Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Bono . . . on the difference between Grace and Karma



How good is this . . .  taken from Chapter 11 of Bono on Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas, 2005 (Hodder).  Buy the book.


“It’s a mind-blowing concept that the God who created the Universe might be looking for company, a real relationship with people, but the thing that keeps me on my knees is the difference between Grace and Karma . . .

"You see, at the centre of all religions is the idea of Karma. You know, what you put out comes back to you; an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or in physics – in physical laws – every action is met by an equal or opposite one.  Its clear to me that Karma is at the very heart of the universe.  I’m absolutely sure of it.

"And yet, along comes this idea called Grace to upend all that “As you reap, so will you sow” stuff.  Grace defies reason and logic. Love interrupts, if you like, the consequences of your actions, which in my case is very good news indeed, because I’ve done a lot of stupid stuff.

"That’s between me and God. But I’d be in big trouble if Karma was going to finally be my judge. I’d be in deep shit. It doesn’t excuse my mistakes, but I’m holding out for Grace. I’m holding out that Jesus took my sins onto the Cross because I know who I am, and I hope I don’t have to depend on my own religiosity.

"The point of the death of Christ is that Christ took on the sins of the world so that what we put out did not come back to us, and that our sinful nature does not reap the obvious death. That’s the point. It should keep us humbled . . . it's not our own good works that get through the gates of heaven . . .

"If only we could be a bit more like Him, the world would be transformed.  All I do is get up on the Cross of the Ego; the bad hangover, the bad review. When I look at the Cross of Christ, what I see up there is all my shit and everybody else’s. So I ask myself a question a lot of people have asked: Who is this man?  And was He who He said He was, or was He just a religious nut?  And there it is, and that’s the question.  And no one can talk you into it or out of it.”





Saturday, January 25, 2014

The Priestly Life - a Retreat given by Monsignor Ronald Knox



Ronald Knox (1888–1957), son of evangelical Bishop of Manchester, E.A. Knox, attended Eton College and won several scholarships at Balliol College, Oxford. In 1912 he was ordained to the priesthood in the Church of England  and was appointed chaplain of Trinity College, Oxford. In 1917 he swam the Tiber, and the following year he was ordained in the Roman Catholic Church. Knox wrote many books of essays and novels. Singlehandedly he translated St Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible into English. His works on religious themes include: Some Loose Stones (1913), Reunion All Round (1914), A Spiritual Aeneid (1918), The Belief of Catholics (1927), Caliban in Grub Street (1930), Heaven and Charing Cross (1935), Let Dons Delight (1939) and Captive Flames (1940). He was known for his ability as a communicator and had a witty turn of phrase. He was a regular broadcaster for BBC Radio. 

The following is just a "taster" from "The Priestly Life", retreat addresses to the clergy, published in 1958 on  Go HERE for a pdf document of the whole collection. Deeply Scriptural, thought provoking, challenging  and amusing, I recommend that you download the document. It will feed you for a while! 


If you read through the Hebrew prophets from end to end—not many people do—the last of them, Malachy, strikes you with a sense of homeliness, and almost of modernity. Partly because, except for one verse, his book is intelligible throughout. But partly because he does not share with his fellow-prophets their apparent indifference to all the externals of religion. Of course, we quite realize that the Jews under the Old Dispensation needed to be warned against merely external religion; for that matter, we need it ourselves. But the prophets seem so obsessed with it; look at the way in which Amos represents Almighty God as talking to his people. “Oh, but I am sick and tired of them, your solemn feasts; incense that goes up from your assemblies I can breathe no longer. Burnt-sacrifice still? Bloodless offerings still? Nay, I will have none of them; fat be the victims you slay in welcome, I care not. O to be rid of the singing, the harp’s music, that dins my ear!” Well, some of us aren’t too happy about our own choirs; and apart from that, we know that the Israelites of Amos’ time were worshipping Moloch on the side and oppressing the poor. But you can’t help feeling that a diocesan censor would have recommended the prophet to phrase it rather differently.

With Malachy, you leave all that behind you. For him, there is one glaring reason why Almighty God is discontented with his people; it is because the priests are not doing their job. In particular, they are allowing people who offer sacrifice to bring the worst of their cattle with them instead of the best. At first sight, you would think that was the fault of the laity; after all, it was the priests had to eat what was left over.... But no, it was the priests’ job to teach people the law, which laid it down expressly that the victim of any statutory sacrifice must be a perfect animal, without blemish. And the priests weren’t doing that, apparently because they had come to treat the whole of the Temple worship with disdain.

I suppose it was at the time when the people had just come back from exile, and were living in pre- fabricated buildings, and everything was rather utility; the temple itself, old people would tell you, was a very poor substitute for the old one. And in the general atmosphere of disillusionment, the priests had got disillusioned too; shrugged their shoulders and said well what could you expect. “You think to yourselves, The Lord’s table is desecrated now; it makes no matter what food lies there, what fire burns it. Weary work, say you, and dismiss it with a sigh. Cursed be the knavery that offers the Lord gelt beast, when there are vows a-paying, and all the while there is an entire beast left at home!







Monday, January 20, 2014

S.S. Lewis on Biblical Criticism


Apologies . . . this amazing talk by C.S. Lewis is now HERE



Fr Longenecker on dating the New Testament



I keep an eye on Fr Dwight Longenecker’s blog “Standing on My Head” (which is HERE). Born in the USA, Longenecker is a former Evangelical who became a priest of the Church of England, and is now a Roman Catholic priest back in the USA. He’s no slouch intellectually; nor is he easy to pigeonhole in terms of what particular stream of the contemporary Catholic Church he belongs to. He’s just - well - mainstream. On 20th November last year, he posted a little article which expresses exactly my view of a whole branch of purported scholarship. Now, I must say that I have always been fascinated by theories of the origins of sub strata of Biblical texts and how they might have been edited by the writers who incorporated them into the literature that became canonical. 

But as a student I had come across C.S. Lewis’ devastating 1959 article “Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism”, now published in “Fern-seed and Elephants” (text HERE) at about the same time as I made my decision to write essays as if I believed the latest theories, in order to get through the subjects, while - to be honest - I was becoming more and more sceptical about the worth of such unbridled unbelief as actual scholarship. It is so uncool, even among some of the theologically orthodox, to question the assumptions of the biblical critics, that I’ve really left the area alone, even on this blog. But the short sharp blows dealt by Fr Longenecker in his blog post were so good that I couldn’t resist sharing it with you. 
     

Dating the New Testament

For the life of me I have never been able to figure out why scholars make such a big difficulty out of dating the New Testament.

On the face of it, the problem is not so difficult, but what we have to do is take things at face value with common sense. Once we get into academic theories about what might have happened it is all a bit like conspiracy theories–in which one scrap of ambiguous evidence may mean that and may mean this and may mean something else, then the theorists start building great castles in the air from scraps of evidence combined with huge chunks of speculation. Then other scholars speculate further on the speculation until the result is so far from the real events as to be laughable. Once you go down that route of possible other authors, possible later dates and possible editorial changes–for which there is no evidence anywhere–you end up in a labyrinth of confusion and chaos–and we know who the Lord of confusion and chaos is . . .

If we work with common sense and take things at face value it is actually very easy to discover the dating of the New Testament:

First you need a verifiable historical date. We could use 70AD the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, but we have an earlier reliable date:  65AD. We know this is the year St Peter and St Paul were killed in Rome during the persecution of the Emperor Nero. Therefore Paul’s epistles and the first epistle of Peter were all written before 65 AD.

The Acts of the Apostles was written by Luke–the same person who wrote the gospel of Luke. The Acts of the Apostles does not mention the death of Peter and Paul. If Peter and Paul had died by the time it had been completed we can be sure Luke would have mentioned their martyrdom. He would have mentioned their martyrdom for three reasons: he told the story of Stephen’s martyrdom and he related the death of the apostle James. Thirdly, the death of the martyrs was an important feature for the early Christians. They used it as a teaching point. John does just this in his mention of the death of Peter in his gospel.

Because the deaths of Peter and Paul are not mentioned in Acts of the Apostles we can be confident that it was written before 65AD.

The Acts of the Apostles makes it clear that the Gospel of Luke was written before the Acts of the Apostles. Luke says in his opening words, “In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen.”Therefore the Gospel of Luke was written before 65 AD.

Scholars believe the Gospel of Luke was based on the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Matthew. If the gospel of Luke depended on Mark and Matthew, then they were also written before 65 AD.

Jesus Christ was crucified 33AD. Therefore the main three gospels were written within just thirty or so years of the death of Christ. John’s gospel was written after 65 AD and before the death of John around 90 AD.

This leaves the question of authorship. Some scholars dispute the authorship of the books of the New Testament saying that apostles’ names were attached to them, but they were written by a secretary or another author altogether.  There is some possibility that a secretary wrote some of the material in the New Testament–especially if the stories were based on the preaching of the Apostles. This is probably the case, for example, with the epistles of Peter.

However, the idea that whole books were fabricated later and assigned to the Apostles is far fetched. While this happened with the obviously later Gnostic Gospels like the Gospel of Thomas or the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, there is little evidence that this type of pseudo graphical writing took place in the early development of the New Testament.

While some of the writing of St Paul evidences different vocabulary and style this is not significant enough to say that the books were not written by him. Style and vocabulary vary greatly within any writer’s work.


Why do scholars try so hard then to give a late date to the New Testament? Because they have another agenda. If Jesus really claimed to be God incarnate–as the gospels show–then it is difficult to avoid this conclusion about him. However, if these “mythological” elements can be shown to be later inventions, then they can be dismissed, and the only way to show that they were later inventions is to try to prove that the gospels were written at a later date. In other words, the radically liberal New Testament scholars are not only lousy scholars. They’re liars.




Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Amazing turn-out for Egyptian Vote



Anglican Bishop of Egypt Mouneer Anis (R) greets Coptic Pope Tawadros II

We have been praying for a long time that our Christian brothers and sisters in Egypt will be spared full scale persecution, so it is wonderful to see the amazing turnout for the constitutional vote, where people of goodwill from all sides are saying what kind of society they want. The following is today’s press release from Bishop Mouneer Anis, Primate of the Episcopal (i.e. Anglican) Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East. Keep the prayers going! 


Once again, the Egyptian people have surprised the world. Yesterday was the first day of the Referendum on the new Constitution of Egypt. The supporters of the former President Mohammed Mursi called people to boycott the Referendum. Surprisingly enough, yesterday millions of people went to the polls to vote and they are still voting today! Going to the polls was risky because of those who were trying to use violence to scare people from voting, but the army and the police exerted a great effort to protect the polls and to give assurance to the people who would like to vote.

Unlike the previous Constitution that was written under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, the new Constitution affirms equality and the rights of women within the Egyptian society. It was a phenomenon to see crowds of women at each poll, many of whom queued for hours to vote. Some of them were singing and rejoicing, and even dancing, before and after they cast their vote. There was a general spirit of joy among the people of Egypt who voted, in a way that never happened before. We, alongside other Christian denominations, encouraged the people of Egypt to fulfill their civil duty to vote and to pray for the future of Egypt.

All of this is a message to those who called the 30 June 2013 Revolution a “military coup.” The same millions of people who went out in the streets that day, also went to vote yesterday and today. It is also an indirect support of the Road Map that was announced on 3 July, the day of the removal of the former President. The Road Map, designed by different streams of politicians as well as the Grand Imam of Al Azhar and Pope Tawadros II of the Coptic Orthodox Church, formed an interim government and appointed a Committee of 50 (representatives of all sectors of the society) to write the new Constitution. The interim government, after the Referendum on the Constitution, will prepare for Parliamentary and Presidential elections. Many voters carried the photos of Field Marshall al-Sisi, the Minister of Defense, in an attempt to persuade him to run for the presidency. This is because al-Sisi was the one who responded to the request of the millions of demonstrators on 30 June who called for early Presidential elections and the removal of the former President.

The new Constitution affirms the rights of citizenship, and prohibits all forms of discrimination. It has clauses that ensure the development of education and health care for every citizen. It allows the freedom of worship and the building of churches, and Article 3 gives the right for non-Muslims (Christians and Jews) to resort to their canon laws in regard to civil issues.

I can see my beloved country standing on the doorstep of a new day. Do pray that the hopes and dreams of millions of people, of a more settled, secure and democratic country, will be fulfilled.

May the Lord bless you!

 + Mouneer Egypt


(Hat-tip to George Congar at Anglican Link)



Tuesday, January 14, 2014

Online shortcut to browsing the ESV



The English Standard Version of the Bible is becoming more and more popular. Here, from BibleStudyTools.com is a shortcut to the online text. The following doesn't include the Deuterocanonical books, but the Oxford University Press have published an edition of the ESV containing them. 

BooksChapters
Genesis1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
Exodus1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40
Leviticus1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Numbers1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536
Deuteronomy1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34
Joshua1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Judges1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Ruth1 2 3 4
1 Samuel1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
2 Samuel1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
1 Kings1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
2 Kings1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 Chronicles1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29
2 Chronicles1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536
Ezra1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Nehemiah1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Esther1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Job1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42
Psalms1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51
52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 6768 69 70 71 72 73 74 75
76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116
117 118 119 120 121 122123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133
134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144145 146 147 148 149 150
Proverbs1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
Ecclesiastes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Song of Solomon1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Isaiah1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51
52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66
Jeremiah1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
Lamentations1 2 3 4 5
Ezekiel1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
Daniel1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Hosea1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Joel1 2 3
Amos1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Obadiah1
Jonah1 2 3 4
Micah1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Nahum1 2 3
Habakkuk1 2 3
Zephaniah1 2 3
Haggai1 2
Zechariah1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Malachi1 2 3 4
Matthew1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28
Mark1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Luke1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
John1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Acts1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28
Romans1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1 Corinthians1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
2 Corinthians1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Galatians1 2 3 4 5 6
Ephesians1 2 3 4 5 6
Philippians1 2 3 4
Colossians1 2 3 4
1 Thessalonians1 2 3 4 5
2 Thessalonians1 2 3
1 Timothy1 2 3 4 5 6
2 Timothy1 2 3 4
Titus1 2 3
Philemon1
Hebrews1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
James1 2 3 4 5
1 Peter1 2 3 4 5
2 Peter1 2 3
1 John1 2 3 4 5
2 John1
3 John1
Jude1
Revelation1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22