Some Quotations on Slander From the Puritans

28 Friday Sep 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Puritan, Slander, Uncategorized

Tags

14728830796_f86b586579_o
What is required to the conserving of our neighbours good name?

First, an internal disposition, care, and study of preserving it: which we shall shew by these fruits. First, when we are glad of it, and rejoyce in it; (Rom. 1:8; Col. 1:3, 4.) and are grieved when as it is blacked and blemished.

What other fruits are there of it?

They respect either our hearing, judgment, or reports.
Our hearing; First, when as we shut our ears to wisperers and slanderers, for their detractions and slanders cannot hurt our neighbours good name, if we will not hear and believe them. Prov. 25:23. And this is a note of a Citizen of heaven. Psal. 15:3.
Secondly, when as we willingly and chearfully hear the praises of our neighbours: which is a sign of an honest heart, that is free from self love and envy.

What is required in the judgment?

A candid and ingenuous disposition to preserve our neighbours same, and in all things doubtful to judge the best of his words and deeds.
James Usher, A Body of Divinity: Or, the Sum and Substance of Christian Religion, Eighth Edition. (London: R. J.; Jonathan Robinson; A. and J. Churchill; J. Taylor; J. Wyatt, 1702), 341.

Day by day their malice is fed with a spring, with a malicious heart. A malicious heart and a slanderous tongue alway go well together. The devil, that was the first grand slanderer, hath communion with a malicious heart, and he foments malice, and cherisheth that malicious, poisonful disposition; and a malicious disposition never wants malicious words. As one saith of anger and fury, it ministereth weapons (c), so we may say of malice and hatred, it ministereth words alway.

Richard Sibbes, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, “The Sword of the Wicked,” ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 1 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; W. Robertson, 1862), 111.

Take heed, therefore, we entertain not rash conceits of others upon the entertainment they find abroad in the world, or among those that have a standing in the church, for so we shall condemn Christ himself. How was he judged of the priests, scribes, and pharisees in his times? And this hath been the lot of the church in all ages. The true members thereof were called heretics and schismatics. The veil was taken off. It is the poisonful pride of man’s heart that, when it cannot raise itself by its own worth, it will endeavour to raise itself by the ruin of others’ credit through lying slanders. The devil was first a slanderer and liar, and then a murderer, John 8:44. He cannot murder without he slander first. The credit of the church must first be taken away, and then she is wounded. Otherwise, as it is a usual proverb, Those that kill a dog make the world believe that he was mad first; so they always first traduced the church to the world, and then persecuted her. Truth hath always a scratched face. Falsehood many times goes under better habits than its own, which God suffers, to exercise our skill and wisdom, that we might not depend upon the rash judgment of others, but might consider what grounds they have; not what men do, or whom they oppose, but from what cause, whether from a spirit of envy, idleness, jealousy, and pride, or from good grounds. Else, if Christ himself were on earth again, we should condemn him, as now men do the generation of the just, whom they smite and wound, and take away their veil from them.

Richard Sibbes, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 2 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet And Co.; W. Robertson, 1862), 120–121.

For of all grief that God’s people suffer in the world, there is none greater than reproach, disgrace, and contumely. Movemur contumeliis plus quam injuriis, we are more moved with reproaches than injuries. Injuries come from several causes, but disgrace from abundance of slighting. No man but thinks himself worthy of respect from some or other. Now, slanders come from abundance of malice, or else abundance of contempt; and therefore nothing sticks so much as reproaches, specially by reason of opinion and fancy, that raiseth them over high.

Richard Sibbes, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 2 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet And Co.; W. Robertson, 1862), 492.

As Doeg the Edomite first accused, and then, by the command of Saul, slew Abimelech the high priest, and all his family, destroying the whole city of the priests called Nob, as you may see 1 Sam. 22:9. David, when he professeth the uprightness of his government, would allow no such in his court, but would severely punish them: Ps. 101:5, ‘Whoso privily slandereth his neighbour, him will I cut off.’ These ways of whispering and detraction, by which men are wont to gain confidence, favour, and employment from princes, should not only miss of their aims with him, but be severely punished when he met with them.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 2 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1871), 279–280.

Defamation. Infamy is the forerunner of more trouble, and the showers of slander are but presages of grievous storms of persecution. The devil is first a liar and then a murderer, John 8:44. When the children of God are represented as criminal, they are more easily destroyed. It was a fashion in the primitive persecutions to invest Christians with a bear’s skin, and then to bait them as bears. And it is a usual practice of Satan and his instruments to blast the repute of religious persons, to clothe them with the livery of reproach, and then prosecute them as offenders: Ps. 5:9, ‘Their throat is an open sepulchre.’ The slanders of the wicked are preparatives to death, as the sepulchre when opened is prepared to receive the dead carcase. Men first slander and then molest. The devil is afraid to meddle with unstained innocency. A good report is a great security against open violence.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 7 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1872), 385.

To slander and accuse is the devil’s property; we should be more tender in divulging the infirmities of the saints; it is the devil’s work. Christ, when he prayeth for his enemies, he mollifieth their crime, and softeneth it with a gentle interpretation: Luke 23:34, ‘Father, forgive them; they know not what they do.’ Christ excuseth, Satan accuseth.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 10 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1872), 217.

Self-love makes men envious and slanderous. When men would shine alone, and would have all the world else to serve for their foils, to set them off, therefore they blast their gifts with censure, aggravate their failings, and load them with prejudice, that upon the ruins of their good name, they might erect a fabric of praise to themselves. Self-lovers are always bitter censurers; they are so indulgent to their own faults, that they must spend their zeal abroad.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 15 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1873), 263.

Do no wrong to their names; next to their persons this is to be valued. A slanderer is worse than a thief; the one is publicly odious, but the other robs us of our better treasure: Prov. 22:1, ‘A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches,’ and more conducible to our usefulness for God than wealth. A wrong done to the estate is sooner repaired than a wrong done to the name of others, for a reproach divulged is hardly recalled; when the wound is cured, yet the scar remains; and therefore this is a very great evil to do wrong to their names; especially when you reproach the godly, and do wrong to them, because their discredit lights upon religion. God is much concerned in the credit and honour of his servants. You hinder their service, and lay them open to the rage of the world. A blemished instrument is of little use. Num. 12:8, saith God, ‘Were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?’ To speak against persons eminent and useful for God in their age is to render them suspected to the world; and who would drink of a suspected fountain? You hinder their use and serviceableness. And the wrong is greater when one christian blemisheth another, for one scholar to speak against another, and one lawyer against another; so for one christian to speak against another, it aggravates the injury. Therefore, when there is cause to speak against a man, it should be with grief.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 16 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1874), 145.

Quest. How many ways may we be unmerciful to the names of others?
Ans. Divers ways: 1. By misreporting them, a sin forbidden, Exod. 23:1. ‘Thou shalt not raise a false report.’ Eminency is commonly blasted by slander, Psal. 64:3. ‘Their tongues are as arrows shot out.’ The tongue of a slanderer shoots out words to wound the fame of another, and make it bleed to death: The saints of God in all ages have met with unmerciful men, who have fathered things upon them that they have not been guilty of. Surius the jesuit reported of Luther, that he learned his divinity of the devil, and that he died drunk; but Melancthon, who wrote his life, affirms that he died in a most pious, holy manner, and made a most excellent prayer before his death: It was David’s complaint, Psal. 35:11. ‘They laid to my charge things which I knew not.’ The Greek word for devil signifies slanderer, 1 Tim. 3:11. ‘Not slanderers;’ in the Greek it is, not devils. Some think it is no great matter to defame and traduce another; but know this is to act the part of a devil. O how many unmerciful men are there, who indeed go for Christians, but play the devil in venting their lies and calumnies! wicked men in scripture are called dogs, Psal. 22:16. Slanderers are not like those dogs which licked Lazarus’s sores to heal them; but like the dogs which did eat Jezebel, they rend and tear the precious names of men. Valentinian the emperor did decree, that he who was openly convicted of this crime of slander, should die for it: And pope Gregory did decree, that such a person should be excommunicated, and not have the communion given him; I think it was a just decree.
2. We are unmerciful to the names of others when we receive a slander, and then report what we hear, Lev. 19:16. ‘Thou shalt not go up and down as a tale-bearer among thy people.’ A good man ‘doth not evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour,’ Psal. 15:3. We must not only not raise a false report, but not take it up. To divulge a report before we speak with the party and know the truth of it, is unmercifulness, and cannot acquit itself of sin. The same word in the Hebrew, to raise a slander, signifies to receive it, Exod. 23:1. The receiver is even as bad as the thief; it is well if none of us have, in this sense, received stolen goods; when others have stolen away the good names of their brethren, have not we received the stolen goods? there would not be so many to broach false rumours, but that they see this liquor pleaseth other men’s taste.
Thomas Watson, “Discourses upon Christ’s Sermon on the Mount,” in Discourses on Important and Interesting Subjects, Being the Select Works of the Rev. Thomas Watson, vol. 2 (Edinburgh; Glasgow: Blackie, Fullarton, & Co.; A. Fullarton & Co., 1829), 199–200.

Some injure others in their good name, by reproaching them, or speaking evil of them behind their backs. Abundance is done in this way. No injury is so common as this. The iniquity which is committed by men in all our taverns3 by what they say of one another behind their backs is beyond account. Some injure others by making or spreading false reports of others, and so slandering them. And others, although what they say is not a direct falsehood, yet a great misrepresentation of things, represent things in their neighbors in the worst colors, and strain their faults, and set them forth beyond what they are, and speak of them in a very unfair manner.

Jonathan Edwards, Ethical Writings, ed. Paul Ramsey and John E. Smith, vol. 8, The Works of Jonathan Edwards (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1989), 187.

We must not take up a rash prejudice, or entertain a sinister apprehension of any, upon slight grounds. Do not represent any man, his words or actions, at a disadvantage. Make the best of every thing. A man’s good name is like a looking-glass; nothing is sooner cracked, and every breath can sully it. Handle every man’s reputation with the same tenderness thou wouldest have every man use towards thine. Do not slander or defame any man, or rejoice to hear other men’s miscarriages ripped open. Do not account it an entertainment to censure and backbite all the world.

James Nichols, Puritan Sermons, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Richard Owen Roberts, Publishers, 1981), 203.

Observe that good old rule, of doing to others as you would be done to.—You would have others to bear with you; and why will not you bear with others? You would have the best sense put upon your words, actions, and carriages; and why will not you put the best sense on their words, actions, and carriages? You would not be imposed on, censured, reproached, backbitten, slandered; no more should you impose upon others, or censure them, or reproach or backbite or slander them.

James Nichols, Puritan Sermons, vol. 4 (Wheaton, IL: Richard Owen Roberts, Publishers, 1981), 251.

We must not injure another in his name. “A good name is a precious balsam;” it is a great cruelty to murder a man in his name. We injure others in their name when we calumniate and slander them. ’Twas David’s complaint, Ps. 35:11., “They laid to my charge things that I knew not.” The primitive Christians were traduced for incest, and killing their children, as Tertullian, Dicimur infanticidii, incestus rei. This is to behead others in their good name; this is an irreparable injury; no physician can heal the wounds of the tongue.

Thomas Watson, The Select Works of the Rev. Thomas Watson, Comprising His Celebrated Body of Divinity, in a Series of Lectures on the Shorter Catechism, and Various Sermons and Treatises (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1855), 307.

1st. Slandering our neighbour. This is a sin against the ninth commandment. The scorpion carries his poison in his tail; the slanderer carries his poison in his tongue. Slandering is to report things of others unjustly. Ps. 35:11., “They laid things to my charge which I knew not.” It is usual to bring in a Christian beheaded of his good name; they raised a slander of Paul, that he should preach, men might do evil, that good might come of it, Rom. 3:8., “We be slanderously reported; and as some affirm that we say, let us do evil, that good may come.” Eminency is commonly blasted by slander. Holiness itself is no shield from slander. The lamb’s innocency will not preserve it from the wolf. Christ was the most innocent upon earth, yet was reported to be a friend of sinners; John Baptist was a man of a holy austere life, yet they said of him, “he hath a devil,” Mat. 11:18. The scripture calls slandering, smiting with the tongue, Jer. 18:18., “Come, and let us smite him with the tongue.” You may smite another and never touch him. Majora sunt linguæ vulnera quam gladii, AUG. The wounds of the tongue no physician can heal; and to pretend friendship to a man, yet slander him, is most odious. St. Hierom speaks thus: “The Arian faction made a show of kindness; they kissed my hands, but slandered me, and sought my life.” And, as it is a sin against this commandment, to raise a false report of another, so it is a sin to receive a false report before we have examined it, Ps. 15:1., “Lord, who shall dwell in thy holy hill?” Quis ad cœlum? v. 3., “He that backbiteth not, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour.” We must not only not raise a false report, but not take it up. He that raiseth a slander, carries the devil in his tongue; and he that receives it, carries the devil in his ear.

Thomas Watson, The Select Works of the Rev. Thomas Watson, Comprising His Celebrated Body of Divinity, in a Series of Lectures on the Shorter Catechism, and Various Sermons and Treatises (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1855), 329.

Thomas Manton, Twenty Sermons, Sermon 1.1 (Holiness and Happiness)

11 Saturday Aug 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Puritan, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Happiness, Holiness, Psalm 32, Puritan, Thomas Manton

In the second volume of Manton’s collected works is a section “called Twenty Sermons” published together. William Bates, in an introduction to the volume writes,

The main design of them is to represent the inseparable connection between Christian duties and privileges, wherein the essence of our religion consists. The gospel is not a naked, unconditionate offer of pardon and eternal life in favour of sinners, but upon most convenient terms, for the glory of God and the good of men, and enforced by the strongest obligations upon them to receive humbly and thankfully those benefits. The promises are attended with commands to repent, believe, and persevere in the uniform practice of obedience. The Son of God came into the world, not to make God less holy, but to make us holy, that we might please and enjoy him; not to vacate our duty, and free us from the law as the rule of obedience, for that is both impossible and would be most infamous and reproachful to our Saviour. To challenge such an exemption in point of right, is to make ourselves gods; to usurp it in point of fact is to make ourselves devils. But his end was to enable and induce us to return to God, as our rightful Lord and proper felicity, from whom we rebelliously and miserably fell by our disobedience, in seeking for happiness out of him. Accordingly the gospel is called ‘the law of faith,’ as it commands those duties upon the motives of eternal hopes and fears, and as it will justify or condemn men with respect to their obedience or disobedience, which is the proper character of a law. These things are managed in the following sermons in that convincing, persuasive manner as makes them very necessary for these times, when some that aspired to an extraordinary height in religion, and esteemed themselves the favourites of heaven, yet woefully neglected the duties of the lower hemisphere, as righteousness, truth, and honesty; and when carnal Christians are so numerous, that despise serious godliness as solemn hypocrisy, and live in an open violation of Christ’s precepts, yet presume to be saved by him. Though no age has been more enlightened with the knowledge of holy truths, yet none was ever more averse from obeying them.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 2 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1871), 175–176. In short, the gospel was given to make us fit for God, and the sermons were given to encourage that end. The first two sermons on the text Psalm 32:1-2

SERMON I

Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.’—Ps. 32:1, 2.

Manton begins the sermon with the note that we all seek happiness — of which we were deprived by sin; for happiness is only from God. Therefore, we must be reconciled to God to become truly happy:

The title of this psalm is ‘A psalm of instruction,’ and so called because David was willing to show them the way to happiness from his own experience. Surely no lesson is so needful to be learned as this. We all would be happy: the good and bad, that do so seldom agree in anything, yet agree in this, a desire to be happy. Now, happy we cannot be but in God, who is the only, immutable, eternal, and all-sufficient good, which satisfies and fills up all the capacities and desires of our souls. And we are debarred from access to him by sin, which hath made a breach and separation between him and us, and till that be taken away there can be no converse, and sin can only be taken away by God’s pardon upon Christ’s satisfaction. God’s pardon is clearly asserted in my text, but Christ’s satisfaction and righteousness must be supplied out of other scriptures, as that 2 Cor. 5:19, ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses to them.’ Where the apostle clearly shows that not imputing transgressions is the effect of God’s grace in Christ.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 2 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1871), 177. Thus, opens a theme was quite consistent throughout the Puritans: holiness and happiness are inextricably intertwined. Happiness was a common and consistent theme in their writing — which is interesting because they are uniformly portrayed as dour. Yet, there are thousands of reference to happiness in Manton: 264 uses of the word “happy” in volume 2 of works alone. There are more than 1,000 references to happy in Thomas Brooks collected works; over 500 in George Swinocks collected works; more than 1,000 references in Richard Sibbes’ works; et cetera.

Theophilus of Antioch: This is What We Believe and DoT

03 Friday Aug 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Ante-Nicene, Church History, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Ante-Nicean, Apologetics, Church History, Theophilus of Antioch

The previous summary of Theophilus may be found here.

Having responded to the accusations of Christians by first noting what the pagans actually espouse, Theophilus turns to what Christians actually believe and espouse. He begins with the law:

Now we also confess that God exists, but that He is one, the creator, and maker, and fashioner of this universe; and we know that all things are arranged by His providence, but by Him alone. And we have learned a holy law; but we have as lawgiver Him who is really God, who teaches us to act righteously, and to be pious, and to do good.

Theophilus of Antioch, “Theophilus to Autolycus,” in Fathers of the Second Century: Hermas, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria (Entire), ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. Marcus Dods, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 113–114. In the following words, he lays out a summary of the Ten Commandments together with a brief summary of the giving of the law.

Next he notes that Christians have an obligation to care for the stranger, “Ye shall not afflict a stranger; for ye know the heart of a stranger: for yourselves were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Christians have the need to repent — which is a grace given by God. Christians must live lives of chastity. In these ways, Christians are very counter-cultural; for even those who seem to espouse such tremendous concerns of immigrants don’t really have a record of living among those people. I suspect that for many immigrants are merely a pawn or a weapon in a political calculation.

His summary of the Christian life includes a discussion of righteousness. This section is interesting at the present time as Christians debate the matter of “social justice”. It is interesting to note the ways in which his summary draws on some of the concerns of our time and yet does not follow our current concerns. Since it is timely, I will quote it at length:

Moreover, concerning the righteousness which the law enjoined, confirmatory utterances are found both with the prophets and in the Gospels, because they all spoke inspired by one Spirit of God. Isaiah accordingly spoke thus: “Put away the evil of your doings from your souls; learn to do well, seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.” And again the same prophet said: “Loose every band of wickedness, dissolve every oppressive contract, let the oppressed go free, and tear up every unrighteous bond. Deal out thy bread to the hungry, and bring the houseless poor to thy home. When thou seest the naked, cover him, and hide not thyself from thine own flesh. Then shall thy light break forth as the morning, and thine health shall spring forth speedily, and thy righteousness shall go before thee.”1 In like manner also Jeremiah says: “Stand in the ways, and see, and ask which is the good way of the LORD your God, and walk in it and ye shall find rest for your souls. Judge just judgment, for in this is the will of the LORD your God.” So also says Hosea: “Keep judgment, and draw near to your God, who established the heavens and created the earth.” And another, Joel, spoke in agreement with these: “Gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children that are in arms; let the bridegroom go forth of his chamber, and the bride out of her closet, and pray to the LORD thy God urgently that he may have mercy upon you, and blot out your sins.” In like manner also another, Zachariah: “Thus saith the LORD Almighty, Execute true judgment, and show mercy and compassion every man to his brother; and oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, nor the stranger; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart, saith the LORD Almighty.”

What I find most interesting in Theophilus’s defense of Christianity on this point is that it does not draw on anything from his culture. While he is engaging his world, he is not using the then-current culture to support his position. It is simply, this is what we are.

And so he summarizes his defense as to what Christians supposedly do and say:

But far be it from Christians to conceive any such deeds; for with them temperance dwells, self-restraint is practised, monogamy is observed, chastity is guarded, iniquity exterminated, sin extirpated, righteousness exercised, law administered, worship performed, God acknowledged: truth governs, grace guards, peace screens them; the holy word guides, wisdom teaches, life directs, God reigns. Therefore, though we have much to say regarding our manner of life, and the ordinances of God, the maker of all creation, we yet consider that we have for the present reminded you of enough to induce you to study these things, especially since you can now read [our writings] for yourself, that as you have been fond of acquiring information, you may still be studious in this direction also.

John Collins, “Earnestly Contend for the Faith” Part 2

21 Monday May 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Ecclesiology, Puritan, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Church, Earnestly Contend for the Faith, Ecclesiology, John Collins, Prayer, Puritan

Collins lays down series of rules for his congregation, that they may not swerve or fail in the faith. The first rule is discussed here.

The second rule give my Collins is

Be very well rooted and established in the right that has been delivered to you.

When the roots do not go down deep, one can easily be swayed. “There are many Christians that, through their own itching ears and the heaping up of teachers to themselves, have never been root or established in the truth.”

One without depth, cannot distinguish. Without a true “sight” of Christ, one will follow after existing affections and ideas. Christianity entails an entire renewing of the mind (Rom. 12:1-2). Collins expresses it thus, “You must not only hear the things of God, but see them; the first will but blind you, or best leave you in great uncertainty; the last will settle you.” There must be renovation of one’s heart.

This will require effort — and an effort which begins by beseeching the Lord to be the teacher, “In order to have a heart established through grace, get the Lord himself by prayer to teach you every truth. What Jesus Christ teaches once is everlastingly taught; no word is abiding, but what the Lord Jesus himself teaches.”

Here we see the great duty and burden of the church. The duty of the gathered people is to create disciples: those who are rooted and grounded in the truth. The truth must shape thought, affections and action. It is the duty of leaders to lead others in the way of truth (Heb. 13:7) and then to give an account for such leadership (Heb. 13:17). The new Christian will easily wonder if left utterly alone. The church is given to bring about this depth of life.

Yes, every individual Christian has the duty to learn the things of God, to study, prayer, mediate, serve, et cetera. But God did not give his Word to be lived in isolation but in communion. This depth takes place among the gathered people of God.

Manichaeians

06 Friday Apr 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Church History, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Augustine, Church History, Mani, Manichaeians

My knowledge of the Manichaeans derived from mentions in Augustine’s Confessions. Here is a bit more:

As to what Mani taught, it was the well-worn Gnostic account of an evil creator and an evil world, with some especially scandalous details. It was not Adam but an evil archon who had sex with Eve and fathered Cain. Then Cain had sex with his mother and fathered Abel. Later Eve managed to arouse the ascetic Adam to father Seth, thus beginning a race of beings who are noble in spirit but “entrapped in innately evil material bodies.”

Mani created two levels of membership: the Auditors and the Elect. The former ‘heard’ the word but did not live a life that could qualify for admission to the Kingdom of Light upon their death. Rather, they could hope only to be reborn as vegetables and then to be eaten by the Elect and “belched” to freedom from the evil archons and sent on their way to the Kingdom of Light. As for the Elect, they were bound by extraordinary restrictions: no sex, no alcohol, no meat, no baths, and virtually no physical activity of any kind. They could meet these requirements only if Auditors waited on them hand and foot. The Manichaeians enjoyed some success. They missionized far eastward (into China), making converts even among the nobility, as well as far westward—the young St. Augustine was a Manichaean for a few years (but only as an Auditor and without giving up his mistress).

Stark, Rodney. Cities of God: The Real Story of How Christianity Became an Urban Movement and Conquered Rome (p. 175-177). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. I wonder what anyone found attractive about such a scheme….

Christ Transforms our Thinking

04 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Church History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Ambrose, Biblical Counseling, Church History

Ambrose to Felix, Bishop of Comum, 380 AD:

Aaron indeed once stood in the midst,* interposing himself to prevent death passing over to the hosts of the living from the carcases of the dead. But He, as the Word, ever stands within each of us, although we see Him not, and separates the faculties of our reason from the carcase of our deadly passions and pestilential thoughts

This quote is interesting because it gets to an element of biblical counseling – or soul care: all clinical psychology is trying to change how a person thinks, desires, acts from some undesired state to what is perceived as a better state. Here Ambrose states two things: (1) Christ does change our thinking; (2) our reason has been corrupted by “deadly passions”.

What I cannot tell is whether he holds to an idea that human reason is uncorrupted and it is merely desire which corrupts. Does he hold that all desire or merely “deadly passions” are the culprit.

The Priesthood of all Believers 710 AD

04 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Church History

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Priesthood

The doctrine of the priesthood of all believers is commonly accounted a cardinal Reformation position. Thus, I found this quotation from the Venerable Bede (Beda) in his exposition of Revelation 1:6 interesting

Because the King of kings and heavenly Priest united us unto His own body by offering Himself for us, there is not one of the saints who has not spiritually the office of priesthood, in that he is a member of the eternal Priest

Theophilus of Antioch on the False Accusations Against Christians

06 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Ante-Nicene, Apologetics, Church History, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Ante-Nicene, Apologetics, Church History, Theophilus of Antioch

Theophilus makes an interesting move, because he seeks to pry his reader (Autolycus) his prejudice; notice the move here:

Nor indeed was there any necessity for my refuting these, except that I see you still in dubiety about the word of the truth. For though yourself prudent, you endure fools gladly. Otherwise you would not have been moved by senseless men to yield yourself to empty words, and to give credit to the prevalent rumor wherewith godless lips falsely accuse us, who are worshippers of God, and are called Christians,

This comes immediately after Theophilus has made the point that Hebrew prophets wrote of what they knew — as opposed to the poets who have no reason for their belief. He then turns to the accusations against the Christians. These accusations seem to come from both Christian use of the concept of “family” and the Lord’s Supper wildly distorted through rumor of a group not well understood:

alleging that the wives of us all are held in common and made promiscuous use of; and that we even commit incest with our own sisters, and, what is most impious and barbarous of all, that we eat human flesh.

Finally, it is the apparent newness of Christianity that seems to be a trouble:

But further, they say that our doctrine has but recently come to light, and that we have nothing to allege in proof of what we receive as truth, nor of our teaching, but that our doctrine is foolishness. I wonder, then, chiefly that you, who in other matters are studious, and a scrutinizer of all things, give but a careless hearing to us. For, if it were possible for you, you would not grudge to spend the night in the libraries

Then in the next several chapters, Theophilus recounts instances of Heathen poets and philosophers espousing the very things of which the Christians had been (falsely) accused (such as cannibalism and holding wives in common). Following that, he again recounts the contradictory opinions of the poets on matters the gods:

And one can see how inconsistent with each other are the things which others, and indeed almost the majority, have said about God and providence. For some have absolutely cancelled God and providence; and others, again, have affirmed God, and have avowed that all things are governed by providence. The intelligent hearer and reader must therefore give minute attention to their expressions; as also Simylus said: “It is the custom of the poets to name by a common designation the surpassingly wicked and the excellent; we therefore must discriminate.” As also Philemon says: “A senseless man who sits and merely hears is a troublesome feature; for he does not blame himself, so foolish is he.” We must then give attention, and consider what is said, critically inquiring into what has been uttered by the philosophers and the poets.

And also the depravity of the gods:

They who elaborated such a philosophy regarding either the non-existence of God, or promiscuous intercourse and beastly concubinage, are themselves condemned by their own teachings. Moreover, we find from the writings they composed that the eating of human flesh was received among them; and they record that those whom they honour as gods were the first to do these things.

Theophilus of Antioch: “They beat the air”

01 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Ante-Nicene, Apologetics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Ante-Nicene, Apologetics, Theophilus of Antioch

(The previous post on Theophilus is here)

800px-Francisco_de_Goya,_Saturno_devorando_a_su_hijo_(1819-1823)

(Goya, Saturn Devours His Son)

Theophilus of Antioch makes an important point in his reason with Autolycus: and it is a point which can be easily missed when we speak of people from the ancient world. There is a sort of prejudice against those from another time or another place — particularly those from the past — they are merely credulous, thoughtless beasts. Now the New Testament explicitly denies such things: Luke gives us his credentials in the introduction to his Gospel. John in his Gospel takes pains to explain that he was there and personally saw and heard the things he reports. Yes, the things they report of Jesus are remarkable — but that is part of the argument.

Theophilus pits the Scriptures — and he in particular is writing of the Old Testament prophets –against philosophers and poets as follows:

For it was fit that they who wrote should themselves have been eye-witnesses of those things concerning which they made assertions, or should accurately have ascertained them from those who had seen them; for they who write of things unascertained beat the air.

Theophilus of Antioch, “Theophilus to Autolycus,” in Fathers of the Second Century: Hermas, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria (Entire), ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. Marcus Dods, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 111. If you don’t know what you’re speaking about, you merely “beat the air”: you’re just making noise.

And if we don’t know, can’t know, if a thing is true; then what is the point? What does it profit?

For what did it profit Homer to have composed the Trojan war, and to have deceived many; or Hesiod, the register of the theogony of those whom he calls gods; or Orpheus, the three hundred and sixty-five gods, whom in the end of his life he rejects, maintaining in his precepts that there is one God?

He goes on to explain that they contradict themselves — and one another. They cannot maintain consistency. I heard John Frame in a lecture explain that any understanding which is not ultimately anchored in reality will always have one pole in irrationality. Greek thought was a mess, a shambles: and if one looked at the product of the thought, it was easy to see that it could not be true. Oh sure, there were buildings and armies: but what of the depravity it produced? Surely human beings are meant for more than that.

For either they made assertions concerning the gods, and afterwards taught that there was no god; or if they spoke even of the creation of the world, they finally said that all things were produced spontaneously. Yea, and even speaking of providence, they taught again that the world was not ruled by providence. But what? Did they not, when they essayed to write even of honourable conduct, teach the perpetration of lasciviousness, and fornication, and adultery; and did they not introduce hateful and unutterable wickedness? And they proclaim that their gods took the lead in committing unutterable acts of adultery, and in monstrous banquets.

For who does not sing Saturn devouring his own children, and Jove his son gulping down Metis, and preparing for the gods a horrible feast, at which also they say that Vulcan, a lame blacksmith, did the waiting; and how Jove not only married Juno, his own sister, but also with foul mouth did abominable wickedness

Horatio Alger at Church

09 Wednesday Aug 2017

Posted by memoirandremains in Church Conflict, Church History, Ministry

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Ecclesiology, Leadership, Pride

The following question comes from a long article in the Journal of Pastoral Theology (3.3, 1979) by Harvie Conn. Conn discusses how a church has a “model” for ministry; an often unarticulated self-understanding of what a church is, does, and how it functions. A great of the discussion is how to make change (do more evangelism for instance) when the inherited culture stands against that change.

In the diagnostic section, Conn quotes this question (cited to Dr. Ward at Michigan State):

Pride and status. Has leadership become something of an end in itself? Have the teachings of Christ about servanthood become culturally clouded by the Horatio Alger syndrome: one begins low in order to become great? How real is the danger in ministry that servanthood becomes a temporary or transient period of initiation or demonstration of eligibility? Is leadership defined too often not by service but by privileges?

This question struck me, because it points to a poison I have seen destroy too many churches and harm too many Christians. It is a poison from the broader world and culture. Because it is so common in our world it can become nearly invisible in our church.