Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 11 - Reflections

Augustine now recounts a near brush with death in his childhood. He became sick with terrible stomach pain almost to the point of death. He also recounts how his mother (a faithful Christian) was always in intense prayer for his salvation and that she almost had him baptized as he was close to death.

And here Augustine confesses something that seems a mystery to me. He was glad not to be baptized at that point because of the horrible sins he would commit later in life. He quotes a proverb of his time "leave him alone, let him do as he wants, for he is not yet baptized." Put another way he felt it was of good advantage that the "unformed clay" be subjected to his life of sin rather than the "clay formed in Christ's image." The idea here being that sins after baptism were more serious and spiritually disfiguring than sins committed before baptism.

I find this interesting. I mean, I think it's true that a life of sin after one has come to Christ is worse than a life of sin before one comes to Christ. Before one comes to Christ he is simply doing what is in his nature. After one comes to Christ and is reformed by the Holy Spirit then that same life of sin becomes a denial of Christ and a denial of one's own spiritual nature. In the first case the unreformed man can still come to Christ and be reformed for the first time. In the second case it will be more difficult to return as the reformation has already occurred and so it is not just sin but also treacherous sin in the face of grace... I think. I don't want to speak for Augustine whose context I do not understand and whose experience and insight far exceeds my own.

In any case it reminds me of Jesus' words in Matthew 12:43-45, how once an evil spirit has been exorcised it will eventually return and bring seven other demons worse than itself should it find the abode unguarded.

But here is the mystery. What does baptism have to do with it? If I remember enough from Church History and Patristic Fathers and Theology classes then I think Augustine believes that the reformation of one's soul, their coming to Christ, occurs at or even through baptism. Baptism as a sacrament, as a means of grace that is the means by which God extends his grace to us. The physical ceremony being the moment that grace is extended. The Protestants do not hold to this understanding of baptism though, we believe that baptism is a symbol or a sign, not a means of grace. So a person can be a Christian and experience the life changing soul shaping reformation of Christ before (and even without) having been baptized with water.

I'll keep an eye out for further hints on how Augustine understands baptism.

Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 10 - Reflections

After recounting his childhood Augustine confesses that he sinned as a child in that he willfully disobeyed his parents and sought after vain glory. This confession is paired with the plea "Look down with mercy upon these things and save us who call upon you!"

This chapter is very short but it is of tremendous theological value. The so called "Sinner's Prayer" that we Evangelicals hold in high esteem comes from this vein which has its source in the Father, flowing through Word of God into our hearts by the power of the Holy Spirit. Here it is in Augustine as it will be in every true Christian.

Here is the acknowledgement of God's justice and mercy. Justice in that all sin is sin and that any sin separates us from God, even that of a child. (Romans 3:23) Mercy in that God has made a way for us and will save us if only we call upon him and put our faith in him (John 3:16-18).

What I find interesting is his plea that continues: "deliver those also who do not call upon thee, that they may call upon thee, and thou mayest deliver them." My heart throbs with this plea. He is praying for all who have not called upon God, that God may move their hearts by circumstances natural or supernatural so that they may call upon God and be saved.

Amen and Amen. Lord show mercy upon my sins and save us now who call upon you. And Lord, show mercy also to those who have not called upon you but bring them to a point where they may call upon you and be saved.

Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 9 - Reflections

Augustine continues on to recount his young years going to school, an important privilege in the ancient world. He also remembers how he had learned from his parents and elders and peers about the existence of God and that He was some person of incredible power who, even though undetectable by our senses, was nevertheless able help us if we called upon Him. Augustine remembers calling upon God often to spare him the discipline for neglecting his studies and further remembers regretting the such prayers were never answered. It was ok though because he realizes in hindsight that the lessons were good for him as was the discipline even though it was painful at the time.

I have to wonder at what he must have thought in in his younger years. That he would write a book and that hundreds of millions of people would read about what he was going through for the next thousand and a half years probably never entered his head.

Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 8 - Reflections

Augustine now recounts to God his maturing from an infant to a 'chattering boy' and how he gradually learned words from his parents and elders according to the sounds and gestures they made and that with these words in his mind he could relate his thoughts and communicate.

I don't know why this is important but it was important enough to Augustine that he is bringing it before God in what has already been a very long prayerful introduction. My initial thought is that it reminds me of C.S. Lewis' theological explanations of children scattered throughout his books. They understand so much of the world that we adults forget. My other thought is that God is indeed patient. Patient with chattering children and rambling theologians.

Political Fatigue?

A lot has been said about why Donald Trump won the election. From the right's growing anger and frustration to the left's bankrupting shame language I only seem to hear from and about the polarized camps. I have a theory about the moderate camps though, something I think is very sensible but not something that I have heard much about this year. I have never studied politics so I don't know what its proper term is but I will call it 'political fatigue'. It's the idea that the longer one party stays in power the less appealing it appears to the middle ground camps, the people who are not sold heart and soul to any particular political party.

Every political leader promises the world during the election process but no political leader can fulfill those promises, partly because they promised too much and partly because every time you cast a vision the people you cast it to have their own understanding of what you're promising that is different from what the vision caster meant to communicate. Obama has been the president for 8 years. During his presidency he has made a lot of progress in line with his promises and agendas but America is still deeply divided on so many contours that many can rightly ask "what has he done for me and my group?" Not enough. There is still poverty. There is still racism. The economy is still bad. The war is still happening. Christianity is still under siege or still too strong depending on who you ask. "Yes you can!" didn't materialize in a practical sense for a lot of people and so the vote for "more of the same" loses its luster while the vote for "change" (Obama's cry after 8 years of Clinton) becomes more attractive.

Its the same thing that happened here in Canada with Stephen Harper's Conservative party. They were just as lean, mean, and effective as they ever were but the country voted for Trudeau, not because Harper had become ineffective but because he had run the nation for 9 years and the middle camps had grown tired of his policies and wanted change.

Every political party, no matter how benevolent or effective, is a human construct and so will be imperfect. Both left and right styles of government have their pros and cons (temporary as they may be) and so the affections of the voters shift to whichever they think will solve their problems.

I have to wonder if Trump's divisive tactics were strategic with this in mind, hoping that after 8 years of left wing politics most states would side with a right wing candidate if a sufficient polarizing force could be applied. Now that America is very polarized (more than usual) the idea of voter fatigue is masked by all manner of name calling and accusations about the left lecturing, moralizing, reforming, and interfering too much and the right having gone hateful and insane.

Lord have mercy on us all.

The Screwtape Letters

Sometimes I get really mindless jobs at work; things like data entry or uploading tons of files to Ia server. In order to stay productive I usually listen to music but last week I listened to the Screwtape Letters and lets just say I really enjoyed them.

The Screwtape Letters were written by C.S. Lewis and sent to his buddy J.R.R. Tolkien. So that's a great start, full Christian cred and nerd cred right from the get go. It's an unusual piece of fiction that blends demonology, pastoral care, and systematic theology together in what I found to be a delightful, thoughtful, and even fun story. The premise is that Screwtape, an experienced and revered demon sends correspondences with his nephew Wormwood, a young and inexperienced demon, on how to best tempt and deceive his patient to ensure he ends up in Hell.

Screwtape's advice to young Wormwood was, to me at least, a fascinating medium to explore topics like temptation, the nature of time, Heaven and Hell, and the numerous pitfalls and traps that the human mind and soul can fall into. In reading the communications of our spiritual enemy Lewis is able to talk about a wide range of topics from a unique perspective. I don't think its a book you can just read once because it is full of excellent theological and spiritually practical gems that need to be brought to mind often if they are to be remembered.

Through the letters you get the general idea of the human's story that Wormwood has been assigned to try and keep away from God who Wormwood refers to as 'The Enemy'. I thought it especially interesting how Screwtape would berate Wormwood for celebrating at something that was actually a bad sign, something that seemed at first to indicate that Wormwood's patient was becoming disenchanted with spiritual matters when it was actually the opposite. Exchanging his initial exuberance over his faith for a quieter and more contemplative stance. On the surface it seems as though the human is cooling or becoming less interested but in reality it is a dreadful sign to the demons that the faith has penetrated the surface and is working on the soul. At ever step Screwtape advises Wormwood about what tactic to take next to try and lead his patient astray.

Something about this formula struck a chord in me. I've seen these 'tactics' used in real life and I've seen people fall for the exact same traps Screwtape suggests. I've encountered them myself as well.

One gem that come to mind is when Screwtape advises Wormwood to make the man aware of his virtues so that he might become proud. If he does not become proud, bring this to light so that he may be proud of not being proud or do it the other way, congratulate him on his humility so that he may downplay himself and not be as effective. The circle can go on and on and on but know when to back off or you may awaken his sense of humour in which case he will just laugh at you, roll over, and go to sleep.

The interplay between Wormwood and Screwtape is also a fun element in the story. They are demons after all and so when Screwtape continually signs his letters "from your affectionate uncle" you have to wonder what sort of 'affection' one demon can have for another. At one point I think Wormwood tried to blackmail his uncle and when he makes a particularly fatal blunder Screwtape very poetically describes his love for his young nephew in very cannibalistic terms.

All in all, I am very glad to have finally gone through these letters. It is a fine piece of theological fiction and quite unique as far as I can tell.

Prager University

I recently stumbled across a bastion of well made videos created by what appears to me as very well reasoned conservative thinkers. Prager University founded by Dennis Prager, a popular right wing radio host, columnist, speaker, intellectual, etc. They've apparently been around since 2011 and I had seen a few of their videos before but didn't clue in that they were united under one banner.

I have to say that it has been a pleasant find overall but I'm still figuring out what I think of some of them. On the one hand they serve as a counterbalance to the leftist narratives that the media and an overwhelming number of universities tell everyone to believe. On some issues they appear to as a voice of reason at a time when North American media and higher education have gone mad. They pose some critiques to some of the more outrageous things the left says. Feminism. Climate Change. Oil. Religion. Political Science. The Israeli / Palestinian conflict. PragerU hits all sorts of contentious issues, debunking the left's phony stats (1 in 5 women are raped on campus every year, 97% of scientists say we need to act now to stop climate change or we will all die, etc.) and provide an alternative narrative that corresponds more with reality.

For some of these videos I breathe a sigh of relief as what I have thought for a very long time comes back to me through the mouth of an expert in that field. This doesn't give them an automatic pass, but it is nice to hear someone speak some sense at least on the surface.

On the other hand I find their lack of references and the brevity of their videos suspicious. They would be very well served to put a list of 'recommended reading' at the bottom of every video page they produce, that way we can be sure that they aren't just making up crap that sounds good like they accuse the left of doing. A well made 5 minute video is great to get an idea across, and that is what these videos are designed to do, but aside from what sounds reasonable and a few names dropped there is no way for the viewer to dig deeper. I mean, if you're going to do the left vs right evidence weighing then the left has 90% of academics with papers stacked to the moon and Prager has a a bunch of of 5 minute videos. I'm not saying that the amount of papers or people in agreement is the basis of truth but if anyone wants further evidence there is none provided. I suppose their strategy is the get people started thinking, to ask questions, to take the initiative to look for themselves, and more likely to reassure the masses of uneducated right wingers that their opinions are valid in spite of the left's constant lecturing.

What I find a little disturbing is PragerU's nationalism. They keep bringing up Judeo-Christian values as their core but really it is also a certain kind of nationalism that doesn't sit well with me. If they could define how America was run then I don't think the rest of the world would enjoy it. A self serving superpower with the largest military the world has ever seen and an agenda to crack down on anyone they defined as 'evil' would be fine provided it was run by incorruptible human beings who could actually define between good and evil. Note: This is impossible. Yet, their simple argument caries some weight in my mind, "America has been the greatest force for global good in the history of the world. When we stay in a nation and enforce human rights that nation prospers and advances, (S. Korea, Germany) when we pull out and let them do their own thing it becomes a festering pothole of corruption. (N. Korea, Vietnam)"

In any case I would advise folks from both the left and the right to take a look at PragerU, they articulate conservative ideas clearly and even if you don't agree with what they are saying you often learn the most from the people you disagree with. I suspect the more conservative persons will thoroughly enjoy these videos.

Faith in God vs Conjured Spirituality

I want to argue that there is a difference between faith in God and what I will call 'conjured spirituality.' Christians have faith in God in that we assume Him to be real and who the Bible claims He is. This assumption manifests itself in how we live. We show kindness to others because of the kindness that God showed us in Jesus Christ. We give to others because we believe that God wants us to to provide for others as He provides for us. We pray because we believe that God hears our prayers, cares about us, and as sovereign of all things, is indeed able to do what we ask and immeasurably more. This sort of faith is easy when God answers our prayers and things seem to be moving along in a good direction, we see God at work in our lives and this confirms our faith. This sort of faith is difficult when our prayers seem to go unanswered and the working of God is imperceptible to the point where it seems as though our fates were more determined by natural causes and at the mercy of chance and entropy.

When things aren't going our way, if we are depressed or sick or poor, or on the brink of tragedy one of the popular 'spiritual notions' that gets presented to us in North America is that we must just have more faith. After all, faith as small as a mustard seed can move mountains (Matthew 17:20) and one must not doubt if he / she is to receive from The Lord (James 1:6). In the correct context and taken the right way, this is a good and healthy challenge and encouragement to spur one's self on to trust in The Lord. All too often though the result and the expectation results in an unhealthy 'conjured spirituality;' the idea that if I believe hard enough God will answer my prayers in the way I want Him to.

I've heard more than enough stories of broken people who, instead of trusting in God tried to force God's hand by conjuring up belief within themselves. "My relative will not die of this disease, I believe it and claim it in Jesus' name!" "My allergies are healed because I trust that God has healed them." "I know it is God's will for me to have this thing because I believe it is." Then, despite the most sincere and unceasing prayers, the relative does die of cancer, the allergy almost kills you, and the thing he wanted so badly causes him to miss out on what God actually wanted him to be a part of. 

The problem is that we are often told implicitly that God will do things the way we want him to if we just have enough faith and that if things aren't going the way we want them to then that is evidence of a lack of faith. Our emotions lean us toward this sort of superstition. The reality though is that while God is sovereign, and while he does care for us, and while having faith and acting upon faith are critical to the Christian life, He is God and we are not God. His ways are higher than our ways. His paths are not our paths. He is always working in our lives but we rarely perceive it, even and perhaps especially those of whom we think are most 'spiritual' or 'godly'. It is often the will of God that his people should endure hardships in this world. They often serve great spiritual purpose in making us less selfish and greedy, more sympathetic and generous. In going through a difficult time the Christian is molded by God to become the hands and feet of Christ so that we may have the heart and experience to participate in what God is doing in the world around us. One of the primary objectives God is working in us is that we think of others before ourselves. Faith in God acknowledges the possibility that this might be God's will but is also bold enough to wrestle with God on the point yet not so bold as to imagine and bow down to another god of our own making.

Faith is something given to us, each one has a measure of faith provided by God that we can conduct our lives by. Faith is not something we conjure up, as though pursing our lips and squeezing our fists and thinking as hard as we can will change the course of the universe in our favor. Taking God at his word, bringing our prayers and petitions, concerns and contemplations to him though, that is faith that will change us and the world around us.

So where exactly is the line between faith and conjured spirituality and between discerning spiritual realities and doubt? I don't know and I suspect it is different for each person as each person is wired differently. When presented with a serious problem we should pray about it. Bring the request to the Lord and trust that God is able to fix it and that He does indeed hear and cares about you. Do not fall into trap of trying to twist God's arm by claiming a specific result in Jesus name, as though "I claim it in Jesus' name," where a magic phrase. But here is where the line gets blurry, if God does reveal to the believer(s) that he does intend to bring about the desired result, then claiming that result in Jesus' name becomes a wholly appropriate act of faith. I am thinking specifically of my time in Caronport when my church was praying for an older lady not present and one of the elders had a vision of the cancer being taken out of her. After prayer and searching the vision team (the church leaders) also felt that this was a sign from the Lord and not just the hopeful imagining of one person. Later, I do not remember how much later, the doctors' scans revealed that the cancer had vanished.

How does one tell if a vision or strong feeling similar to this is from the Lord or just hopeful wishes? Here are my thoughts on the matter. Continued prayer on the topic over time is important, we must continually return to the Lord in prayer on what concerns us. Some have the gift of discernment and they often know where others do not. Praying with other believers often can makes things more clear.

Always assuming the best and most ideal result in prayer is unrealistic and not in keeping with how God has worked in history (it wasn't ideal that Jesus, the prophets, the apostles, and countless faithful throughout all times and places suffered and died). Assuming that God will never answer your prayer is lack of faith (pray for more faith if this is you).

Ultimately we know that God will reconcile all things to himself in Christ Jesus and that not only we but all creation looks forward to the new creation, the new heavens and new earth where all who have put their faith in God with resurrected bodies made perfect will have life everlasting to reconnect with each other and our God. Until that time we live fallen yet redeemed in the present and are called into God's Kingdom, this new creation under cover that we can partake in the already but not yet. 

Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 7 - Reflections

In this chapter Augustine contemplates the sin of man and the mercy of God. All who cry "Hear me oh God! Woe to the sins of men!" receive mercy from on high. This is still a worshipful confession and, I think, still just an introductory dialogue for what is to come. I have sometimes done the same when praying to God, telling back to Him how great He is, acknowledging my own frailty and smallness in light of God's holiness and perfection but telling back to God his own mercy for all who repent as I sought to at that moment. I'm actually shocked that my inner dialogue has mirrored Augustine's some 1500 years before me. In such prayers I often take a long time recounting many things such as God's mighty deeds through history, important moments in my life where he intervened, moments of faith, moments of trial, God's faithfulness even in things that I have not seen the end of yet and can not imagine how he will bring about a good result but that even if it is not good as I define good that God is still good as his ways are higher than my ways... etc. all the way to the Second Coming of Christ and the fulfillment of all things. I wonder if Augustine will follow a similar path.

Going back to chapter 7 Augustine contemplates human sinfulness before the time that he can remember, as an infant, and asks what existence he had (if he did exist) before conception. I see his mark on the doctrine of sin. He explains that surely we are sinful at birth as anyone can clearly see infants are jealous and if they were physically stronger they would do great harm to any who disobeyed them and deprive a sibling of their mother's life giving milk even though the supply is sufficient to feed both. We excuse this because an infant does not understand what it is doing and is unable to do more than wail but will soon grow out of their jealousy. Even so, Augustine argues, it is sinfulness that needs to be covered by God's mercy and he asks God what he can possibly do about these sins he committed in infancy that he can not remember.

Why is Augustine taking his sins in infancy so seriously? I think part of the reason is that he is a systematic theologian, and every piece has to fit somewhere in his theological system. Why is seems so genuinely concerned with this piece at this moment, I do not know. It is a worshipful confession though, a focusing and response of heart and mind upon and to the glory of God and His revelation to him.

Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 6 - Reflections

Augustine continues speaking but his contemplation of mysteries stops for now. In light of who God is and who he is Augustine pleads upon God's mercy that he may speak with Him and he recounts how God's mercy has sustained him from birth until the present. It is upon God's mercy that we may address Him and it is upon God's mercy that we live.

This chapter sounds Calvinist but John Calvin wouldn't be around for another thousand years and he I have to wonder if he picked up this particular theme from Augustine. I don't know yet, my knowledge of Calvin, Augustine, and so much of the Patristic and Medieval theologians is very bad indeed.

One thing stood out to me as strange in this chapter. Augustine claims that it was God's mercy alone that sustained him and used the example of how his mother and nurses fed him breast milk but that it was not them feeding him but God feeding him by them. It seems that Augustine has such a high and all encompassing view of God's mercy that a mother's love for her infant becomes transparent. God's mercy shines through us all as if we were windows and it is not we who love but God who loves through us. I don't know of any Christians who hold to this viewpoint today. I have difficulty with it because it doesn't fit with us being image bearers of God, capable of loving. I suppose this isn't what Augustine is saying though, "that we do not love," but rather that when we do love it is God who is loving through us. It is a striking image, like the sun shining through a stained glass window. Even so I find it unsettling to, and I'm not sure what the right word is here, to assimilate or obliterate or nullify human agency in loving.

But even if we do not think in these terms and even though I find the theological ramifications unsettling, I am but a learner and a reflector. May the Lord indeed be merciful and shine through me his love. Whether this is an image, a figure of speech, or a reality, whether I have agency or not I will acknowledge the Lord as necessary and myself as needing to be a willing host for the Holy Spirit in order that I love rightly and fully.

Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 5 - Reflections

Augustine's questioning has taken a turn from the abstract other to the personal. Who is it that can open up his heart that God come come into him? Only God, by his mercy. I am interested by the idea he brings up that God demands that he love Him and threatens great disaster if he does not love him. We would try to use different language today, I mean, "that God demands that we love Him," makes Him sound cruel and petty and unlovable. Yet even if this be accurate God is right and just and wholly lovely in his demand for our love for He has gone to the greatest possible length to love us first. We ought, by our very nature as creatures, love him as our Creator. He is much more than this though, He is also our redeemer paying with his own blood the ransom of our souls. He has made promises and has proven himself faithful so that any who call upon his name will be saved and more than just being spiritually saved, He promises provision and actively leads us, as the psalm says, "to lay down in green pastures and beside still waters." He is the heart mender, the great physician, the just judge, and the one who has promised that he will redeem all things and make them right, raising up the dead, those who have loved him to everlasting life, those who have hated him to everlasting death, and the creation or re-creation of a new heaven and a new earth where the righteous will live forever. Even with such a thin description as I have written here, ought we not to love Him?

I have to wonder at how Augustine speaks of unbelief.

Edit: Another perspective came into my mind that I must write here. C.S. Lewis noted that those who love God and seek to do his will and become more like Christ find, to their joy and amazement that doing so makes them more themselves. One does not lose one's self by joining with God, God makes you more yourself, you do not lose your identity, your identity becomes sharper, clearer, and stronger. Another reason to love God.