-
The Holy Spirit and Miracles, Then and Now
This is the ninth in a sporadic series on the Catechetical Lectures of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. The last posting was Is God’s Omnipotence Dependent Upon the Existence of His Creation?
One of the long-running debates in Christianity is that of cessationism. Did the “sign gifts” described in 1 Corinthians 12 die out with the Apostles? What does that say about God’s plan for people at any given time after Jesus Christ’s time on earth? Did all kinds of supernatural phenomena cease with the Apostles?
Until modern Pentecost shook things up, since the days of the Montanists most Christians have worked under the assumption that speaking in tongues—and the baptism in the Holy Spirit that it goes with—went out with the original Apostles. But other supernatural phenomena, especially bodily healing, are another business altogether. It wasn’t until the Reformation that a significant body of Christians rejected the miraculous.
It is the general property of absolute cessationists to state that a) all miracles and supernatural phenomena ended with the original Apostles and b) that recourse to Patristic writings is illegitimate because they are outside the New Testament. Without going into the hermeneutics of cessationism in the New Testament, it’s fair to say that the last thing that those who believe the active power of the Holy Spirit through miracles and other manifestations ended with the original Apostles want to consider is Patristic evidence.
We can see this abundantly in the two lectures that Cyril gave his catechumens on the Holy Spirit, the first taken from the Old Testament and the second from the New. Probably the best way to illustrate this is to cite some of the more interesting passages on the subject:
Thus also the Holy Ghost, being one, and of one nature, and indivisible, divides to each His grace, according as He will (1 Corinthians 12:11): and as the dry tree, after partaking of water, puts forth shoots, so also the soul in sin, when it has been through repentance made worthy of the Holy Ghost, brings forth clusters of righteousness. And though He is One in nature, yet many are the virtues which by the will of God and in the Name of Christ He works. For He employs the tongue of one man for wisdom; the soul of another He enlightens by Prophecy; to another He gives power to drive away devils; to another He gives to interpret the divine Scriptures. He strengthens one man’s self-command; He teaches another the way to give alms; another He teaches to fast and discipline himself; another He teaches to despise the things of the body; another He trains for martyrdom: diverse in different men, yet not diverse from Himself, as it is written, But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith, in the same Spirit; and to another gifts of healing, in the same Spirit; and to another workings of miracles; and to another prophecy; and to another discernings of spirits; and to another various kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues: but all these works that one and the same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will. (1 Corinthians 12:7-11) (XVI, 12)
And if ever, while you have been sitting here, a thought concerning chastity or virginity has come into your mind, it has been His teaching. Has not often a maiden, already at the bridal threshold , fled away, He teaching her the doctrine of virginity? Has not often a man distinguished at court , scorned wealth and rank, under the teaching of the Holy Ghost? Has not often a young man, at the sight of beauty, closed his eyes, and fled from the sight, and escaped the defilement? Askest thou whence this has come to pass? The Holy Ghost taught the soul of the young man. Many ways of covetousness are there in the world; yet Christians refuse possessions: wherefore? Because of the teaching of the Holy Ghost. Worthy of honour is in truth that Spirit, holy and good; and fittingly are we baptised into Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. A man, still clothed with a body, wrestles with many fiercest demons; and often the demon, whom many men could not master with iron bands, has been mastered by the man himself with words of prayer, through the power which is in him of the Holy Ghost; and the mere breathing of the Exorcist becomes as fire to that unseen foe. A mighty ally and protector, therefore, have we from God; a great Teacher of the Church, a mighty Champion on our behalf. Let us not be afraid of the demons, nor of the devil; for mightier is He who fights for us. Only let us open to Him our doors; for He goes about seeking such as are worthy and searching on whom He may confer His gifts. (XVI, 19)
Great indeed, and all-powerful in gifts, and wonderful, is the Holy Ghost. Consider, how many of you are now sitting here, how many souls of us are present. He is working suitably for each, and being present in the midst, beholds the temper of each, beholds also his reasoning and his conscience, and what we say, and think, and believe. Great indeed is what I have now said, and yet is it small. For consider, I pray, with mind enlightened by Him, how many Christians there are in all this diocese, and how many in the whole province of Palestine, and carry forward your mind from this province, to the whole Roman Empire; and after this, consider the whole world; races of Persians, and nations of Indians, Garbs and Sarmatians, Gauls and Spaniards, and Moors, Libyans and Ethiopians, and the rest for whom we have no names; for of many of the nations not even the names have reached us. Consider, I pray, of each nation, Bishops, Presbyters, Deacons, Solitaries, Virgins, and laity besides; and then behold their great Protector, and the Dispenser of their gifts;— how throughout the world He gives to one chastity, to another perpetual virginity, to another almsgiving, to another voluntary poverty, to another power of repelling hostile spirits. And as the light, with one touch of its radiance sheds brightness on all things, so also the Holy Ghost enlightens those who have eyes; for if any from blindness is not vouchsafed His grace, let him not blame the Spirit, but his own unbelief. (XVI, 22)
And lest men should be ignorant of the greatness of the mighty gift coming down to them, there sounded as it were a heavenly trumpet, For suddenly there came from heaven a sound as of the rushing of a mighty wind (Acts 2:2), signifying the presence of Him who was to grant power unto men to seize with violence the kingdom of God; that both their eyes might see the fiery tongues, and their ears hear the sound. And it filled all the house where they were sitting; for the house became the vessel of the spiritual water; as the disciples sat within, the whole house was filled. Thus they were entirely baptised according to the promise, and invested soul and body with a divine garment of salvation. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost. They partook of fire, not of burning but of saving fire; of fire which consumes the thorns of sins, but gives lustre to the soul. This is now coming upon you also, and that to strip away and consume your sins which are like thorns, and to brighten yet more that precious possession of your souls, and to give you grace; for He gave it then to the Apostles. And He sat upon them in the form of fiery tongues, that they might crown themselves with new and spiritual diadems by fiery tongues upon their heads. A fiery sword barred of old the gates of Paradise; a fiery tongue which brought salvation restored the gift. (XVII, 15)
If you believe, you shall not only receive remission of sins, but also do things which pass man’s power. And may thou be worthy of the gift of prophecy also! For you shall receive grace according to the measure of your capacity and not of my words; for I may possibly speak of but small things, yet you may receive greater; since faith is a large affair. All your life long will your guardian the Comforter abide with you; He will care for you, as for his own soldier; for your goings out, and your comings in, and your plotting foes. And He will give you gifts of grace of every kind, if you grieve Him not by sin; for it is written, And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby you were sealed unto the day of redemption. (Ephesians 4:30) What then, beloved, is it to preserve grace? Be ready to receive grace, and when you have received it, cast it not away. (XVII, 36)
In particular Lecture XVII is a tour de force of the working of the Holy Spirit in the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles.
There’s no doubt that Cyril does not envision the kind of sequence of the action of the Holy Spirit that, say, classical Pentecostals do. But there’s no doubt either that Cyril knows and teaches about a Holy Spirit whose power and manifestation is effective and continuous in his day. Should you expect any different from a bishop who was within walking distance of the Upper Room?
-
Gene Robinson Should Be an Atheist
That is, if he takes his own words seriously:
No, Tyler was a victim — not of an inner disturbance of depression or mental illness–but of an external and in part religiously inspired disdain and hatred of gay people.
Despite the progress we’re making on achieving equality under the law and acceptance in society for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, why this rash of bullying, paired with self-loathing, ending in suicide? With humility and heartfelt repentance I assert that religion — and its general rejection of homosexuality — plays a crucial role in this crisis.
If I thought that and I were gay, I would be an atheist, or perhaps a pagan.
But it’s hard to know whether Gene is serious or not about this:
With the exception of Brown in Texas these suicides are not happening in Bible Belt regions of the country, where we might predict a greater-than-usual regard for religious thought. Instead, they are occurring in states perceived to be more liberal on LGBT issues: California, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.
If religiously inspired hatred was the predominant driving force behind this, one would expect these incidents to be concentrated in the “Bible Belt regions of the country.” But, by his own admission, they are not.
What I think we’re seeing here is someone who, as a gay cleric, sees everything either through an LGBT lens, a religious lens, or both. An occupational hazard of clerics is to see every problem as a religious one, which is one reason why I don’t work for the church any more. As far as the LGBT lens is concerned, the thing this community doesn’t want to admit (or anyone else to realise) is that, in these United States, you don’t have to be gay or lesbian to be persecuted. You just have to be different. If you can redefine different–and that’s a major objective for the leadership of the LGBT community–you can shift the persecution elsewhere.
HT to The Lead.
-
It's Important to be Careful When You're Eating Out in Russia
Some things have not changed from Soviet times:
Russian officials have been left red-faced after a salad containing a live earthworm was served at a dinner in honour of German President Christian Wulff, media reported Thursday.
The incident came to light after a Russian regional governor, evidently finding the matter hilarious, wrote a Twitter entry about the worm and linked to a photo. The governor, Dmitri Zelenin, has been branded an “imbecile” and could now lose his job, The Moscow Times reported.
Zelenin, 47, former head of the giant mining company Norilsk Nickel, has since removed the blog post and photo. In the original post, Zelenin quipped of the worm: “It was a very special way to show the salad was fresh.”
The invertebrate salad was served at a dinner at the Kremlin on Tuesday night in honour of Wulff, who is on a state visit to Russia. He has met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
-
Book Review: Jean-Baptiste Duroselle's France and the Nazi Threat: The Collapse of French Diplomacy 1932-1939
One of the urgent questions that keeps coming up in the war with Islamic careerists is this: what is the similarity of the situation that lead up to the start of World War II? Are our leaders appeasers in the tradition of Neville Chamberlain, letting budding Hitlers like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have victory after victory until they start a war their opponents are unprepared to fight? To understand the answer to this question, it’s necessary to understand the events that lead to the first part of the analogy.
Most Anglophones do think of Chamberlain and the British, but what about the French? They were the other “key player” in the whole drama, and had more “skin in the game” as they had a land border (and three neutral countries unable to withstand a German onslaught) between them and Germany. Why didn’t they act more forcefully? The answer to that question is the subject of France and the Nazi Threat: The Collapse of French Diplomacy 1932-1939
by Jean-Baptiste Duroselle, the most eminent expert on the subject France has produced.
Most American conservatives tend to dismiss the French, especially in the wake of their lack of support for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. But the French, especially in the early part of the period in question, did many things that would warm the hearts of any American neo-con. For example, they held out for the gold standard much longer than their American and British counterparts. In an age when disarmament talks were much the rage in diplomatic circles and at the League of Nations, the French were advocates of the “trust but verify” philosophy which Ronald Reagan would advocate in the 1980’s. Especially when Louis Barthou–in some ways the real “hero” of this story if there is one–was Foreign Minister, France pursued a system of alliances with eastern European countries and with the USSR as well to counteract the growing threat of Hitler’s Germany. But Barthou died in the assassination of Yugoslavian King Alexander I in Marseille, and his successors lacked his vigour, to say the least.
But fail France ultimately did, and Duroselle attributes this to several factors.
The first was the nature of France’s political system. Having drug themselves through the Reign of Terror, two Napoleons and the other excitement of the nineteenth century, the French were wary of real centralisation of power. The Third Republic, an heir of the French revolutionary tradition, was set up in theory with Cartesian logic and centralisation. The reality was that its multi-party system and weak presidency guaranteed that no one group would dominate, which meant instability. During the period in question (from the death of Aristide Briand to the outbreak of the war in Poland) France had no fewer than nine Foreign Ministers, some of them serving more than one time in office. As a result France was inherently slow to react to focused threats such as Nazi Germany. One thing that Duroselle observes more than once is that this instability reflected the desires of the French people even if it didn’t serve their interests.
The second was the legacy of the “Great War,” World War I. France had been “bled dry” by that conflict. Its people were totally unenthusiastic for another war; much of the slowness of their response was a form of denial. Its military, having been burned with an obsessively attack-oriented strategy in World War I, overcompensated by adopting an obsessively defensive strategy, symbolised by the Maginot Line. This strategy ignored the rise of mechanisation, both on the ground (tanks, motorised infantry) and especially in the air which would change the nature of war. France was especially tardy in rising to the latter issue, not beginning to seriously upgrade its air force until 1938 (the Germans and even the British had started in the middle of the decade.)
And that leads to the third problem: the British were no help at all for most of this period. It was no secret that France could not stop the Germans militarily without the British. But the UK had a different view of the situation. Protected (or at least they thought they were) by the Royal Navy, the British were not as sensitive to the needs for strong land defence as their French counterparts. In any case most of those in London–including Neville Chamberlain and especially Sir John Simon–were appeasers from the start to Munich, even insisting in the early period that the French disarm, as was the fashion of the time. The only British politician to address the issue of Germany satisfactorily in the period was Anthony Eden (Churchill, who would have proceeded entirely differently, was in the political wilderness during the 1930’s,) and he didn’t last long. The performance of the British (and to a lesser extent the Americans) doubtless was in de Gaulle’s mind when he constructed France’s offish security arrangements in the 1960’s.
Through one government after another, the French attempted to put together a plan to deal with Hitler’s rise. They did so in the middle of the last Great Depression. France’s agrarian economy insulated it from the initial severity of the crash, but as depression drug out and the Anglophone world played post-gold standard games with their currencies, the economic debacle reached the Hexagon. The turning point of the story took place in 1936 with a) the German occupation of the Rhineland and b) the election of the Popular Front and Léon Blum. France’s attention was more focused on its social problems (the 40 hour work week and the exit from the gold standard were implemented in this period, the former only to be fudged on with war preparations and the latter subverted by the French themselves) than with the rise of Nazi Germany. The Rhineland occupation caught both London and Paris flatfooted. The French lack of meaningful response was in part due to Maurice Gamelin’s overestimate of Germany’s strength. (The Americans were to repeat this faulty guesswork during the Cold War, overestimating the USSR’s missile strength in the 1950’s, then to wake up in the late 1970’s to discover they really did have a “missile gap” on their hands, although the American response was different.)
The capitulation at Munich in 1938 may have been an embarrassment to the British, but it was a disaster for the French. Édouard Daladier had good intentions, but in some ways he was a hawk flying with turkeys such as Chamberlain and his own Foreign Minister Georges Bonnet, as accomplished of an appeaser as the British. The sell-out of Czechoslovakia led to the collapse of France’s credibility, especially in eastern Europe and the USSR. That collapse doubtless made an impact on Stalin and Molotov as they, having toyed with the British and French about a mutual assistance pact, turned around and signed the non-aggression pact with Germany, which cleared the way for Hitler’s Wermacht to invade Poland on 1 September 1939.
In the middle of this drama Duroselle chronicles much of the history of Europe in the 1930’s as it affected France’s foreign policy. It will come as a surprise that Mussolini’s Italy, always assumed to be hand in glove with Hitler, was in fact alarmed at Hitler’s rise and especially the possibility of the absorption of Austria into the the Reich. It wasn’t until the Italians invaded Ethiopia that Italy, isolated by sanctions and disapproval, really gravitated towards Germany and the “Pact of Steel.” In the background also was the Spanish Civil War. One would expect Popular Front France to be enthusiastic about supporting the Republicans, but France took a policy of non-intervention. The final collapse of the Republic (followed by France’s recognition of Franco) is probably the most moving part of the book from a humanitarian standpoint.
In the middle of the book Duroselle stops and takes a look at France in the 1930’s. In spite of their reputation as a chic and sophisticated people, the French of the era were insular, lacking in foreign language skills, and inveterate homebodies. Their commercial presence internationally–aided to some extent by their empire in Africa and South-east Asia–was reasonable but not outstanding, and not a centrepiece of their foreign policy, as the loss of France’s presence in eastern Europe in the wake of Munich would attest to.
Duroselle was certainly the master of his subject. The reader is well advised to become familiar with the French system of the Third Republic before attempting to wade through the diplomatic maze he describes. The translation is reasonable, although dense in spots.
Americans frequently think they are wholly other than the French–whose current political state is the other major direct product of the Enlightenment–but reading Duroselle should disabuse anyone of the notion. There are important differences, some of which he points out, but France and the Nazi Threat: The Collapse of French Diplomacy 1932-1939
-
Guess We'll Have to Go Back to Going to Europe via Boat
If they take this to it’s logical conclusion, that is:
A global deal on emissions curbs by airlines struck late on Friday will allow the European Union to press ahead with plans to charge airlines for emissions permits from 2012, the European Commission said on Saturday.
The EU agreed in 2008 that airlines should be included in its emissions trading scheme (ETS), which forces industry to pay for permits for each tonne of carbon dioxide they emit into the atmosphere.
The ETS is the EU’s main tool for combating climate change and it wants to see the system adopted worldwide. Aviation is responsible for some 2 percent of the world’s carbon emissions.
There’s no way that you travel as fast as you do through a fluid medium as you do with a jet aircraft and not generate a great deal of drag, and thus engine thrust to move forward, and thus carbon dioxide emissions. Travel by boat, although slow (or because it’s slow), is more fuel efficient.
As long as the ship has Wi-Fi it’s good. By the time you get to Europe, you’ve already done your business, so just bum around as a tourist and then come home…just don’t hit any icebergs.
Sailing the Last Voyage with Newton and Pascal
Positive Infinity 