Sing to the Lord a new song

Here's the text of a handout (which I didn't in fact handout!) for a sermon on Psalm 98. Some further jottings here.

What?

Sing (vv1, 5) / shout to the LORD (vv4-5)

jubilant (v4) / for joy (vv4, 6)

a new song (v1)

a variety of instruments (vv5-6)

Why?

(a) What he has done:

marvellous salvation (vv1, v3b)

revealed to the nations (vv2, 3)

covenant faithfulness (v3)

(b) Who he is:

the LORD, the King (v6)

(c) What he will do:

comes to judge in righteousness (v9)

Who?

God’s people (v3)

All people (vv2, 3, 4, 7)

The whole creation (vv7-8; Ps 19:1-6; Rm 8:19-21)

Don't be deluded at the Supper

Calvin argues that the alternatives to his doctrine of the Supper have God offering us delusions.

(1) You really get Jesus' body

God does not delude us by just offer us bread but speaking of the body of Christ. There is not a bare, empty representation in the Communion. As we receive the sign in faith, feeding on the bread, God also feeds us spiritually with the body of Christ, giving us what the sign represents.

(2) You really get bread

The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation also has God offering us a delusion since the bread appears to be bread, but in substance is not what it seems to be and has turned into the body of Christ.

Calvin maintains both the reality of the sign and of the thing signified.

See Calvin’s commentary on 1 Cor 11:24.

Sermonizing a song

Just thought I might share a little sermon preparation angst with you. I hope the following dilemmas make sense. Any tips welcome, though really the sermon ought to be ready by supper time.

As a general rule I would have thought its good if the style and manner of our preaching matches the genre and feel of the passage we’re preaching from. I guess that under God we're usually after the same emotional response and rhetorical effect that the original writer intended to produce.

I’m preparing to preach on Psalm 98 which is an exuberant call to triumphant praise. Enthusiasm and even a little flamboyance would seem called for. I wont be breaking in to song, but a little loudness wouldn’t be out a place (vv4-6).

Yet I feel tempted to crunch the Psalm down into clear propositions. I feel the need for headings and structure. I’m toying with rearranging the material (something like: 1. What should be done? 2. By whom should it be done? 3. Why should it be done?). Its a way of mining the psalm for its teaching but this would be a move away from the poetry of the psalm that I’m reluctant about. A line by line approach might help me to stick to the feel of the psalm rather more.

Maybe I’m over attached to the attractiveness of a neat(ish) handout! I don’t want to sacrifice clarity or precision yet I fear that showing too much scaffolding in my sermon may not be the best way to get the effect of psalm across.

I know there ought to be practical applications, but too many specific take-home lessons about what our corporate worship should be like, for example, seem to risk blunting the call to praise the Lord! But I guess that sometime somehow such applications also need to be made from such texts, if they genuinely are implied by them, since when would they otherwise be made?

Maybe they shouldn’t be, but some of these things can seem like competing concerns and I’m not sure which of them really matter (or matter for the sermon) and how best to do justice to them all. We are going to sing a version of the Psalm (Sing To God New Songs of Worship) and we’ve tried to pick some other stuff that fits its mood. Maybe it would be good to read the psalm aloud together too?

Perhaps I need to do some more thinking about specifically what the sermon's for. I'm not sure I really know the ideal I'm aspiring to! But I guess as the clock is ticking I'll probably just try to say some true and useful things from the passage without being too dull...

He hath done marvelous things

God-willing I’ll be preaching on Psalm 98 on Sunday morning and in preparation I’ve been reading Spurgeon’s comments in The Treasury of David (which can be found on-line here).

Having been helped by Spurgeon's quaint sayings and tips for preachers I just told baby Jonathan about "the song of the seas" and "the hallelujah of the hills" (v7-8), and got a very happy smile in return!

Here are some favourite moments:

Jesus, our King, has lived a marvellous life, died a marvellous death, risen by a marvellous resurrection, and ascended marvellously into heaven. By his divine power he hath sent forth the Holy Spirit doing marvels, and by that same energy his disciples have also wrought marvellous things and astonished all the earth. Idols have fallen, superstitions have withered, systems of error have fled, and empires of cruelty have perished. For all this he deserves the highest praise. (p210)

It is no small blessing, or little miracle, that throughout all lands the gospel should be published in so short a time, with such singular success and abiding results. (p211)

All repetitions are not vain repetitions, in sacred song there should be graceful repeats, they render the sense emphatic, and help to fire the soul; even preachers do not amiss when they dwell on a word and sound it out again and again, till dull ears feel its emphasis. (p212)

Man’s voice is at its best when it sings the best words in the best spirit to the best of Beings. Love and war must not monopolise the lyric muse; the love of God and the conquests of Immanuel should win to themselves man’s sweetest strains. (p212)

Let but the reigning power of Jesus be felt in the soul and we shall cast aside that chill mutter, drowned by the pealing organ, which is now so commonly the substitute for earnest congregational singing. (p213)

This psalm is an evident prophecy of Christ's coming to save the world; and what is here foretold by David is, in the Blessed Virgin's Song chanted forth as being accomplished. David is the Voice, and Mary is the Echo.

1. DAVID. "O sing unto the Lord a new song." (The Voice.)

MARY. "My soul doth magnify the Lord." (The Echo.)

2. DAVID. "He hath done marvellous things." (The Voice.)

MARY. "He that is mighty hath done great things." (The Echo.)

3. DAVID. "With his own right hand and holy arm hath he gotten himself the victory." (The Voice.)

MARY. "He hath showed strength with his arm, and scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts." (The Echo.)

4. DAVID. "The Lord hath made known his salvation; his righteousness hath he openly showed, "&c. (The Voice.)

MARY. "His mercy is on them that fear him, from generation to generation." (The Echo.)

5. DAVID. "He hath remembered his mercy and his truth toward the house of Israel." (The Voice.)

MARY. "He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy." (The Echo.)

These parallels are very striking; and it seems as if Mary had this psalm in her eye when she composed her song of triumph. And this is a farther argument that the whole psalm, whether it record the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, or the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, is yet to be ultimately understood of the redemption of the world by Jesus Christ, and the proclamation of his gospel through all the nations of the earth: and taken in this view, no language can be too strong, nor poetic imagery too high, to point out the unsearchable riches of Christ. Adam Clarke. (p214f)

Towards Better Bible Studies Training

Here's a Word document with some thoughts on how to prepare and lead a Bible Study with some suggested resources. The notes are from a couple of training sessions I ran for home group leaders and others at Holy Trinity.

When God Pitched Up

Below is the text of my handout for a sermon preached yesterday on John 1:10-14. There are some more jottings (in a Word document) here.

(1) An Amazing Miracle: (v14)

God became a man

The incarnation

Jesus: (i) fully God – the eternal “Word”, The Son

WYSIWYG – (Jn 14:9; Heb 1:3; Col 1:15, 19; I Jn 1)

--> we can know God (v18)

(ii) fully human – “flesh” – (Jn 11:45; 4:6; Mt 4:2)

--> God knows us (Heb 4:15)

astonishing love – we must really matter to Jesus (2 Cor 8:9)

“made his dwelling” (v14) = “tabernacled” – (Ex 33)

Jesus the New Tabernacle / Temple (Jn 2:21)

--> if you want to know God, go to Jesus

(2) A Terrible Tragedy: (vv10-11)

God’s world rejected Him

--> don’t make the same mistake: recognise Jesus

(3) A Wonderful Privilege: (vv12-13)

But all who received Jesus became God’s children

“Dear Lord and Father of Mankind”? – (Jn 8:42, 44)

we are not all / automatically children of God

--> receive Him / believe in his name (v12)

born again Christians (v13; Jn 3:3; Eph 2:1)

“right” (v12) – “power / authority” --> confidence

The illusion of progress?

As the PhD might be a very long time in emerging, I feel I ought to demonstrate I've been doing something on Thursdays since August. Mainly typing out bits of Calvin. Here are some notes on his doctrine of the Lord's Supper from Institutes of the Christian Religion Library of Christian Classics Volumes XX and XXI edited by John T. McNeill, translated by Ford Lewis Battles (London / Philadephia, SCM / The Westminster Press, 1960) and Calvin: Theological Treatises Library of Christian Classics Volume XXII, Translated with Introduction and Notes by J. K. S. Reid (London / Philadelphia, SCM Press / Westminster Press, 1954) - (Word document, 19350words, 45pp).

Calvin on Lord's Supper Bibliography

I’ve been toiling away today at a bibliography for Calvin’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. I could have saved myself plenty of work if I’d done some more Googling earlier.

Dr Keith A. Mathison (author of Given For You: Reclaiming Calvin’s Doctrine Of The Lord’s Supper (Phillipsburg, P & R Publishing, 2002)) has an extensive bibliography for an ThM seminar he taught on the subject at Reformed Theological Seminary in January 2006 online here.

The only things I have to add are:

Ferguson, Sinclair, “Calvin on the Lord’s Supper and Communion with Christ” in David Wright and David Stay (editors), Serving the Word of God: Celebrating the Life and Ministry of James Philip (Mentor, 2002)

Wolterstorff, Nicholas, “Not Presence But Action: Calvin on Sacraments” Perspectives 9 Mr 1994, pp16-22

Zachman, Randall C., Image and Word in the Theology of John Calvin (Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press, 2007)

Update (31/1/08):

While I was at it, I should also have Googled Calvin bibliography and I would have come up with The Calvin College Meeter Center Calvin Bibliography.

Tony Lane also had a ‘Guide to Calvin Literature’ published in Vox Evangelica 17 (1987) 35-47.

English (Any!)

Almost anyone who's ever read anything I've written will know that I'm badly in need of a good spell checker.

Using the Word spell checker just now, I was quite often puzzled as to which of the correction options I was actually originally aiming for!

Anyway, what I wanted to say was that it would be handy if Word had an "English (Any)" option, so that one didn't have to choose between UK & US spellings. If you've got a document with lots of quotations its sometimes a job to work out whether the original used English or American spellings. And if your American spelling is even worse than your English spelling, are you then meant to as Word to switch dictionaries each time? Being lazy I tended to allow "s"s or "z" and willingly overlook "u"s, and so on.

Things You Must See Before You Die

With a nod to Revd Sam Allberry, here's something from yesterday's sermon (more jottings for which are available here).

Let me tell you a few book-titles I found on Amazon this week - (I've been using my sermon preparation time wisely!):

Unforgettable Places to See Before You Die

1000 Places to See Before You Die

1001 Natural Wonders: You Must See Before You Die 1001 Historic Sites: You Must See Before You Die 101 Things to Do Before You Die

101 Things to Buy Before You Die

300 Beers to Try Before You Die

1001 Golf Holes You Must Play Before You Die

Fifty Places to Sail Before You Die

Fifty Places to Fly Fish Before You Die:

1001 Wines You Must Taste Before You Die

1001 Albums: You Must Hear Before You Die

1001 Classical Recordings You Must Hear Before You Die

1001 Books: You Must Read Before You Die

1001 Paintings You Must See Before You Die

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die

1001 Gardens You Must See Before You Die

The Five Secrets You Must Discover Before You Die

Ten Fun Things to Do Before You Die

There’s also, by the way,

101 Things Not to Do Before You Die

Its an exhausting list, isn’t it!

After that lot, you might need

Unforgettable Islands to Escape to Before You Die

I'm not knocking those books (necessarily!). I'm interested in some of them myself.

But I think a list of books like that makes you realise, doesn’t it, that many people sense they're missing something in life.

They’re trying to squeeze as much as possible out of the time left to them on this planet.

They’re not satisfied and they don’t know quite where to look for peace and rest.

There would be something a bit desperate if someone had all those books on their shelves, wouldn’t there?

But the Bible’s message is much saner and much simpler.

This passage (Simeon's song in Luke 2) tells us that the one thing we must do before we die is, as it were, see Jesus.

Don’t worry too much about all those books and pictures and places and films.

The only really essential thing is to come to appreciate Jesus – to come to terms with him.

Simeon says, in effect, "now I've seen Jesus, I can die happy".

That's the message of Simeon’s song:

Jesus is at the centre of things.

He alone brings salvation and light for all people.

Jesus is the one who brings peace.

Lasting satisfaction and rest, meaning and purpose are to be found in him.

If we put Jesus at the centre of our lives, we'll be able to look back on them without regrets.

Limits of Grammatical Historical Exegesis

This might be worth a read.

The Presence of God Qualifying Our Notions
of Grammatical-Historical Interpretation:
Genesis 3:15 as a Test Case

by Vern Sheridan Poythress

[Published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50/1 (2007) 87-103]

Abstract:

Evangelical scholars have championed grammatical-historical interpretation as an objective means of sifting truth from error. This approach has value if we use it as one focus, but limitations if we use it as a total account. The temptation arises to think of objective interpretation as implying total domination of the text in order to capture its meaning. God himself poses an obstacle in several ways to hermeneutical dominance. God as master author limits our understanding of the authorial mind. God the Spirit as inspirer of human authors limits our understanding of human author's minds. God as archetype for man as the image of God implies the necessity of understanding the divine mind in order to understand the human mind. God as master of history limits our ability to confine the text to its immediate historical and cultural horizon. God as Lord of language limits our control on word and sentence meaning. God as present through the Spirit among interpreters limits our control on our own minds. Various limitations can be illustrated in the challenge of interpreting Genesis 3:15.

Conclusion

God as Sovereign is present with human authors, with the text of the Bible, and with the recipients. On all three fronts his presence is the one true foundation for the proper functioning of communication. On all three fronts his faithfulness gives hope for our understanding. God gives us access to genuine truth. But on all three fronts there is no such thing as mastery that evaporates mystery and succeeds in fully controlling meaning.

How to carry on theological debate?

You have got to love Calvin's refreshing directness!

I am planning to do some thinking about the view that all of creation is sacramental so I have noted this comment from Calvin:

… if they simply understand “sign” as what is adduced for a comparison… what end or measure will there be? There is nothing that by this reasoning will not be a sacrament. There will be as many sacraments as there are parables and similitudes in Scripture…. I admit that whenever we see a vine, it is a very good thing to recall that Christ said: “I am the vine, you are the branches”; “My Father is the vinedresser”. Whenever we meet a shepherd with his flock, it is good that this also come to mind: “I am the good shepherd”; “My sheep hear my voice”. But anyone who would classify such similitudes with the sacraments ought to be sent to a mental hospital.

(Institutes 4.19.34, FB ed. p1481-2)

Probably Incoherent Trinitarian Musings

An interesting discussion on the way back from vicar training last night around things Trinitarian, such as, should we begin with the one-ness or the three-ness and how do we best describe the unity and diversity in the Godhead. I’m not quite sure where all this got us and if we avoided heresy, but it was stimulating to talk about it and perhaps worth revisiting some rambling thoughts here to see if I’ve got any of it straight in my own head! It made me wish I’d been in Rev’d Dr Mike Ovey’s Trinity Lectures. It’s a shame we so quickly get into foreign words like hypostasis, substantia and ousia and that East and West didn’t seem to understand one another. Corrections welcome.

It seemed to me my interlocutor wasn’t the greatest fan of talking of one substance as the basis of unity. I can understand that there are dangers in thinking of some extra substance of goodness that stands behind the Persons and makes them God. My friend wanted to describe the unity of the persons of the Godhead and their divinity in terms of relationships.

However, it seems to me we need something more than relationships to ground the unity – and that we can usefully describe what it means to be divine or the One God of the Bible (such as uncreated) without necessarily having to talk of persons and relations. I guess mutual indwelling (perichorisis) – relationship language – does help us out in describing the unity. We could also say something about agreement of purpose and will, but it seems to me that we also need to talk of shared attributes.

As I had understood it, the relationships between the members of the Trinity ground their distinctiveness. The Son is all that the Father is except Father, and so on. You could say this strong statement of unity actually emphasises relationships since it is the relationships alone that are highlighted as distinguishing the persons. It is the relationship of eternal begetting / begottenness that makes the Son the Son and not the Father. Otherwise he shares all the attributes of the Father and is God (holy, wise, powerful, loving etc.) just as much as the Father is.

However, I guess we ought to say that the Son is God as the Son (in a Sonly way, in eternally begotten relationship with the Father) and so on. The persons are all that they are always in relationship to one another. They have their attributes as who they are in relationship, interdependently and in unity.

I think my friend also had some questions about some ways of talking about simplicity, but I cant quite remember / grasp what they were?

We don’t want to start parcelling out attributes amongst persons. We might call the Son the Wisdom of the Father but we don’t want to say the Father isn’t wise! The Father is never without the Son so I don’t know how much sense it makes to try to isolate the persons. For example, would the Father know an Other, or indeed know himself in an Other without the Son? Presumably not. But that’s just a way of saying we must be Trinitarian. All the persons are essential and eternal and any monadic account of “God” or “god” is inadequate.

My friend said he thought Calvin wasn’t very happy with Nicene-creed language of the Son as “God from God” etc. and stressed that it is poetic. We don’t have a reference for this? I guess the battle is to hang on to the fact that Jesus really is God, not God in some weaker sense. Sure, you might say the Son is True God in himself but all the persons are always only what they are in relationship.

It is also interesting to ask what we should make of John 5:26, “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.” So that would seem to mean that there is a prior sense in which the Father has life in himself in which the Son does not? Clearly we must say the Son is eternal and uncreated but do we say he gets his life from the Father by virtue of / in his eternal begetting / begottenness? Is self-existence therefore an attribute of the Godhead or is it also an attribute of the Father but not of the Son? However, I guess the Father is only the Father in so far as he begets. So the Father is also dependant on the Son in terms of relationships: it is (eternally) having a Son that makes the Father a Father. The Father has no independent-apart-from-the-Son life as Father. Which is happy since in any case there wasn’t when he was not.

Mmmm.

Theological Word Count

Wallace Benn mentioned at vicar-training yesterday that Richard Baxter wrote more words in English than any other theologian. Baxter also served as something of a local doctor on a Wednesday, apparently!

Calvin on the Supper Reading

I'm just beginning to wonder what secondary literature I should be reading on Calvin's doctrine of the Lord's Supper. So far I've come across the following. Any further pointers gratefully received!

Ferguson, Sinclair, “Calvin on the Lord’s Supper and Communion with Christ” in David Wright and David Stay (editors), Serving the Word of God: Celebrating the Life and Ministry of James Philip (Mentor, 2002)

Gerrish, B. A., Grace and Gratitude: The Eucharistic Theology of John Calvin (Eugene, Wimpf and Stock Publishers, 1993)

Mathison, Keith A., Given For You: Reclaiming Calvin’s Doctrine Of The Lord’s Supper (Phillipsburg, P & R Publishing, 2002)

McDonnell, Killian, John Calvin, the Church and the Eucharist, (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1967)

Nevin, John Williamson, The Mystical Presence: A Vindication of the Reformed or Calvinistic Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist edited by Augutine Thompson (Eugine, Wipf and Stock, 2000) originally published 1846

Tinker, Melvin, ‘Language, Symbols and Sacraments: Was Calvin’s View of the Lord’s Supper Right?’ Churchman 112 no 2 1998 pp131-149

Wallace, Ronald S., Calvin’s Doctrine of Word and Sacrament (Edinburgh, Oliver and Bond, 1953)

Wolterstorff, Nicholas, “Not Presence But Action: Calvin on Sacraments” Perspectives 9 Mr 1994, pp16-22

Zachman, Randall C., Image and Word in the Theology of John Calvin (Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press, 2007)

Ceremonies that point to Christ

No doubt there’s more to say here, but I’ve been helped by the way Revd Dr Paul Blackham of All Souls’, Langham Place, analyses the 3 ceremonies Luke mentions in chapter 2 that might shed light on the coming Messiah:

Circumcision (v21). In Genesis 17 the giving of circumcision as the bloody sign of the covenant and its implementation sandwiches the renewing of the promise of the seed through Isaac. It is perhaps in part a way of looking forward to the birth of the Messiah.

Redemption of the Firstborn (v23). In the Passover all the people deserve judgement but the first born male stands in for or represents the nation, bearing the wrathful punishment of God, unless a lamb dies in the place of the firstborn. Exodus 13 commands that firstborn males always have to be redeemed, just as if the people of God were still in captivity in Egypt. The firstborn Son is still to come to die as a substitute in the place of the people, bearing the wrath of God, releasing God’s people from slavery.

The ceremonial purification of Mary after childbirth (vv22, 24, cf. Leviticus 12). The pain of childbearing comes from God’s curse against sin in Genesis 3. It is through the birth of a child that the curse will be removed. Jesus will, of course, bring cleansing to his people and access to God.

Blackham’s sermon, The Child Who Divides (sermon code D040/03, 29th Dec 2002) is available on the All Souls’ website.

Comfort for Israel the widow

The widow Anna who speaks to those who were "looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem" (Luke 2:25) about the child Jesus becomes a more significant figure when we realise that Israel, the people of God, is often pictured as the LORD's bride in the Bible. In Lamentations 1, Jerusalem is a widow in need of comfort. The final "consolation of Israel" (Luke 2:25; cf. Isaiah 40), the ultimate end of exile, comes in the Lord Jesus Christ and in the wedding of the Lamb (Revelation 19:7-9).

God bless the diocese of Chichester!

A nice woman from Church House in Hove phoned today to say that they had heard (I know not how) that we had had a new addition to the family and they were giving us a grant of £150 (from a "Welfare Fund", it turns out) which is jolly kind of them.

Glad the diocese is supporting the filling of the earth (Genesis 1:22), a commandment which as far as I'm aware has not been repealed.

I guess its good if prospective vicars can bring their own Sunday school with them. I wonder if my job prospects would improve if we invest in a labradore too?

The First Christmas Presents

I’m glad to say that the good people of Holy Trinity, Eastbourne seem quite happy with a bit of interpretative maximalism. No grammatical-historical reductionistic obsessions for us!

I spoke at the all age service yesterday on the significance of the “wise men”’s gift. Mrs Lloyd tells me that I inadvertently said there were 3 wise men, for which, of course, I apologise, since the Word of God doesn’t say so. I was trying hard not to call these philosopher / astrologer "magi" types kings too.

I suggested that gold implied that Jesus is a king (vv2, 6 and the star as a sign of a ruler in the Bible), frankincense (incense used in Old Testament temple worship) that Jesus is a priest and that myrrh points forward to his death. My points were further expounded in ‘We Three Kings of Orient Are’.

Born a King on Bethlehem's plain
Gold I bring to crown Him again
King forever, ceasing never
Over us all to rein

Frankincense to offer have I
Incense owns a Deity nigh
Pray'r and praising, all men raising
Worship Him, God most high

Myrrh is mine, its bitter perfume
Breathes of life of gathering gloom
Sorrowing, sighing, bleeding, dying
Sealed in the stone-cold tomb

I must admit that I’m not entirely sure that all those ideas were in Matthew’s mind and I fear there may have been a bit of “right doctrine, wrong text”. The gifts may just be choice Eastern products fit for a king, but I had published my title and we’d paid to download images of gold, incense and myrrh from iStockPhoto, and it seemed to make such a neat talk and....

Calvin is dismissive of the idea that each of the gifts has a special significance:

Their presents show whence they came: for there can be no doubt that they brought them as the choicest productions of their country…. Almost all the commentators indulge in speculation about those gifts, as denoting the kingdom, priesthood and burial of Christ…. I see no solid ground for such an opinion. It was customary, we know, among the Persians, when they offered homage to their kings, to bring a present (p137) in their hands. The Magi select those three for the produce of which Eastern countries are celebrated….” (Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke, pp137-138)

Nevertheless, the Magi no doubt would have thought long and hard about what to give Jesus and Matthew does bother to tell us what the gifts were. And anyway, given God’s sovereignty and the inspiration of Scripture, we need not limit our interpretation to the intentions of the human actors or authors.

Myrrh is mentioned in connection with the crucifixion (Mk. 15:23) and burial of Christ (Jn. 19:39) but it is also associated with kings (Ps. 45:8, where incense is also mentioned; Song 3:6, where King Solomon is in view) and France (Tyndale NT Comm.) says that in the Old Testament it is a symbol of joy and festivity (Pr. 7:17; Song 5:5).

Isaiah 60:6 prophecies that “all from Sheba will come bearing gold and incense and proclaiming the praise of the LORD” and it is interesting to note that in 1 Kings 10:1-13 the Queen of Sheba gives gifts of gold and spices to Solomon the Davidic King.

Jesus Our Castle

The youth group are having an indoor bouncy castle tonight. The text for the talk: "he [God] is my fortress" (Psalm 62:2).

(1) God is a "fortress" for his people (vv6-7) - a place of security and safety, defence, refuge (vv7,8), a (mighty) rock (vv2, 7) - strong, stable, "never be shaken" (vv2, 6) "salvation" (vv1-2), rest (v1) - ultimate salvation, eternal rest

(2) God "alone" is a dependable fortress (v2, v5, v6) - no one and nothing else can give us ultimate satisfaction / "rest" (v1, 5) - always dissatisfied till we find our satisfaction in God - people are weak and will die and sometimes let us down (v9) - riches cannot satisfy or save and are unreliable (v10) - God's strength and love and justice are the certainties in life (vv11-12)

(3) "So trust in God at all times;" (v8)

"pour out your heart to him" (v8) - you can bring any problem or situation to God. He understands and can cope with anything.

Red or white?

Calvin says it is a thing indifferent whether we use red or white wine in the Lord's Supper, which should be left to the church's discretion (Institutes IV.XVII.43, p1420).

I wonder if anyone has ever actually advocated using white wine?

The symbolism of red, the colour of blood, seems so natural and obvious that it would be a shame to miss it.

Half-baked thoughts

Presumably half-baked thoughts are better than no thoughts. But there are probably some foods I would rather have raw than half-baked. More thought needed. Perhaps a mid-morning snack first...

Jesus' body & God's words - sacraments?

As it’s a Thursday I’m struggling away at Calvin’s doctrine of the Supper again – partly with a view to thinking about whether or not the Bible may usefully be called sacramental.

I’m not sure I really get all this but this little bit of Calvin’s interaction with Lombard has got me thinking:

But the foolish imagination, of which Lombard was the author, that eating Christ’s flesh is the sacrament, has perverted their minds. Here are his words: “The sacrament and not the thing are the forms of bread and wine; the sacrament and the thing are the flesh and blood of Christ; the thing and not the sacrament, his mystical flesh.” Again a little later: “The thing signified and contained is Christ’s proper flesh; signified and not contained, the mystical body.” I agree with his distinction between the flesh of Christ and the effective nourishment which inheres in it; but his pretending it [the flesh and blood of Christ?] to be a sacrament, and even one contained under bread, is an error not to be endured. (Institutes 4.17.33, p1406)

It seems to me that there’s an important question here about what constitutes the real “thing” and where it is to be found. There could be a problem about describing the sacrament in contrast to the thing. The sacrament broadly conceived surely involves a union of the thing signified (the real substance) and the signifier. The more narrow use of sacrament refers only to the outward sign making a distinction between the sacramental sign and the substance of which it speaks.

For example, could Jesus’ human body be called a sacrament? In a fairly weak sense that it is a created thing that somehow significantly mediates the divine, surely so. There is a union of the divine and the human in Jesus. But in the case of Jesus’ human body, what you see (the sign) is the real thing: the substance of the human body of the God-man Jesus. Lombard wrongly seems to imagine some third thing called “the mystical body”.

The case is very different in the case of the bread of the Lord’s Supper: it is the sign or sacrament (narrowly understood) of the body of Christ, not that physical body itself, which is now seated at the Right Hand in glory. Yet the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper (broadly understood) offers the true Christ (including his body) to be received spirituallu by faith.

A problem with thinking about the words of the Bible as sacramental is that it might lead one to suppose that the real action is elsewhere: that these words only point towards the true Word of God which is somehow beyond these words. One can see why liberals would see this as an attractive way of downgrading the words while still retaining them (just as we use bread in the Supper but we don’t confuse it with Jesus’ body). Granted the written words are given to lead us to the Living Word, they are nevertheless themselves the real words of God, not just signs of those words.

I guess the issue is more complicated however when one speaks of Bible translations. They would seem to be pointers to the words of God, rather than his very words – secondary signs.

The ink markings on the pages of our Bibles could be said to be the form and not the thing of the words of God, rather as the bread is not the physical body of Christ.

The Third Province Movement

I guess I should be a more faithful reader of the church newspapers that pad onto my doormat every week, but I'd not come across The Third Province Movement website until today. Bishop Wallace Benn and Roger Beckwith are patrons of it.

Free Images for my sermons

Does anyone have any tips for good places to find free images on-line for use in talks?

I’m particularly interested in some gold, frankincense (or even just plain incense, whatever the difference is) and myrrh, if anyone can tell me how I can lay my hands on them in the next few days.

Though it may be better simply not to bother with the old power-point, I guess. I could always start decorating old cereal packets or something. The joy of giving all-age talks!

I’ve had a look at a few of the sites listed on the Wikipedia Public Domain Image Resources page, but I imagine this would be a great way to waste lots of time.

Two Little Boys

Here's a copy of my handout for a sermon preached yesterday on Zechariah's song from Luke 1:57-80 entitled A Song For Christmas: Two Little Boys - the boys in question being John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus Christ, of course.

A new born baby boy – a proud father

“What then is this child going to be?” (v66)

Significance (of John) in the light of the big picture of:

(1) What God is doing:

God Himself is coming (v68, v76, v78)

A Saviour from the line of King David (v69)

To redeem (v68), rescue (v74), save (v69, v71) and forgive (v77) his people

(2) Why God is doing it:

Mercy (v72, v78) – undeserved love

Fulfilling His promises (v70, vv72-73)

(3) How we (and John) fit in:

John the Baptist’s unique role: Are we ready? Be prepared! (v76)

Two Little Boys: John points us to Jesus

Accept what He offers: light, life, peace (vv78-79), security (v69, v71, v74), freedom (v68)

Serve Him without fear (v74)

Here are a few more jottings as a Word document.

Another blog to read

I've noticed my fellow Eastbourne curate, Rev'd Glen Scrivner is blogging away at http://christthetruth.wordpress.com/

Aren't you glad I'm using my paternity leave wisely?

Get 'em when they're born

Visiting Mrs Lloyd and our firstborn in hospital this morning, it was a bit like being on a beech in Tenerife as people came and touted their wares at us. Would we like to have his photo taken there and then? Someone else would make a framed cast of the boy’s hand and foot print, for a hefty fee. We were also given a Bounty Bag of Newborn “Essentials” (!). No Bounty bars, unfortunately, but I was surprised that there was an official form for registering for Child Benefit amongst all the glossy junk mail.

The pack also contained a flyer for naming ceremonies with www.civilceremonies.co.uk who will do you all manner of ceremonies in venues of your choice or flog you a script and let you get on with a DIY option. They could even train you to do ceremonies too!

If there really is a market for such things, I wonder if the church isn’t missing a trick here? Maybe we should be promoting Thanksgiving and Naming Ceremonies to new parents? Maybe the C of E could cut a deal to get its bumph in the Bounty Bag or local arrangements could be made with hospitals?

Someone also told me that when you go to register a death in Eastbourne there’s a poster up advertising funeral ceremonies.

I wonder how many people opt for these new fangled civil ceremonies with their practical atheism or pick n mix spirituality and how much of a loss they really are in terms of evangelistic opportunities.

Thanks be to God!

for the safe arrival of Jonathan Obadiah Andrew Lloyd at 1:03pm today, at Eastbourne District General Hospital, weighing 8 pounds and 6 ounces. Mother, baby and father are doing well, though we could all do with a good long sleep and something to eat (or drink).



I've put up far too many repetitious photos on my photos blog.

Resolved!

My arm has been twisted for an item for the church magazine (HT Today) for the re-launched January edition. I'm hoping something like this may get me off the hook: (Thanks to Ruth Field for jogging my memory on these).

I’m not much of a one for making New Year’s Resolutions. Partly because I reckon I’d break them in the first twenty-four hours, so it seems easier not to make any at all. But I guess we shouldn’t let the possibility of defeat cause us to give up the fight altogether before we’ve even begun.

It’s sometimes said that if you aim for nothing in particular, that’s exactly what you’ll achieve! So maybe some resolutions would help us to strive for something, to make some efforts. One of my resolutions for this year is to make another resolution next year.

So what should our resolutions be? Even asking ourselves what our goals (or perhaps just our “aspirations”) for 2008 ought to be could do us good. Perhaps we might even dare to hope (and pray) this New Year for something more significant than losing a few pounds. We could take the beginning of the year as the opportunity for a spiritual health check.

If we need inspiration for some New Year’s Resolutions, we could do a lot worse than look to Jonathan Edwards. Not the Olympic triple-jumper turned TV-presenter, but Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), possibly the greatest American theologian ever.

Edwards was in to resolutions in a big way. He wrote 70 before between the ages of 19 and 20. He introduced them, saying:

BEING SENSIBLE THAT I AM UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT GOD' S HELP, I DO HUMBLY ENTREAT HIM BY HIS GRACE TO ENABLE ME TO KEEP THESE RESOLUTIONS, SO FAR AS THEY ARE AGREEABLE TO HIS WILL, FOR CHRIST' S SAKE.

And resolved to read over them once a week.

Here are a few of my favorites.

5. Resolved, never to lose one moment of time; but improve it the most profitable way I possibly can.

6. Resolved, to live with all my might, while I do live.

7. Resolved, never to do anything, which I should be afraid to do, if it were the last hour of my life.

And if, like me, you ever find yourself growling at your computer, you might consider this one:

15. Resolved, never to suffer the least motions of anger towards irrational beings [and I guess, we might add, objects!]

28. Resolved, to study the Scriptures so steadily, constantly and frequently, as that I may find, and plainly perceive myself to grow in the knowledge of the same.

31. Resolved, never to say any thing at all against any body, but when it is perfectly agreeable to the highest degree of Christian honor, and of love to mankind, agreeable to the lowest humility, and sense of my own faults and failings, and agreeable to the golden rule [of doing to others as we would have them do to us]

52. I frequently hear persons in old age, say how they would live, if they were to live their lives over again: Resolved, that I will live just so as I can think I shall wish I had done, supposing I live to old age.

55. Resolved, to endeavor to my utmost to act as I can think I should do, if, I had already seen the happiness of heaven, and hell torments.

Even if Edwards seems at times to set impossibly high standards, perhaps he might inspire us to think that we could do better.

Edwards knew he was always a sinner and couldn’t keep his own resolutions. He resolved to repent as soon as he realised he’d failed. He also resolved to count up the number of times he broke a resolution every week to see if the number went up or down. A broken resolution could serve us well if it drives us back to God’s undeserved love in Christ.

Further reading:

Jonathan Edward’s resolutions can be found online in various places, including:

www.reformed.org/documents/Edwards/j_edwards_resolutions.html

For an introduction to Edwards, you might try John Piper, God’s Passion For His Glory: Living the Vision of Jonathan Edwards (IVP, 1998).

There is a solid evangelical biography by Iain Murray (Banner of Truth, 1987). Perhaps the best biography (fat but surprisingly readable) is by George Marsden (Yale University Press, 2003).

Church Website Tips?

Our church website at:

http://www.htpcebn.mistral.co.uk/

badly needs improving.

We don't really have anyone in the church with the time and whizzy know-how to make it happen, as far as I'm aware.

So I've agreed to look into the options, including paying someone to set it up for us. Ideadly it would be something that the office could then manage and keep up to date.

We're due to invest in an MP3 recorder when we upgrade the sound system a bit, so hopefully audio sermons can be online in the not too distant future.

We do have a church copy of Dreamweaver.

Any tips / suggestions? Reccomendations of website designers?

Loves and hates of church websites?

Preaching Plans (Jan-Apr '08)

Here are some first thoughts on what I might preach on in January - April 2008:

13 Jan AM – Famous “Anglican” Texts: Now I Can Die Happy! (Luke 2:21-40)

20 Jan PM – When God Pitched Up (John 1:1-18)

10 Feb AM – Famous “Anglican” Texts: Sing to the Lord a New Song (Psalm 98)

24 Feb PM – A Spotlight on the True Light (John 1:6-34)

9 Mar AM - Famous “Anglican” Texts: Jubilate! (Psalm 100)

20 Mar – The Meal Jesus Gave Us (Luke 22:7-38)

(Maundy Thursday meal)

23 Mar PM – The Difference the Risen Jesus Makes (John 20)

(Easter Sunday)

20 Apr PM – Come and see (John 1:35-51)

27 Apr AM – Article 1 of C of E continued: “… God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness;”

I need to find a reading for that last one: I feel a bit guilty about preaching from the 39 Articles rather than the Bible!

* * *

It is great to have my pick of what to preach on, but a series of sermons once a month has its challenges!

It would be great not to have to decide what to preach on next time untill I've seen how the last one went. How many sermons do we want on John 1:1-18? I don't know.

* * *

I'd like to preach a couple of sermons on the Lord's Prayer at some point and maybe I might set myself a title like "Tips for Parents" to allow myself to think about how to be a dad.

* * *

I'm not sure really why we publish a programme card. Does anyone really choose to come to church or not on the basis of the passages and the little titles? Or the preacher? And if they do, is that a good thing?

The titles seem a bit of a joke anyway since I've no idea what I want to say about these texts now, really, and in 5 months time and after some serious work on the passages, I might find my titles are totally off target. Maybe they should just be seen as advertising and need have little resemblance to the finished product!

John's Gospel: Beginning at the Beginning

I'm planning a long series on Sunday evenings in John's Gospel. I preached last month from the "last page" of the Gospel on John's purpose in writing: that those who (unlike "Doubting" Thomas) have never seen the Risen Jesus might believe that he is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing they might have life in his name.

Yesterday I began at the beginning of the Gospel.

Here's my handout:

John 1:1-5 – Beginning at the beginning…

The purpose of John’s gospel (20:31)

that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

The prologue of John’s gospel (1:1-18)

an overture / trailer – introduces themes developed later

simplicity & depth - inexhaustible

“In the beginning…” (John 1:1 / Genesis 1:1)

“was the Word”

Word = Light (vv4-5, 7-9) = Jesus (v14, v17)

Logos / Reason – but a person (he) not a thing / Force (it)

Word of God – reveals / expresses God

agent of God in creation – “God said, let there by light…”

God acts powerfully by his Word - saves / judges

Word of God – gospel – good news

“and the Word was with God”

distinct from God – Jesus ≠ Father

behind the scenes: the private life of the Trinity

relationship at the heart of the universe (v18)

“and the Word was God”

not a god / divine but God

of one substance / essence co-eternal with the Father

--> a greater vision of Jesus: don’t underestimate him

--> to know God, look to Jesus since Jesus is God

--> Jesus makes sense of life

--> Jesus is the Maker: trust him give Life

There are some jottings in a Word doucument here.

Prayers for Sea Cadet Parade

Having had a look at B.R. 426 Pray With The Navy (Chaplain of the Fleet, Ministry of Defence, 1965) and The Book of Common Prayer (where the extra prayers for use at sea tend to focus on storms and battles), I've come up with the following for tonight's Parade and Trophey Night at the Eastbourne Sea Cadet Unit, where I'm expecting a great display:

Living and true God,

we give you thanks for all the achievements we celebrate this evening,

and we pray for your blessing on the whole Sea Cadet Corps

and especially on this unit.

Eternal Lord God,

who alone rules the raging of the sea,

we pray that you would graciously prosper your servant, Elizabeth our Queen,

and protect all who go down to the sea in ships,

especially those who defend our coasts and waters.

Help us so to accept and trust the Lord Jesus Christ as our Captain

on our earthly voyage, in this brief mortal life,

that you might bring us at last to the rest and safety of your everlasting haven.

And the peace of God which passes all understanding,

keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge and love of God,

and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord,

and the blessing of God Almighty, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

be with us, and all whom we love and pray for,

now and always. Amen.

Given Signs

An interesting observation and suggestion from Revd Dr Peter Leithart:

Many translators and interpreters of Augustine's de doctrina Christiana translate "signa data" as "conventional signs." But there's something to be said for taking the phrase literally (as some commentators do).

The difference between naturalia and data, Augustine says, is that the latter occur by the will of a sign-user while the former do not. Given this voluntarist emphasis, it makes sense to translate "signa data" not as "conventional signs" but "given signs."

This is a pleasant thought, since it brings linguistic exchange into the realm of gift-reception-return. To speak is to give; to hear is to receive; to speak back is to show gratitude.

Can ungrateful people carry on a conversation?

May the elements of the Lord's Supper not be thought of as at least partly conventional or given signs? Leithart's analysis of words suggests that it would be fitting to think of the Supper (which is after all a kind of visible word) as a gift sign, to be recieved with gratitude and calling for a response.

Preacher's Disclaimers

As I contemplate preaching on the prologue to John’s gospel on Sunday, I want to issue all sorts of disclaimers. Of course I don’t really get it all. The Trinity is mysterious. There are depths here that I can’t understand or explain.

And more generally there is a dreadful responsibility to preaching. The preacher hopes that his hearers wont write off Jesus because the preacher was dull, that they wont think some doctrine nonsense because the preacher mucked up his description.

Yet you’ve got to just pray, do your best, and pray again. Unfortunately, or fortunately, sermons can’t really have small-print apologies, or at least not every week.

Here’s Calvin on his inability to fully explain the Lord’s Supper:

… - if one may reduce to words so great a mystery, which I see that I do not even sufficiently comprehend with my mind. I therefore freely admit that no man should measure its sublimity by the little of my childishness. Rather, I urge my readers not to confine their mental interest within too narrow limits, but to strive to rise much higher than I can lead them. For, whenever this matter is discussed, when I have tried to say all, I feel that I have as yet said little in proportion to its worth. And although my mind can think beyond what my tongue can utter, yet even my mind is conquered and overwhelmed by the greatness of the thing. Therefore, nothing remains but to break forth in wonder at this mystery, which plainly neither the mind is able to conceive nor the tongue to express. Nevertheless, I shall in one way or another sum up my views; for, as I do not doubt them to be true, I am confident they will be approved in godly hearts. (Institutes, 4.17.7, p1367-8)

"just as"

Reading the Ford-Battles edition of Calvin's Institutes, I have to remind myself that it seems "just as" often seems to mean "kind of like in some way or ways" rather than "just and precisely as in every respect". I imagine one could get into hot water pretty quickly, for example, if one pressed this "just as":

... by true partaking of him [Jesus], his life passes into us and is made ours - just as bread when taken as food imparts vigor to the body. (Institutes 4.17.5, p1365).

Right, enough distracting myslef from typing out the Instiutes. Back to it...

When do we eat The Bread of Life?

(1) The Lord Jesus Christ gave his body to be the bread of life once for all on the cross.

(2) We are continually offered the crucified and living Christ as spiritual bread in the gospel and we receive Christ with all his benefits in by faith in the Word of God.

(3) The gospel is sealed to us in the Lord’s Supper when we receive bread as an outward sign of Jesus body broken for us and his life given to us as spiritual food. We again receive Christ and all his benefits spiritually by faith.

Here is Calvin saying similar things:

It remains for all this [the saving work of Christ] to be applied to us. That is done through the gospel but more clearly through the Sacred Supper, where he offers himself with all his benefits to us, and we receive him by faith. Therefore, the Sacrament does not cause Christ to begin to be the bread of life; but when it reminds us that he was made the bread of life, which we continually eat, and which gives us a relish and a savor of that bread, it causes us to feel the power of that bread…. it [Christ’s body] is offered to us to eat, when it makes us sharers in him by faith. Once for all, therefore, he gave us his body to be made bread when he yielded himself to be crucified for the redemption of the world; daily he gives it when by the word of the gospel he offers it for us to partake, in as much as it was crucified, when he seals such giving of himself by the sacred mystery of the Supper, and when he inwardly fulfils what he outwardly designates. (Institutes 4.17.5, Ford Battles edition p1364)

The Supper might seem unnecessary and dispensable since it communicates to us the same Jesus we already had by believing the Word of the gospel. But the outward signs are important. They are adapted to the fact that we are bodily creatures. The Supper is a ritual enactment of the gospel by which the promises of the gospel are dramatically offered to us. We make a conscious public declaration that we are appropriating Christ. We cast ourselves for all to see as Jesus hungry beneficiaries. Our faith is strengthened and we are assured that God gives us what he signifies to us in the Supper. The Supper is a formal communal affirmation of our union with Christ and with one another in the gospel.

To say that we don’t receive Christ in the Supper since we always receive him by faith is a bit like saying we don’t go to church to worship since we worship all the time with our whole lives not just when we sing. There are things about formal, public, special, corporate / communal / gathered worship that are important and distinctive. Receiving the Lord’s Supper isn’t exactly the same as reading the Bible and listening to a sermon (though both offer Christ to us) and nor is reciting the creed together in church on a Sunday the same as a silent prayer on the bus or witnessing to your neighbour (though all are worship). We need to receive the Supper to feed on Christ just as much as we need to “go to church” to worship, though we can receive Jesus without the Supper and we can worship without Sunday services.

The Original Christmas Hits (Homegroup Notes)

Here is a word document with some notes intended for homegroup leaders for 3 studies from Luke 1 and 2 on the songs of Mary, Zechariah and Simeon.