3 November 2008

Grr! What a Title

I think I'll this journal entry the crazy preponderance that pervades the media. But what do I mean here by crazy? Recently, I saw an episode of Grey's Anatomy where the character, Izzy Stevens, retorts the new attending of trauma (I can't recall his name). She raises her complaint to her roommate, Dr. Derek Shepherd, saying that "what happened to 'do no bodily harm'?" He answers her in a genial and somewhat honest way, "I believe that rule is about humans." No prejudice in his voice—just honest conjecture. This is clearly the lamentable state of the media today where they need to use characters of a highly-rated TV series to superimpose an opinion to the general public. I recently had to boycott this TV series because of its morale and debased ideologies. I left the show last season. In a punning way, it got gay.

This, of course, is not the only instance of moral enforcement. There is the constant "romance" of Calley Torres and Dr. Hann, both females. What is with this indoctrination? Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. Considering that the elections are today, it's taking a toll on me, namely because the Constitutional proposition, Prop. 8. What a mess! I hope and pray it passes.

    God, please preside over these elections. Do your will in this state. You are the King of the universe and every place. There is no DNA code that you don't know, no flee that has hid under a rock to escape your eye, or sin done in secrete that you have not judged. Have mercy on us who remain in this state, this decadent state of California. I pray that you allow the people who are for your ordained plan for families to pass the Constitutional amendment of marriage, Proposition 8. Lord, I've read in your Holy Law (Judges 2:6-10) what could happen to such a decadent state of immoral referendums. This is such a state. Don't leave us in the immoral state we are in. You have covenant keepers here, and children! Lord, you yourself said that we ought not to forbid the children to come to you. California seeks to do that in the denial of this proposition. Please, God of the universe, pass this proposition.

This is prior to the outcome of the elections. Fortunately, Proposition 8 passed! Looks like heard the cries of his people. He hasn't left us—yet.

 

Figuring It Out

I figured it out! I know what I want to teach. All this time I tried figuring out what I wanted to do. I knew I want to teach, but it was the object that confused me. Maybe I struggled with it because I didn't know what exactly I was looking for. Was I too intrigued with the mystery of being surprised? I honestly believe it was the idea of letting the muse teach me something. It came to me today. I was always mesmerized by the idea of High School. I didn't really realize it before. It wasn't until I began reading novels that encapsulated the high school scene that I opened my eyes. I'm just stuck on if I want to join the state or the private sector. I don't know. But I know what I want to teach and who too.

    I've been reading New York Times' #1 Best Sellers' List Twilight, by Stephenie Meyer. Most of the reviews I've read were a bit pessimistic about the style and characterization of the characters. As far as dialogue is concerned, however, there is no doubt as to her style: she is definitely gifted. I too have a problem with her characters. They don't match. They don't seem as a real as I want them to be. I ultimately want to teach high school students for the reason that eluded Meyer, mainly that she didn't understand the students. She wasn't able to dig into the minds of the students. In a sense, I'm going to use them, my students, to write a novel. That is my ultimate concern, to write.

    Another famous writer that I admire most of all is Fyodor Dostoevsky. He is known as the psychiatrist. Nietzsche himself said that Dostoevsky was the only psychologist he would ever listen to. The best way to write the best novel is to actually live in it. How can we expect the muse to whisper secretes if we are not in the same room? Another great author is Laura Kasischke. She wrote an electrifying novel which was made into a movie entitled The Life before Her Eyes. The author does an excellent job at showing the dilemma and anguish of the character. She also utilizes foreshadowing as a valid form at fluidly moving along the story.

New-school Politics

It isn't a new thing to conjecture what the new-school is all about. Everyday I read the paper I find some ominous idea replete in this new school. There is either a reinvention of what we call a semblance of hope or some contrived plan to maintain the status quo. I know that I said I was going to maintain this group discussion for religious ideas, specifically a reformed ideal, but let's get real--Reformed ideas stem into the political realm. Though I don't agree with Roussau completely (that man is the noble savage), he is right that man is a political animal. Okay, maybe not the animal part, but he is right that we are politically inclined to think in like manner. I've recently joined the Libertarian Party for reason only I can explain for myself; however I am inclined to say that we (LPs) are motivated by liberty and freedom. Notwithstanding my reasons, there is a blog in which the writer, Bob Barr, the nominee for President in the Libertarian Party, expresses his irritation with the new bailouts of Wall Street, explicating them as egregious and presumptious. Here is the article. If you are as irritated as I am, please respond.

Trusting in Christian Faith

The lights are bright, the moon is complacent, and people still are retarded. The more I am well acquainted with the world; the ambivalence of the human race still beguiles my sense of intellectual perception. What, mind you, could elude such an incongruous attitude that the world bequeathed? Relationships! They elude me from the very character of their nature. Sometimes the romance (the Romantic ideal of man) belies our very nature of proneness to trust. Why do people trust so easily? Are we too inoculated by the very disingenuous nature of the opposite sex?

My idea is that people tend to give too much credit to honesty. I don't mind the trust factor within the human psych. In fact, we trust more superfluously than we should. Don't get me wrong, we should trust. It is our Christian duty to trust. Paul, the Apostle, himself used the Greek word for faith and faithfulness (pisteou) to illustrate trustfulness. It is a mental faculty that enables the trust-factor. He also uses a "diatribe" of sorts when he illustrates the Christian virtues (not to be confused with the Cardinal virtues): faith, truth, and love. These three are brothers with a bond closer than the earth's dependence to the sun. The earth cannot exist apart from its ineluctable relationship to the cosmological order. Relationships in trust are osmotic in nature.

Musing on the Second Commandment

This was originally posted by Professor John Murray of Westminster Seminary

---

Pictures of Christ by Professor John Murray

NOTE: This article first appeared in the Reformed Herald, vol. XVI, no. 9, February 1961.
The question of the propriety of pictorial representations of the Savior is one that merits examination. It must be granted that the worship of Christ is central in our holy faith, and the thought of the Saviour must in every instance be accompanied with that reverence which belongs to his worship. We cannot think of him without the apprehension of the majesty that is his. If we do not entertain the sense of his majesty, then we are guilty of impiety and we dishonor him.

It will also be granted that the only purpose that could properly be served by a pictorial representation is that it would convey to us some thought or lesson representing him, consonant with truth and promotive of worship. Hence the question is inescapable: is a pictorial representation a legitimate way of conveying truth regarding him and of contributing to the worship which this truth should evoke?

We are all aware of the influence exerted on the mind and heart by pictures. Pictures are powerful media of communication. How suggestive they are for good or for evil and all the more so when accompanied by the comment of the spoken or written word! It is futile, therefore, to deny the influence exerted upon mind and heart by a picture of Christ. And if such is legitimate, the influence exerted should be one constraining to worship and adoration. To claim any lower aim as that served by a picture of the Savior would be contradiction of the place which he must occupy in thought, affection, and honor.

The plea for the propriety of pictures of Christ is based on the fact that he was truly man, that he had a human body, that he was visible in his human nature to the physical senses, and that a picture assists us to take in the stupendous reality of his incarnation, in a word, that he was made in the likeness of men and was found in fashion as a man.

Our Lord had a true body. He could have been photographed. A portrait could have been made of him and, if a good portrait, it would have reproduced his likeness.

Without doubt the disciples in the days of his flesh had a vivid mental image of Jesus' appearance and they could not but have retained that recollection to the end of their days. They could never have entertained the thought of him as he had sojourned with them without something of that mental image and they could not have entertained it without adoration and worship. The very features which they remembered would have been part and parcel of their conception of him and reminiscent of what he had been to them in his humiliation and in the glory of his resurrection appearance. Much more might be said regarding the significance for the disciples of Jesus' physical features.

Jesus is also glorified in the body and that body is visible. It will also become visible to us at his glorious appearing – "he will be seen the second time without sin by those who look for him unto salvation" (Hebrews 9:28).

What then are we to say of pictures of Christ? First of all, it must be said that we have no data whatsoever on the basis of which to make a pictorial representation; we have no descriptions of his physical features which would enable even the most accomplished artist to make an approximate portrait. In view of the profound influence exerted by a picture, especially on the minds of young people, we should perceive the peril involved in a portrayal for which there is no warrant, a portrayal which is the creation of pure imagination. It may help to point up the folly to ask: what would be the reaction of a disciple, who had actually seen the Lord in the days of his flesh, to a portrait which would be the work of imagination on the part of one who had never seen the Savior? We can readily detect what his recoil would be. No impression we have of Jesus should be created without the proper revelatory data, and every impression, every thought, should evoke worship. Hence, since we possess no revelatory data for a picture or portrait in the proper sense of the term, we are precluded from making one or using any that have been made.

Secondly, pictures of Christ are in principle a violation of the second commandment. A picture of Christ, if it serves any useful purpose, must evoke some thought or feeling respecting him and, in view of what he is, this thought or feeling will be worshipful. We cannot avoid making the picture a medium of worship. But since the materials for this medium of worship are not derived from the only revelation we possess respecting Jesus, namely, Scripture, the worship is constrained by a creation of the human mind that has no revelatory warrant. This is will-worship. For the principle of the second commandment is that we are to worship God only in ways prescribed and authorized by him. It is a grievous sin to have worship constrained by a human figment, and that is what a picture of the Savior involves.

Thirdly, the second commandment forbids bowing down to an image or likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. A picture of the Saviour purports to be a representation or likeness of him who is now in heaven or, at least, of him when he sojourned upon the earth. It is plainly forbidden, therefore, to bow down in worship before such a representation or likeness. This exposes the iniquity involved in the practice of exhibiting pictorial representations of the Saviour in places of worship. When we worship before a picture of our Lord, whether it be in the form of a mural, or on canvas, or in stained glass, we are doing what the second commandment expressly forbids. This is rendered all the more apparent when we bear in mind that the only reason why a picture of him should be exhibited in a place is the supposition that it contributes to the worship of him who is our Lord. The practice only demonstrates how insensitive we readily become to the commandments of God and to the inroads of idolatry. May the Churches of Christ be awake to the deceptive expedients by which the archenemy ever seeks to corrupt the worship of the Savior.

In summary, what is at stake in this question is the unique place which Jesus Christ as the God-man occupies in our faith and worship and the unique place which the Scripture occupies as the only revelation, the only medium of communication, respecting him whom we worship as Lord and Saviour. The incarnate Word and the written Word are correlative. We dare not use other media of impression or of sentiment but those of his institution and prescription. Every thought and impression of him should evoke worship. We worship him with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God. To use a likeness of Christ as an aid to worship is forbidden by the second commandment as much in this case as in that of the Father and Spirit.

Intellectual Promiscuity—Letter to the Reserved Christian

I haven't been on here for a while and I apologize for that. However, there is a reason why I came back—other than the reason that I need to blog. There is a book that I recently purchased by Christian philosopher James P. Moreland entitled "Love Your God with all Your Mind." In it he presents a case first by showing that the Christian-Evangelical community is flanked with "empty-headedness" among the leadership as well as the church at large. This alone is enough to perturb the common Christian off his or her seat to action. However, he doesn't stop there. He goes to show that because of the church's lazed attitude throughout the centuries (more specifically the 18^th century), there was a drastic shift in the learning that travailed the academy. Moreland writes,

As Friedrich Nietzsche said, once God died in Western culture—that is, once the concept of God no longer informed the major idea-generating centers of society turned secular—there would be turmoil and horrible secular wars unchecked by traditional morality because the state would come to be a surrogate god for many.

Although many who read phrases like these don't see the inherent (philosophic) ideas behind this, it evident that most of the metaphysical and epistemic tragedies bereaved most of the academic world for a cheaper version of reality—a material reality. One of my favorite heroes of the 20^th century put it like this: "False ideas are the greatest obstacles for the reception of the gospel." It is the case that the academy is the center for ethical notions of practical living—and it is taught in the public square of the academic elites. There is a current rush over the public school system (and by this, I mean the state is launching an attack against parents who desire to teach their own children). Certain "demagogues" currently have the semblance of being devils. They disturb the peace of the American consensus. But are these people on to something? Do they have some knowledge forehand not seen by the public?

Dr. G.L. Bahnsen, when his Always Ready was first published in 1996 stated in chapter 1 that some people—the consensus—would have the general public believe that there isn't a real need for Christian schools (or private schools for that matter) since they basically teach the same things—with the exception of Bible readings and prayer. Is that true? Do we not have prior commitments when we look at, say, logic, math, geometry, etc.?

Moreland's voice is also heard in the vibrations of Lindsey, Gerstner and Sproul in Classical Apologetics when they wrote that the death of the church will not come from blunt force from the saeculum. It will come from the inexorable blow of irrelevance. The church will simply disappear from the world. Where Christianity was the voice of the sciences, it will merely be the voice of emotional bystanders whose dub worthy name will be "lunatic." So what does the church do when it is amassed with these epithets and insults? How will she defend herself when she has left the very arsenal by which emboldened the rise of the 18^th century Visigoths of science and philosophy?

SOLI DEO GLORIA,

Julio Martinez, Jr.

 

Women & the Office of Deacon in the PCA: The 36th General Assembly’s Decision

 

Female Deaconesses

• As we have seen in previously, the PCA Book of Church Order makes it quite clear that there are only two ordained offices in the PCA: Elder & Deacon (BCO 7-2).
  
• With regards to deacons we are told that they are to be ordained and that they are to be ordained and they are to be spiritual men (BCO 9-4).
  
• In fact, both offices are open to men only (BCO 7-2).
  
• This year's GA received an overture (#9) from Philadelphia Presbytery requesting that the GA "Erect a study committee on the deaconesses."
  
• The GA committee to study this overture was comprised of approximately 70 members.
  
• The net result was a minority and majority report.
  
• The minority report requested a "balanced" study committee to report back at the 37^th GA in Orlando.
  
• The minority folks (Bryan Chapell of Covenant Seminary was their spokesman) listed 3 specific areas for the committee.
  
• First, "Scriptural teaching bearing on the role of women in diaconal ministry."
  
• Second, "Is the Book of Church Order more, or less, restrictive than the Scriptural teaching bearing on the role of women in diaconal ministries? If so, what potential changes to the BCO (in keeping with any findings proceeding from the study of Scripture) might be considered for future Presbytery overtures?"
  
• Third, "Offer pastoral advice on what might be an appropriate range of practices related to women serving in diaconal ministry and give guidance regarding our current differences in practice among PCA churches."
  
• In their "Grounds," the minority stated: "Given the existence of a variety of practices on this issue, many have found the language of BCO 7-2 and BCO chapter 9 to be insufficient to answer questions such as those from Overture 9 from the Philadelphia Presbytery."
  
• What are some of those questions? Let's take a look at them.
  

Questions Considered

• First, may churches choose not to ordain any male deacons?
  
• Second, may churches choose to commission but not ordain male deacons?
  
• Third, may women be commissioned as deaconesses without ordaining them as deacons?
  
• Fourth, may the same constitutional questions, or similar questions, used to ordain be used to commission deacons or deaconesses who are not ordained?
  
• Fifth, may churches elect ordained men and commissioned women to serve together in the diaconate? (Note: 9-7 states: "It is often expedient that the session of a church should elect and appoint godly men and women of the congregation to assist the deacons in caring for the sick, the widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may be in distress or need.")
  
• Finally, may churches use the title deaconesses for an elected position off ministry in the church or selected to serve according to BCO 9-7?
  
• The minority adds, "There would be value in offering our congregations an historical and a comprehensive, exegetical, and hermeneutical analysis of Scripture's teaching concerning the role of women in the diaconal ministries."
  
• Thankfully, the minority report failed.
  

A Historical Look

• Let's take a historical look for a moment.
  
• Actually, the PCA examined the issue of deaconesses when they were initially formed. You see the denomination they came out of, the PCUS, decided to begin ordaining women to church offices in 1964 and amended their own Book of Church Order to reflect that. Nine years later, when the PCA was formed, much of their book of church order was taken verbatim from the PCUS book of church order, so at that point the PCA could have simply adopted the existing practice of the PCUS and continued to elect and ordain women deacons. This practice, however, was rejected.
  
• In 1973 the PCA determined that sessions could select and appoint godly women of the congregation to assist the deacons in their work, and in this a clear avenue was created for women who wish to formally serve the church to minister to the needs of others. Therefore it is incorrect to say the PCA is preventing women from serving the church, even in regards to diaconal care. Historically though, the controversy is not over having opportunities to serve, it is over whether women may hold ordained offices in the church.
  
• Additionally, in 1982 when the PCA joined and received the RPCES they merged with a denomination that already had an office of "non-ordained" deaconesses, and yet the understanding was that the RPCES would conform to the PCA BCO on this point, and not vice versa.
  
• With regard to Overture 9, the majority report answered, "Presbyteries are reminded that appropriate ways to bring these issues before the Assembly are through Presbytery overtures to amend the BCO, or by way of reference (BCO 41)."
  
• The majority's "Grounds" read as follows: "BCO 7-2, chapter 9, and especially 9-7, provided a sufficient answer to the issues contemplated in Overture 9; the Presbyteries should work through the implications in their own local contexts. This is always subject to the actions noted in the text of the response."
  
• The majority report passed.
  

Where Do We Move From Here?

• So what now? Let me briefly outline a course of action.
  
• First, at our stated meeting of South Coast Presbytery in September, Grace and whoever will join us will overture Presbytery to bring its practices into line with what is clearly stated in our PCA Constitution as given to us in the BCO.
  
• Please pray for us as we put this document together and ask other neighboring churches to join us and sign it.
  
• Also pray that the Presbytery meeting would go well because this is going to be an emotional discussion. Why?
  
• Simply because we intended to inform those who refuse to come into line that we are going to report them to the Standing Judicial Committee of the PCA, which will, if necessary, bring punitive measures to bear.