We are doing a short series called "Heidelberg Highlights", hitting on the main points of the HC. Part of it is different members coming up each week and reciting a question and answer. Last week we did the first Q and A. In preparing for it, I ran across a wonderful quote from Renee House who reflected on the meaning of comfort when she was dealing with a breast cancer diagnosis. She wrote:
"The catechism is a theological bouillon cube--a dense, compact presentation of the biblical witness from a Reformed perspective. We don't eat bouillon cubes in their condensed state. Rather, we mix them with water and other ingredients so that their flavors can spread out. Similarly, the treasures of the catechism are best received in the church when we mix them with weekly worship, Scripture, and daily life."
Maybe a good way to bring this across in worship would be to videotape some members faith stories and ask them how the comfort of belonging to God has helped them as they have walked through life.
If the report from the advisory committee on the Synod page is any indication, I am afraid that we will be seeing a repeat tonight. We'll have to wait and see.
Reading it more closely, I'm glad that they are bringing forward the proposed CO changes; my hope is that no reversals along this process will take place between now and 2015-2016.
I would agree. Now the task remains of delineating the tasks of the offices. I think that John Calvin will help a lot there. In one of his commentaries he breaks up the calling of the elder and deacon along the lines of the Great Commandment, with elders being responsible for pietas, love of God, and deacons being responsible for caritas, love of neighbor. This may be a good organizing principle for the work before us.
I think that part of the answer to your question of if we are nullifying the distinction of tasks and callings by having deacons have a part in the larger assemblies depends on whether or not you think there is a ruling aspect to their office. If there is, then it is most appropriate for them to be delegated. This is the question, I think--have we in our tradition adequately reflected on that aspect of the office?
If deacons are primarily seen as "assistants", I think that runs the danger of underplaying the parity of the offices. They are equal in dignity and authority to elders, and as church offices should equally be seen as a means by which the ascended Christ carries out his ongoing ministry.
Note too, that Acts 6 is talking about the offices of apostle and deacon, not elder and deacon.
I think that there's something tangential but important in your last statement, and one that I would like your perspective on. It seems that sometimes the scientific enterprise is conflated with the doctrine of general revelation. I think that there is some overlap but at the same time important distinctions between the two. You refer to it as "Christ's other book of revelation". I have recently read it in the Banner as "creation revelation"...both of which draw squarely from the Belgic confession. My only question would be, revelation of what? Data, or a person?
I wonder if part of this debate also comes from differing ideas concerning the doctrine of general revelation...there are those who are "maximizers" of the doctrine, creating in effect a two-source model of authority, and there are minimizers, and there are those in between. It was helpful for me in seminary when one of my professors was speaking about general revelation and then said "now, remember, general revelation is revelation *of God*. He then went on to expound what he thought was a mistaken idea of general revelation, that it is primarily about data and not about the fact that the world is transparent to God's glory, only occluded by our own fallenness and spiritual darkness.
As one source I read says "the content of general revelation deals with God and various aspects of his being and activities. Any efforts to widen the scope of general revelation to include information or theories about aspects of creation, humanity, or anything else besides God do not have support from the Bible, which limits the scope of general revelation to information *about God*. General revelation performs the limited function of enabling all persons to know that God is and something of what he is like." This person, one would think, would be a "minimizer" of the doctrine, which he would probably see as having been broadened too much by automatically linking it with the scientific endeavor.
Like I said, somewhat tangential, but I would say that part of what is at issue is where theologians/Christians have tried to situatate the scientific enterprise within the loci of theology. Protestants, especially in the last hundred years have tried to situatate it within the area of revelation. As far as I understand, other traditions such as Catholicism, seem to have situated it more under the doctrine of creation and "natural law", without making much reference to revelation.
But that, in my understanding is the historical interpretation of the doctrine...both general and special revelation are primarily revelation *of God*. If this is neglected I think the whole doctrine is somewhat skewed. You could, I suppose make the same distinction in special revelation. Jesus refers to the scribes and teachers of the law who "search the scriptures" for the least bit of information but miss the point...that they reveal himself. This is only revealed by the illumination of the Holy Spirit. They have the data but not the import of the data.
Is data that is discoverable by unaided human reason by definition not revelation? Is it rather, the medium of revelation? And isn't that revelation about a Person?
Just trying to wrap my head around how this might work within our polity. Would this essentially be a "classical pastor" who would be empowered by common consent of the classis, to enact some of these administrative /pastoral tasks? How would/could this be anything more than an advisory role? Could it?
What are some denominations that have historically practiced infant communion? Are there any studies that show its effect/improvement upon the process of faith formation?
Part of the answer I think would be that classis and synod are both *deliberative* assemblies before they are (if at all) *representative* assemblies. Delegates are sent by the classis not to vote lock step with whatever the classis or church wants, but to freely deliberate with the guidance of the Holy Spirit on matters of common concern. I would say that this deliberative nature actually dampens the political nature of the broader assemblies, not aggrivates it.
Found a copy of Fred Klooster's translation of Ursinus' Larger Catechism, which I think predates the HC. The HC is the binding confession of the CRC, not the larger, but it was interesting to read Ursinus' answer about who is to be admitted to the Lord's Supper:
Posted in: CRC Church Order Commentary
Got mine in the mail today! Woo hoo!
Posted in: Reciting HC Q&A 1 During Worship Service
We are doing a short series called "Heidelberg Highlights", hitting on the main points of the HC. Part of it is different members coming up each week and reciting a question and answer. Last week we did the first Q and A. In preparing for it, I ran across a wonderful quote from Renee House who reflected on the meaning of comfort when she was dealing with a breast cancer diagnosis. She wrote:
"The catechism is a theological bouillon cube--a dense, compact presentation of the biblical witness from a Reformed perspective. We don't eat bouillon cubes in their condensed state. Rather, we mix them with water and other ingredients so that their flavors can spread out. Similarly, the treasures of the catechism are best received in the church when we mix them with weekly worship, Scripture, and daily life."
Maybe a good way to bring this across in worship would be to videotape some members faith stories and ask them how the comfort of belonging to God has helped them as they have walked through life.
Posted in: Diakonia — We've Passed This Way Before
If the report from the advisory committee on the Synod page is any indication, I am afraid that we will be seeing a repeat tonight. We'll have to wait and see.
Posted in: Diakonia — We've Passed This Way Before
Reading it more closely, I'm glad that they are bringing forward the proposed CO changes; my hope is that no reversals along this process will take place between now and 2015-2016.
Posted in: Diakonia — We've Passed This Way Before
I would agree. Now the task remains of delineating the tasks of the offices. I think that John Calvin will help a lot there. In one of his commentaries he breaks up the calling of the elder and deacon along the lines of the Great Commandment, with elders being responsible for pietas, love of God, and deacons being responsible for caritas, love of neighbor. This may be a good organizing principle for the work before us.
Posted in: Diakonia Remixed and Experience of Deacons at Classis
John,
I think that part of the answer to your question of if we are nullifying the distinction of tasks and callings by having deacons have a part in the larger assemblies depends on whether or not you think there is a ruling aspect to their office. If there is, then it is most appropriate for them to be delegated. This is the question, I think--have we in our tradition adequately reflected on that aspect of the office?
If deacons are primarily seen as "assistants", I think that runs the danger of underplaying the parity of the offices. They are equal in dignity and authority to elders, and as church offices should equally be seen as a means by which the ascended Christ carries out his ongoing ministry.
Note too, that Acts 6 is talking about the offices of apostle and deacon, not elder and deacon.
Posted in: Creation vs Evolution: Impact on Witness and Faith
Rinsen,
I think that there's something tangential but important in your last statement, and one that I would like your perspective on. It seems that sometimes the scientific enterprise is conflated with the doctrine of general revelation. I think that there is some overlap but at the same time important distinctions between the two. You refer to it as "Christ's other book of revelation". I have recently read it in the Banner as "creation revelation"...both of which draw squarely from the Belgic confession. My only question would be, revelation of what? Data, or a person?
I wonder if part of this debate also comes from differing ideas concerning the doctrine of general revelation...there are those who are "maximizers" of the doctrine, creating in effect a two-source model of authority, and there are minimizers, and there are those in between. It was helpful for me in seminary when one of my professors was speaking about general revelation and then said "now, remember, general revelation is revelation *of God*. He then went on to expound what he thought was a mistaken idea of general revelation, that it is primarily about data and not about the fact that the world is transparent to God's glory, only occluded by our own fallenness and spiritual darkness.
As one source I read says "the content of general revelation deals with God and various aspects of his being and activities. Any efforts to widen the scope of general revelation to include information or theories about aspects of creation, humanity, or anything else besides God do not have support from the Bible, which limits the scope of general revelation to information *about God*. General revelation performs the limited function of enabling all persons to know that God is and something of what he is like." This person, one would think, would be a "minimizer" of the doctrine, which he would probably see as having been broadened too much by automatically linking it with the scientific endeavor.
Posted in: Creation vs Evolution: Impact on Witness and Faith
Rinsen,
Like I said, somewhat tangential, but I would say that part of what is at issue is where theologians/Christians have tried to situatate the scientific enterprise within the loci of theology. Protestants, especially in the last hundred years have tried to situatate it within the area of revelation. As far as I understand, other traditions such as Catholicism, seem to have situated it more under the doctrine of creation and "natural law", without making much reference to revelation.
But that, in my understanding is the historical interpretation of the doctrine...both general and special revelation are primarily revelation *of God*. If this is neglected I think the whole doctrine is somewhat skewed. You could, I suppose make the same distinction in special revelation. Jesus refers to the scribes and teachers of the law who "search the scriptures" for the least bit of information but miss the point...that they reveal himself. This is only revealed by the illumination of the Holy Spirit. They have the data but not the import of the data.
Is data that is discoverable by unaided human reason by definition not revelation? Is it rather, the medium of revelation? And isn't that revelation about a Person?
Posted in: Some Denominations Have Bishops; We Have Article 17
Keith,
Just trying to wrap my head around how this might work within our polity. Would this essentially be a "classical pastor" who would be empowered by common consent of the classis, to enact some of these administrative /pastoral tasks? How would/could this be anything more than an advisory role? Could it?
Posted in: Baptism, Infant Communion & Faith Formation
Darwin,
What are some denominations that have historically practiced infant communion? Are there any studies that show its effect/improvement upon the process of faith formation?
Posted in: Delegates From Classis Voting Opposite From Classis Vote on an Issue
John,
Part of the answer I think would be that classis and synod are both *deliberative* assemblies before they are (if at all) *representative* assemblies. Delegates are sent by the classis not to vote lock step with whatever the classis or church wants, but to freely deliberate with the guidance of the Holy Spirit on matters of common concern. I would say that this deliberative nature actually dampens the political nature of the broader assemblies, not aggrivates it.
Posted in: 2011 Report: Faith Formation
Found a copy of Fred Klooster's translation of Ursinus' Larger Catechism, which I think predates the HC. The HC is the binding confession of the CRC, not the larger, but it was interesting to read Ursinus' answer about who is to be admitted to the Lord's Supper:
319 Q And who are to be admitted to them?
A To baptism,
both adults,
who rightly confess the basics
of the Christian faith
and lead a life
worthy of a Christian,
and also infants
who are born to those
whom the church recognizes
as believers.
To the Lord’s supper, however,
only adults
who are able to examine themselves
and who demonstrate this
in confession and life.