Lewis on the assumption of skepticism

I must admit that one of the difficulties I had in seminary was in the attitude contained within many of our (modern) texts (and professors) that I might call a 'bias toward skepticsm.'  Whatever we said about the stories of Scripture, we surely (for some reason) could not take them at face value.  They were guilty until proved innocent.  We did not believe that a person such as David or Pontius Pilate, or a place such as Cana ever existed until we could find evidence for them. 

Why were not the ancient Biblical texts themselves evidence?

This same bias toward skepticism was to be found in numerous other fields beyond Biblical studies.  We have no idea who wrote the Illiad...but it obviously was not Homer.  Troy surely did not exist...because only ancient documents said so...until we found it. 

It seems that the assumption of skepticism has, in the modern (and post-modern) academy, come to be equated with clear-eyed, rigorous, and 'critical' investigation.  I certainly do believe in rigorous and probing investigation, but beginning with these presumptions ("of course the traditional understanding could not be true precisely because it is the traditional understanding") seems to me to hinder and needlessly bias rather than to aid in that investigation.  I doubt this post will have too much impact on the Academy, but I was thinking (and laughing) about this problem recently when I read this C.S. Lewis quote (from "Religion without Dogma?" in reponse to Prof. Price's objections to miracles):

If I thus hand over miracles from science to history (but not, of course, to historians who beg the question by beginning with materialistic assumptions) Professor Price thinks I shall not fare much better.  Here I must speak with caution, for I do not profess to be a historian or a textual critic.  I would refer you to Sir Arnold Lunn's book The Third Day.  If Sir Arnold is right, then the Biblical criticism which began in the nineteenth century has already shot its bolt and most of its conclusions have been successfully disputed, though it will, like nineteenth century materialism, long continue to dominate popular thought.  What I can say with more certainty is that that kind of criticism - the kind that discovers that every old book was made by six anonymous authors well provided with scissors and paste and that every anecdote of the slightest interest is unhistorical, has already begun to die out in the studies I know best.  The period of arbitrary scepticism about the canon and text of Shakespeare is now over: and it is reasonable to expect that this method will soon be used only on Christian documents and survive only in...the theological colleges.   

I thought the bit about 6 anonymous authors of every old book well provided with scissors and paste was pretty funny (inciting flashbacks to my New Testament class in seminary).

Inauguration Week thoughts

It has been quite a week in our nation's life and history:

Monday we honored the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the struggle of the Black community for civil rights.  This year that remembrance was especially poiniant for many as this year marks the 150th Anniversary of the Emmancipation Proclamation of President Lincoln and the 50th Anniversary of Rev. King's great "I have a Dream" sermon delivered on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C.

Monday, on the other end of the National Mall, across from the Lincoln Memorial also saw the second public inauguration ceremony of President Barack Obama who, as everyone knows, is the first Black president of this country, and the first Black leader of any major Western Nation.  Though we still have a long way to go, President Obama is a testimony to how far along our country has come towards Rev. Dr. King's vision. 

Tuesday we marked the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision paving the way for tens of millions of unborn children to be terminated in this country.  While some of those abortions were performed in cases of medical necessity, when the life of the mother was in danger or in the case of extreme birth defects, the great majority were simply cases of birth control in which the child, already living in her mother's womb, was seen as a burden: unwanted and unvalued.  How desperately sad that is if one really thinks on it.  Many of us this week have prayed not simply for changes in the laws concerning abortion, but even more than that, for a culture that is life and child-affirming and sexually responsible; we pray for a change in the American heart.

Mother Teresa said it best I think, "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."  That applies not only to the individuals who decide to have abortions (or who pressure a woman to do so), but also to the community that turns a blind eye to the poverty, family breakdown, and desperation of so many young women that pushes them towards that decision.

I can't help but reflect, now later in the week, that there is a complex symbolic connection between President Obama's swearing-in and these other remembrances this week.  The President even used Rev. Dr. King's Bible for his inaugural oath, deliberately tying himself and his work to the legacy of the great Baptist Pastor, and certainly there is a connection there that is worth celebrating, even if some in the Black community warn us not to blur them together (see here).  Yet I cannot help but see a partial connection between the plight of the Black community and the abortion-friendly policies of some leaders, including President Barak Obama.

 

 

Speaking of the President's policies, many in our country, myself included, were a bit disappointed that President Obama's inaugural address, while calling for unity, seemed to announce his intention to pursue a sharply ideological policy and to govern from the left rather than the center.  Even NPR and the New York Times saw the speech as a sweeping call for a Liberal/progressive programme.  Yet we feel to me like "a house divided that cannot stand" and what we really need today is unity.

 

That need for unity is why one of the more enjoyable aspects of the inaugural festivities (for me) this year was watching well-known United Methodist pastor, Rev. Adam Hamilton, preach to our nation's highest leaders at the National Cathedral's Inaugural Prayer service yesterday.  Rev. Hamilton preached upon the leadership qualities of Moses emphasizing his compasion for the oppressed Hebrew slaves, his humility, his unifying vision for the people, and his reliance upon God.  

 

 

The sermon did not address that whole Golden Calf incident (and the many forms of idolatry that it could represent for us) and when Rev. Hamilton spent some time emphasizing the types of social justice issues that Democratic politicians like the President already tend to champion, I began to wonder if the sermon would simply be a liturgical "high five" offered to the victorious President.  Yet as he continued, Rev. Hamilton spoke of the need for a unifying vision to bring people together, and not a partisan one (like the one the President articulated only hours before at his inauguration), and Rev. Hamilton, using the example of Rev. King's prayer in a dark time, spoke of our need for the living God to give us our strength, direction, and hope.  It was then that I thought, 'There is someone speaking the truth to power,' and I was glad that Rev. Hamilton is United Methodist.  You can watch Rev. Adam Hamilton's sermon here (sadly, or humorously?, you will mostly be watching the back of the preacher's and the President's heads).      

 

As I reflect on the events of this week, I feel myself moved into prayer: for our church, for our President and other leaders, and for the heart of our nation as well.

A Wesley Catechism on Grace

 

Rev. John Wesley on Grace and "Means of Grace"

What is Grace?
"By 'the grace of God' is sometimes to be understood that free love, that unmerited mercy by which I a sinner, through the merits of Christ, am now reconciled to God. But in this place (2 Corinthians 1:12) it rather means that power of the Holy Ghost, which 'worketh in us both to will and to do His good pleasure.' (Phil. 2:13) As soon as ever the grace of God in the former sense, His pardoning love, is manifested to our souls, the grace of God in the latter sense, the power of his Spirit, takes place therein."

   -John Wesley, Sermon XI, "The Witness of our own spirit," 15

How does God ordinarily give Grace to us?
"By 'means of grace,' I understand outward signs, words, or actions, ordained of God, and appointed for this end, to be the ordinary channels whereby He might convey to men, preventing, justifying, or sanctifying grace.
I use this expression, 'means of grace,' because I know none better; and because it has been generally used in the Christian Church for many ages - in particular by our own (Anglican) Church, which directs us to bless God both 'for the means of grace, and hope of glory;'* and teaches us, that a sacrament is 'an outward sign of inward grace, and a means whereby we recieve the same.'**
The chief of these means are prayer, whether in secret or with the great congregation; searching the Scriptures (which implies reading, hearing, and meditating thereon); and recieving the Lord's Supper, eating bread and drinking wine in remembrance of Him; and these we believe to be ordained of God, as the ordinary channels of conveying His grace to the souls of men."

   -John Wesley, Sermon XII, "The Means of Grace," II.1

What is the Grace that God gives us through Holy Communion?
A Second reason why every Christian should do this (receive Holy Communion) as often as he can, is, because the benefits of doing it are so great to all that do it in obedience to him; viz., the forgiveness of our past sins, the present strengthening of refreshment of our souls...
The grace of God given herin confirms to us the pardon of our sins, and enables us to leave them. As our bodies are strengthened by bread and wine, so are our souls by these tokens of the body and blood of Christ. This is the food of our souls: This gives strength to perform our duty, and leads us on to perfection. If therefore, we have any regard for the plain command of Christ, if we desire the pardon of our sins, if we wish for strength to believe, to love and obey God, then we should neglect no opportunity of receiving the Lord's Supper...
In order to understand the nature of the Lord's Supper, it would be useful to carefully read over those passages in the Gospel, and in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which speak of the institution of it. Hence we learn that the design of this sacrament is, the continual remembrance of the death of Christ, by eating bread and drinking wine, which are the outward signs of the inward grace, the body and blood of Christ.

   -John Wesley, Sermon CI, The Duty of Constant Communion, I.2, 3 & 5

How do we embrace, apprehend, and receive the Grace that God thus gives?
Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. - Romans 5:2 (ESV)

For by grace you have been saved through faith. - Ephesians 2:8 (ESV)

"Grace, without any respect to human worthiness, confers the glorious gift.  Faith, with an empty hand, and without any pretence to personal desert, receives the heavenly blessing."
  
   - John Wesley, "Notes on the New Testament," Note on Ephesians 2:8
-----------------------------------------------
*Quoting from the "General Thanksgiving" prayer which is part of the Morning Prayer service in The Book of Common Prayer; it is also found in The United Methodist Book of Worship, 550

**Quoting from the Catechism in The Book of Common Prayer (1662)