interesting article off the PCA site regarding the "Younger Evangelicals" and the "Emergent Church." Liturgy and a high view of the sacraments are a subject of interest to X-ers and this article taps into the relestness that many 20 and 30 somethings feel in their church experience these days. The only danger in such applications is if it is for generational or strategic reasons. If liturgy is not studied intelligently and heartily endorsed then it just becomes another "cool" trend which will be old and dried out in 20 years.

The Resurrection

As we celebrate Easter and the resurrection of our Lord, it is important to remember as well that the resurrection was the focus of the church of Acts and the early church. Somehow, we in the modern church have placed all of our focus on the Cross, not that it is unimportant, but for our ancient brethren the empty tomb was the sign of their victory and hope.

We need to recapture that focus in the church today. Our risen Christ is the firstfruits of our own resurrection and also the downpayment on the restored creation. He is the sign and seal of the new humanity.

Beloved, we are God's children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. 1 John 3:2

He is risen indeed!

The International Dog Museum

St. Louis is home to many unusual and obscure museums. In that vein, today we visited the Dog Museum. It contained many unusual and interesting works of art on Man's Best Friend.

And speaking of dogs...

Das Tooth Fairy ist kommen, wieder!

Well, now it's my older daughter who lost a tooth only this time it's normal growth and not accidental.

Calvin on Baptism

What would Calvin do with baptized infants? Or put another way, how does Calvin view baptized infants? Calvin is emphatic in declaring that the sacraments have no power to save in and of themselves, opus operatum, and that the preaching of the Word and the sacraments are “inferior” instruments of salvation, God being the actual cause. In this connection Calvin says of the sacraments: “these instruments of the Spirit (spiritus organa) whereby God sanctifies us.” (Calvin’s Commentary on Leviticus 16:16) We, however, should not infer from this that Calvin views baptism as only a “sanctifying grace.” For Calvin, baptism is mysterious and contains much more in regards to sign and seal. In his debates with the Lutheran theologian, Westphal, who held to a position of baptismal regeneration, Calvin can comport his views so closely with the Lutherans that they have a hard time distinguishing the difference. As Ronald Wallace demonstrates: “Calvin can go even further. He grants Westphal the possibility that God might regenerate some infants when they are baptised. At the same time he is emphatic that this cannot be the ‘universal rule.” (Ronald Wallace, “Calvin’s Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament,” [Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997], 196).

But Calvin goes even further: “Though faith be requisite in those who are grown up, yet this is falsely transferred to infants whose condition is quite different.” (Ibid., 196). In other words, Calvin does not expect every believer to have an existential (and cognate) conversion experience and makes an exception in the case of infants who are baptized into the church. Let me just end by saying that we perhaps reach too far in radically separating the Word and Sacraments because for Calvin the sacraments are also the “visible word.” (Ibid., 140). Remember, we may find what he says strange but these are Calvin's thoughts. They were very common and confessional up through the beginning of the 18th Century in Reformed Circles. Perhaps we need to ponder these mysteries and why our modern, rational minds rebel against such thoughts and conclusions.

The Library

On how I love you,

my second home.

Down in the stacks,

curled up with a tome.

Time for a Break

Well, its mid-term season and everybody's brain is fried. After an already long day, I decided to take a break at 3:30 p.m. and came home to find my little twins napping but my older daughter, Christiana, sitting around bored. So, with a bright sun out and a crisp spring chill in the air, we went bike riding in the park accross the street from the seminary. This photo is of Christiana riding down the hill toward the small lake that is located in the park.

Who are these little people?

At a recent Presbytery meeting, a bitter debate ensued around the nature of children in the church. The question that caused such consternation was, “Are children Christians?” The examinee answered, “Yes” and an audible gasp went up from one side of the room.

Interestingly, this is the same debate that has been going on since prior to the US Civil War when southern theologians, Dabney and Thornwell, lined up on one side and Charles Hodge on the other. Thornwell, influenced by the revivals of the earlier part of the 19th Century, said children of the covenant are to be dealt with as “enemies of God.” (J.H. Thornwell, “The Collected Works of J.H. Thornwell”, IV, 1881, P. 13). Is this historic Presbyterianism or, for that matter, the historic Reformed view? The answer is a resounding, “No!”

Let us take a step back and look at a very historic document, which was written by the Westminster Divines at the Westminster Assembly and which was ratified upon completion by the Scottish Parliament and taken up for use by the Scottish Church...the original Presbyterian Church. The section on Baptism reads in part:

That children, by baptism, are solemnly received into the bosom of the visible church, distinguished from the world, and them that are without, and united with believers; and that all who are baptized in the name of Christ, do renounce, and by their baptism are bound to fight against the devil, the world, and the flesh: That they are Christians, and federally holy before baptism, and therefore are they baptized.

Did you catch that? The divines say, “they are Christians.” This is no surprise to anyone who has spent any time looking into the milieu that brought forth the Westminster Confession. It was a document that brought much approval from the continental Reformed churches of the day. But how about a couple more quotes?

JW Alexander:

O how we neglect that ordinance! treating children in the Church, just as if they were out of it. Ought we not daily to say (in its spirit) to our children, 'You are Christian children, you are Christ's, you ought to think and feel and act as such! (J.W. Alexander, “Forty Years of Letters”, II, NY: Scribners, P. 25)

Charles Hodge:

The status, therefore of baptized children is not a vague or uncertain one, according to the doctrine of the Reformed Churches. They are members of the Church; they are professing Christians; they belong presumptively to the number of the elect. These propositions are true of adult professing Christians. --Both are included in the general class of persons whom God requires his Church to regard and treat as within her pale, and under her watch and care. (Charles Hodge, “The Church Membership of Infants.” Biblical Repository and Princeton Review, Vol. XXX, No. II, Art. VII, Apr., 1858, pp. 347-389)

A note of clarification is in order at this point. The historic Presbyterian position is not that all covenant children are certainly among the elect but that they are assumed to be by the Church. If we create criteria for assessing the elect beyond the sign and seal given, who could stand under the examination? Can we know for sure with anyone, adult or infant? I think the parable of the wheat and tares has something to say to us on this matter.

So what happened to such a rich and robust tradition in American Presbyterianism? The issue was deadlocked at the synod level but the Civil War intervened. As the Presbyterian Church split along north-south lines the issue came up again in the respective national synods. Of course this time, the south approved changes in their documents that changed the status of covenant children to comport with Thornwell's views and the north continued on a more historic trajectory.

So when you wonder why we do things the way we do them in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) remember the denomination has roots in the southern Presbyterian tradition. But we certainly cannot say that the current popular position is the historic one.