The Mysterious Middle Ages - A Mini-Review

 

I just finished reading (rather listening to the audio book) Thomas Cahill's work Mysteries of the Middle Ages - The Rise of Feminism, Science and Art from the Cults of Catholic Europe. The work's tag line certainly reflects the actual eclecticism of this volume as it does attempt to trace the roots of Feminism, Science and Art in Western Culture.  Cahill is upfront about the rather disparate themes taken up in this volume - a patchwork he calls it, but one that rightfully reflects the various cultures morphing and shaping during the middle ages.

 

Cahill, unlike many post Enlightenment scholars, is not a despiser of Western culture and therefore his histories read as one who actually appreciates his subject matter.  One gets the sense he is actually intrigued by the cradles of Western identity, giving them all a fair hearing on their own terms.  In his other volumes he has taken up the role of the Irish, the Jews, the Greeks and Jesus himself as he has waded through the many streams of western identity and influence.  This book takes up the developments in Catholic Europe from roughly the 12th through the early 14th century.

 

His subjects for feminism were a combination of nun, queen and virgin.  Hildegarde, Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Catholic veneration of the Virgin Mary.  I found the chapter about the mystic nun Hildegarde to be interesting but it could have lost some of its girth.  The history of Eleanor and her husbands and sons was interesting history but the transition material about the lusty sexual escapades of the medieval castles could have been omitted.  It seems however that Cahill wanted to see the sexual liberality in the post enlightenment west as an outflow of the free woman of the castle.  I found it a bit tiresome.  Of course the veneration of the virgin extended a high view to certain virtuous and saintly women in the middle ages but I found its connection to feminism slightly strained. 

 
There were histories of men such as St. Francis that those who love justice today will certainly take delight in - I loved hearing the story of Francis showing up naked in court when his father was suing him over material possessions.  There were also several gems from his writing that I scribbled down in a moleskin while at a stop in the car.  Francis was an important figure on the road to a more gentile Europe breaking with the Rome of its past and helping the same people become the Italians.

 

The segment of the book I enjoyed most was the focus on two thinkers and philosophers of the academic seedbed which was medieval France. Both the accounts of Peter Abelard and Thomas Aquinas were brief but interesting stories into the lives of two very different men who struggled to use reason to understand the world.  Thomas is one of the philosophers my son is named after, mainly for his foundational role in shaping the world in preparation for modern science.  It was good to see Cahill reject the caricatures of the period between Aristotle and Enlightenment as "the dark ages" as indeed there was much light to be found in Christian thinkers such as St. Thomas. No, his theology is not my own, but his example of using reason in service of the gospel is one for which I am grateful.  The developments in England under Bacon were of interest as well but I will let the interested wander into the halls of Oxford if they so choose to read this book.

 

Finally, I was delighted with the histories of art given in this book.  As one who has studied very little in this field I was just captivated by treatment of the painters and poets of Florence.  In particular, this brief biography of Dante and the love the authored showed for his work The Divine Comedy was a pure joy for me as I listened over the distant hum of my lawn mower.  I don't have time to take us this poem - one that I shamefully have not read.  Yet I do hope to take it up at some point - perhaps even as an audio book to take with me on some journey in the car.

 

Overall, Cahill's works reflect the mind of a modern historian looking back at chapters of our history.  He is appreciative of his subjects and does not belittle things such as the Christian contribution in our heritage.  In fact, there are times when he feels very at home in Christianity.  However, his thoughts reflect very modern sensibilities and not a gospel worldview as found in the New Testament.  Yet I am still very thankful for his writing as he takes you on a journey into Western ideas that is not ashamed our Christian past.  He even recommends Bible reading and has a high respect for the Bible. His treatment of the incarnation and its effect on Western intellectualism is quite favorable towards this central Christian teaching. I am not sure that his treatment of Jesus in Desire for the Everlasting Hills will be something I will enjoy, but it may be my next Cahill installment. The final two installments in the series were revealed by Cahill in a Q&A on his web site.

Each volume of the Hinges of History® is intended to be read with pleasure and even surprise; it is not a series of academic obligations. Thus, in the past I have refrained from talking about the books to come, as if I was creating a syllabus. But now that there are just two volumes left to write, I imagine many readers can see where I am headed. So I will come clean: Volume VI will treat the Renaissance and, especially, the Reformation, thus tracing the Protestant contribution; Volume VII, tracing the secular-revolutionary-democratic contribution, will begin with the Enlightenment and go to . . . Well, I think that's enough to say, for now.

I will look forward to his interpretation of the Protestants and some of my theological fore bearers; perhaps he will see how law and liberty actually flowed from those who did Protest with courage enough to stand for freedom of conscience with life and limb on the line.  

For those interested in Cahill's work, I would recommend you begin with the Irish and then meander along as you so choose.  He also has an extensive page of discussion questions which serve as a helpful readers guide for the journey.

Dick Dawkins in the hizzouse...

OK, the style and flow of this may be a bit raw for some...but it is quite creative.  This video is apparently being debated on the net - Is this a slam against atheists or believers?  One cannot know, but one can laugh.  Rated POCBlog PG-13.

(HT - Uncommon Descent)

ESV News

A few interesting details on the English Standard Translation of the Scriptures.  First, Mark Driscoll gives a short description of the long...looooong awaited ESV Study Bible.  It sounds like they took the time to do it right...really right.  Looks to be a very important publication. Additionally, the translation is up to #4 in unit sales in data from February (see this pdf).  I think the addition of a full study Bible will only continue to help the adoption of the ESV. 

I came to the ESV dance back in 2003  - it is fun to see the translation continuing to gain traction. I was never able to switch from NIV to NASB...but the ESV was able to pry me from the translation I first read as a new Christian. I have enjoyed being an undercover ESV evangelist over the years.  I introduced it to our two teaching pastors at Fellowship in 2004 and then witnessed the conversion of our church from NASB to ESV in early 2006. 

My Bible Translation page has stuff on the ESV as well as the TNIV (me not like so much). 

RU into Philosophy?

There is an article in the New York Times about the rising interest in studying philosophy as an undergraduate.  Much of the article focuses on the highly rated philosophy department at Rutgers University - right in the backyard of the place we will soon call home.  I hope the Philosophy club will let me hang out with them - maybe they will think I am fresh meat...a willing friend on the journey perhaps.  I really look forward to it - I love the love of wisdom.

Here is the link. 

(HT - Owen Strachan) 

The Unsettling of Sir Richard...

It appears that Richard Dawkins, the high priest of all the people who are smarter than all of you, seems to be quite unnerved by the the coming documentary Expelled.  On his site he has written a diatribe of sorts about all the stupid people who made the documentary Expelled.  It is interesting to observe Dawkins' tone.  He describes all involved with the project as untalented ignoramuses, who should be embarrassed to be breathing.  It is quite remarkable the arrogance that oozes from his writing.

Perhaps he simply does not realize that telling everyone: 1) I'm starter than you 2) You are an idiot 3) You have zero talent, just might not be the most effective method of persuasion.  Of course, this is not his play in life as he and the new atheist crowd do not desire dialog, only ridicule. Quite frankly, it appears that he thinks all believers in God should be lobotomized.  The choir of the high priest certainly loves to sing when Dawkins preaches.

The post's commentary on the film Expelled is also quite revealing and shows that Dawkins is obviously threatened by the documentary.  He goes to great length to interpret his role in the film so to ameliorate his role in a certain segment of the film.  Apparently, he wanted to give his own spin on the scene where he declares that life could have been intelligently designed by ET. 

One final note of comment to engage one of the philosophical points he attempts to levy against the film.  In the documentary, the filmakers apparently examine the application of Darwinian survival of the fittest to social theories and practices of the early 20th century.  Apparently the Nazi philosophy is focused on heavily in Expelled whereby the Nazi's wanted to eliminate the weak so that the fittest could survive and create a superior, more evolved humanity.

Dawkins then goes on to explain this is a commitment of the is-ought fallacy. Simply because nature IS a certain way - survival of the fittest, red with tooth and claw, does not mean that it OUGHT to be that way.  In other words, Dawkins explains to us that all that nature is, all reality is for that matter, is a complex evolution of matter/energy.  There is simply nothing else.  Yet then he goes on to say that we OUGHT to create a society that is the exact opposite of Darwinian reality.  Let me say that I agree with him - I want no Darwinian society; I agree with him that we ought care for the poor and live for the good of all not simply the strongest, most fit among us.  However, my question for Dawkins is precisely from where does he derive his OUGHT.  If nature all there is, there is nothing else here.  No moral universe, no higher truths, no reason beyond practicality to dictate what anyone OUGHT to do.  So I think he is massively missing the point. I thank God he, unlike the Nazis, is living a contradiction.  He is living inconsistently with his own view of the world. 

Dawkins simply has no reason for not wanting his Darwinian world to be society's reality. Believers in a purposed creation, a moral universe where we OUGHT to live in accord with what is good, right and true.  He is smuggling beliefs which do not flow from his deepest convictions.  He is stealing his OUGHT from other places because it is simply not found is his IS.  We have a reason for desiring a world contrary to the doldrums of Dawkins' Darwinian reality...for we know that his world is an impostor.  For this universe does indeed have purpose, meaning, a moral law and its correlative lawgiver.  It is to him that we all must give an account...

Sending Text Messages

OK, that title could easily have been a technology entry here at POC...but instead of speaking about the weakness of text messaging on the iPhone, I wanted to put you on to a debate about the textual manuscripts of the New Testament.

There is an excellent summary online at Parchment and Pen of the recent debate between New Testament scholars Bart Ehrman and Daniel Wallace.  You may interact with Ehrman's ideas if you ever talk to thoughtful non Christians as his book MisQuoting Jesus has sold quite well over the last few years.

I interacted a bit with a bit of Ehrman's argumentation a few years back when reading his book Lost Christianities. You can read that here - Kind of Ironic.

Renewal as a way of Life

 

On Wednesdays in this interim season between Inversion and moving to New Jersey I am trying to slow down the soul a bit on Wednesdays for some time dedicated to my growth and development as a man.  One of things I am doing is reading slowly through the book Renewal as a Way of Life by Richard Lovelace (I forgot to put this one on the "books I am currently reading" below).  I am about 1/3 of the way through the book and it has been very good, humbling and quotable.  So, I thought I would share some quotes today which encouraged me...and by typing them out hear perhaps provide some light for others.

Here is one on the relation to using God to get stuff...a mixture of Lovelace/Augustine:

On the other hand, evangelical religion as an aid to self-assurance, health or wealth really short-circuits the soul's path toward contact with God, which is the heart's deepest desire.  As Augustine observes, "Many cry to the Lord to avoid losses or to acquire riches, for the safety of their friends or the security of their homes, for temporal felicity or worldly distinction, yes, even for mere physical health which is the sole inheritance of the poor man...Alas, it is easy to want things from God and not to want God himself; as though the gift could ever be preferable to the giver." Or as he says elsewhere, "The soul cannot rest save in that which it loves.  But eternal rest is given only in the love of God, who alone is eternal." Lovelace, 31

The next one was his commentary on the soul's search for a sense of value and identity apart from God - I think many of us, Christian and not, live here often.

They must get a black market substitute for God's love from psychiatrists or other human beings. But this need for love and dignity is so great that self-admiration and the love of others cannot begin to satisfy it.  We can cheer ourselves up only so long by repeating the pitiful fiction "I'm OK - You're OK."  Then we begin to check our own credentials, and our therapist's, for making such judgments.  Lovelace, 36.

In reflecting on the outflow of the love of God through his people he makes a rather dogmatic claim which I found very true.

Spirituality which neglects the love of neighbor, and which fails to seek justice for the neighbor, is simply not biblical. Lovelace, 37.

He has an interesting metaphor for the reality of human enterprise on the earth.  We can be about building the Kingdom or simply go on building Babel.

In the Old Testament, God warns Israel that most human kings will not hallow life, but will turn it into building materials for the Tower of Babel (he includes here the text of 1 Samuel 8:11-18)...Things have not changed since biblical times. Building Babel is still an expensive business. Lovelace, 43.

Indeed, it costs us our very selves as we become cogs in the machine rather than sons and daughters with a purpose in the universe. Finally, in a bit of meddling he comments on the focus of upwardly mobile Protestants in New England after the influence of dying religious formalism (in our day we might as well apply it to upwardly mobile atheological evangelicals). 

The real goals of upwardly mobile Protestantism can be seen in Lisa Birnbach's humorous volume entitled The Official Preppy Handbook, which idealizes the semi-apostate New England family, still glumly going through the motions of "the Puritan ethic" in a sort of twilight zone between Christianity and secularism in order to facilitate its summers on Martha's Vineyard. Lovelace 52-53.

Lovelace's book so far has been a great refresher - a call to God-centeredness and then to living under the rule and reign of Jesus - working, laboring, fighting for...a Kingdom of peace, justice, truth and beauty in this present age as we await the renewal of all things.   

Poetry - Modern Sex

Church Historian Michael Haykin is also a poet as well as a writer about all things in the Puritan era...I really found his poem entitled Modern Sex quite interesting:

No metaphysical union here
Nor majestic ontology—
Only animal pairing
That come break of day parts,
Not to share a glance again.

No talk of Love,
nor Companionate meeting of flesh—
Only business
That ploughs the field
For lucre and gain.

Embodièd worship
And Glory gone—
The squalid alone is left,
Confusion, chaos, and coal
Without regal Fire.

Michael A.G. Haykin
Modern Sex ©2008.

Reading Meme...

Some seminary blog friends tagged me with a reading Meme.  So here goes.

What are you reading on Spring reading days?

Spring reading days...hmm...don't have that as an external but here is what I am currently picking through.  I am about six chapters into Keller's book The Reason for God.  I am also reading a book from the UK entitled Total Church by Chester and Timis.  Not sure if this counts but I am also listening to The Mystery of the Middle Ages by Thomas Cahill - a strangely ecclectic volume. 

What do you wish you had time to read?

Gospel in Pluralistic Culture by Leslie Newbegin, Fear and Trembling by Kierkegaard, One Body, One Spirit: Principles of Successful Multiracial Churches by George A. Yancey

What have you decided NOT to read that you were assigned to read.

I'm only in one class so I am gutting it out and reading it all :)

What is one great quote from your reading?

This is odd - I heard a great quote from Francis of Assisi from Cahill's book.  It is on the third audio MP3, thirty minutes in...I do mean to go back and transcribe it. I think it is this one though:

Lord, make me an instrument of Thy peace;where there is hatred, let me sow love;where there is injury, pardon;where there is doubt, faith;where there is despair, hope;where there is darkness, light;and where there is sadness, joy. O Divine Master,grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;to be understood, as to understand;to be loved, as to love;for it is in giving that we receive,it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.

Why are you blogging? (You’re supposed to be reading!)

As anything we do, I think I am blogging because I want to...and I think God wants me to as well. I blog primarily to think and write about things that interest me - mainly the gospel, theology, technology, philosophy, culture and stuff that makes me laugh out loud (stuff like this).  As such my blog is a work of eclecticism - shallow enough in many spheres as to perplex those who read the site.  Is this a tech blog?  Is this a theology blog? Is this a Christ and Culture Blog? Apologetics?  No - well, maybe a little.

I want to tag Owen Strachan with this (even though he is now at Trinity) 

The Loneliness of Immortality

I just jumped off the plane from Newark, NJ for a medium sized three hour layover in the Chicago airport.  On the flight into the windy city I read through an article on a persona I have followed a bit over the years.  The article was in WIRED magazine and was simply titled Futurist Ray Kurzweil Pulls Out All the Stops (and Pills) to Live to Witness the Singularity. Well, maybe that title is not so simple nor the ideas being discussed therein.  Let me try to summarize, in a few words, the work of Ray Kurzweil.

In my opinion, Ray Kurzweil is one of the intellectual geniuses of our times. He has been a bit of a legend in the computer science and artificial intelligence worlds.  I know, that is probably something like .00001 percent of the world's population but he has contributed greatly in inventing technology that has changed the world.  His work has been mainly in pattern recognition and machine text/speech recognition.  He has invented software that can read books out loud to the blind and answer you phone calls for large companies.  Well, maybe the latter one has been a bit of a frustrating experience to some.  Kurzweil's more controversial work however has been as one of the leading proponents of what is known as Strong AI. 

Strong AI holds that human intelligence (even consciousness for that matter) can be reduced (read my previous post on reductionism) to processes similar to a very complex computer.  In other words, if you can mimic human thought, decision making...even emotions, you then have consciousness and self awareness. So in his theory, there will be a day when computers are powerful enough for Skynet to "wake up" make its own decisions and take over the world. Many of you have been exposed to the Strong AI view in pop culture through cinematic exploration.  The aforementioned Skynet of the Terminator lore, HAL2000 of 2001 a Space Odyssey, the weird boy robot flick AI, the bizarre world of Minority Report, Will Smith's rambunctious robot romp in iRobot and the new theistic, philosophical cylons of the new Battlestar Gallictica.

Kurzweil believes that as computational power increases the ability to write a brain simulating, consciousness simulating algorithm draws nearer in time.  In other words, given enough processing power, computers will some day be as human as you.  Hence, his earlier works evolved from The Age of Intelligent Machines to the book I read some years ago entitled The Age of Spiritual Machines.  Now, Kurzweill did not suddenly become a dualist in changing his language to "Spiritual Machines."  His point is simply that future computers will appear to be every bit as conscious as ourselves - they might even worship and read books by the compuDalilama (my term, not his).  His latest update of the book and its ideas deals with what he calls the singularity, and according to Kurzweil, it is near.

In the work, The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology (Viking Penguin), he speaks of a soon coming day where a radical shift in life as we know it will take place. At this singularity, we will all be uploaded as software into the network, with non perishing "bodies" (if you want) and live forever.  Immortality, the fountain of youth and becoming as gods all in one push of a brain upload button.  Now, if you believe this narrative (and many do not - read the sidebar in WIRED, Never Mind the Singularity, Here's the Science, featuring research of those that think the whole scheme of things is flawed) you will want to stay alive long enough to reach this glorious land.  If you die before we arrive, so to speak, you will not get to gather at the other side with the other comphumans. Interestingly enough a Physicist Frank Tipler in The Physics of Christianity is writing about similar ideas though from a theistic perspective; though I found it very bizarre. If all this sounds a bit nuts, you are not alone. 

One of the philosophical problems with computing=consciousness is that of self-knowledge.  Computers, by nature of their design, perform by processing tasks according to algorithms.  Even the learning and evolving systems, do so according to predetermined rules of logic placed upon them from minds - in this case programming.  In other words, computers process data and symbols , they do not "know" anything.  I actually thought of this over the weekend observing the functioning of a GPS navigation system in a car.

Our realtor during our house hunting in NJ would punch in an address and then a kind woman's voice (perhaps using Kurzweil inspired technology patents) would tell us precisely where to turn to arrive at our destination.  In our case it was usually a small, dumpy, overpriced house...but I digress.  Let me do a bit of a thought experiment with you at this point.  Imagine for a moment that you were in a vehicle where you could not see where you were going yet you could cause a car to turn right or left based upon the cues from a GPS system processing your location.  You would receive data, act upon it, then arrive perfectly at your desired destination.  I felt like I actually did this many, many times sitting in the back seat of a car zipping around New Jersey this weekend.  Now, in our experiment, you would seem to have a great knowledge of the area and a great sense of directions.  Yet there is one glaring problem - you actually have no idea where you are.  You have zero knowledge of New Jersey or any conscious sense of direction.  You simply processed input and data.  Computers process symbols and data, they do not know anything.  They can do many things, appear intelligent, etc but they do not know.  For a more sophisticated argument John Searle's now famous Chinese Room Problem is similar and much more cogent.

I also find massive ethical problems with this view because it will mean the rich and technological persons will keep themselves alive while others will languish in the pre-singularity world of death and decay.  A new elitism will be even more severe in the imagined world of Kurzweil's future.  It seems like a world that will have more selfish people, concerned only about the perpetuation of their own lives.  God forbid the poor masses ever decide to pull the plug (literally) on the machines - we all know that will mean war.  I've seen the Matrix you know.  Or perhaps we will be self-deluded once again that we will make the world perfect this time around.  Perhaps we have forgotten what happens in reality, as well as literature and film, when human beings think they can make the perfect world in their own image.

So what is Kurzweil doing besides promoting his vision of the coming singularity? He is taking hundreds of supplements a day and trying to experiment with any life lengthening idea just to keep his biological existence intact so he can make it.  He is quite wealthy and is spending massive amounts of resources on keeping his ticker going as the clock ticks forward.  Unfortunately none of this can keep one from getting hit by a bus, shot by a crazy person, or succumbing to disease. Yet it does seems that hope for immortality, even eternal life, lives even among materialists.  Many today hope in aliens, hope in getting off this mound called earth by a coming Starship Enterprise and many hope to create our descendants and be transferred into machines by fiber optic transfer (or whatever high bandwidth technology is available at the singularity).  Sadly, some may choose suicide. 

What does all of this reveal about the human soul? I think we see that we long to live, not die.  We long for a better future where the harsh realities of life outside of Eden are brought to an end.  Some choose to trust in the promises of God and resurection for the hope of eternal life.  Others seek to become godlike themselves.  Where does this leave a human being?  In Kurzweil's own description - it has left him lonely.

Note

For all one of you interested in wrestling with these ideas further I recommend the work
Are We Spiritual Machines?: Ray Kurzweil vs. the Critics of Strong A.I. edited by Jay Wesley Richards.

Overtime...

Many thanks to all of you who rallied behind POC in Blog Madness...you have shocked the world, stood with me among the Baptists, saved kittens and monkeys and kept my kids from crying.  Perhaps you learned about some sweet blogs as well. 

Today, is a new day - in fact, the madness just went to Overtime.  Unlike my Tarheels, we need to show up and vote once more to make the POC comeback complete. 

You can vote here - time is short, vote today...

New Jersey House Hunting

 

Kasey and I have been up here in NJ since Thursday looking for a new home for our family.  The house hunt has been discouraging as things are either really expensive or really shack-like.  We found a nice ranch and made an offer which was countered.  We have another offer in and awaiting a reply.  Please pray as there simply isn’t much here in our price range even though we did pretty well on our house in Tennessee.  Pray for Kasey and me as this has been a strong dose of reality for us this weekend.  Thank you so much.

Many infallible proofs...

More evidence has emerged that shows that those who use Macintoshes are religious devotees.  There is a show dedicated to those who have "born again" - delivered from PC Hell into Mac Heaven.  Again, I love the Mac and Apple products, but since I still confess Jesus as Lord and God I must...with conviction...call to my brothers to resist idolatry.  Worshiping a good thing as an ultimate thing is not good for the soul - MacIdolatry must be added to all "cult watch" ministries as many are becoming born again.  Which everyone knows is a term for "holy roller weird." 

To all those moderate, mainline Mac users - who owned Mac classics, talk to your brothers about moderation.  It is a good thing. 

Why Science in a Theistic Universe Does Not Suck

In preparation for some Thoughts in Time (I am renaming a series called Tuesdays in Time, Thoughts in Time because sometimes I am just too busy on Tuesdays) I wanted to post overall on one of the current worldviews prevalent among Western intellectuals.  In this essay I want to do just a few things.  First, I want to lay out a worldview which I am calling naturalistic reductionism - what Richard Dawkins has described as "dancing to our DNA."  Second, I want to give an example from a recent wired magazine article, of how this leads to some rather absurd thinking.  The short article, Why Things Suck: Science, demonstrates well that while attempting to explain everything - this worldview  explains no-thing at all.  Third, I want to describe why the scientific enterprise, when engaged as a believer, in no wise sucks.  So let us begin our dance...maybe with more than just our DNA.

Over the course of time ideas develop and evolve.  Thinkers influence one another and create problems for systems of thoughts.  When problems emerge, other thinkers seek to solve those problems and rescue the system.  At times the system becomes so beaten and questioned that it is jettisoned altogether for other views.  Such is the history of ideas.  In our current situation we stand at an interesting point in Western ideas.  Many have rejected concepts such as supernatural entities, God, angels, human souls - in favor of a a world made up only of energy.  We are just bits of organized information, matter/space/time/energy rearranged ordered according to the laws of Physics.  Here is where it gets interesting.  The universe, so we are told, is a random occurrence of space/time/matter combined with chance.  There is no order to the order any longer in many people's thinkers we are in a random process which in no way had us in mind.  This view of life; that we are all but the result of nature and her laws can be called naturalism and it has ancient roots.

Interestingly enough, the study of nature and her laws had led to astounding blessings and profound burdens for human kind.  Science has brought us both vaccines and atomic bombs, modern sanitation and weapons of mass destruction.  Yet because of the success of the scientific enterprise it has been extended to literally explain everything; as if everything can be reduced by the word "JUST"

• A human being is JUST a bundle of matter organized by law and DNA
• Love is JUST an exchange of chemical signals by specialized apes
• Ethics is JUST something our species created in order to pass on its genes and survive
• God is JUST localized activity in a sector of your brain

Let me be clear.  Scientific investigation is a great gift to humanity.  The very fact that our thinking and the ways our universe functions correspond is a great clue to the design of God in us.  Yet when we take a good thing such as science and extend it to all every of knowledge we go much too far.   As the late British journalist Malcom Muggeridge once remarked we run great risk of simply educating ourselves into imbecility. 

In C.S. Lewis' book The Pilgrim's Regress, a man name John is in prison - captive as it were, to the spirit of the age.  In his pit he is brought things to eat at which the jailer would explain what they were eating.  He tells John that when eating meat they are just eating corpses, when partaking of milk they were just downing the secretions of a cow, and eggs were just the menstruum of a verminous fowl.  John finally rebels against this, calling out the madness of his jailer.  The reductionism of his jailer was far too much for his experience of eggs.  John's objection was that some things in life seem like gifts, others do not.  There is a difference he says between a cow's dung and a cow's milk.  One seems like Nature's gift, the other does not.  We know what an egg is scientifically, yet they are also pleasant food, gifts in creation...  The materialist of course will say at this point - nope, just an unfertilized ovum. The problem with reductionism is not that it says so much - but rather that it says too little.  There is more to life than just the fluctuations of quantum foam.  For human experience, human consciousness, human relations, human spirituality cannot be reduced to the simple, elegant laws of Physics. Yes, they are very much a part of who and what we are - but it is only a partial story...one that impoverishes the human experience and hinders flourishing.  My purpose here is not an argument against metaphysical naturalism, rigorous argument can be found elsewhere, my point is an existential one...that we are left with an impoverished reality when we say we are JUST a bucket of lucky DNA.

Now to our example.  Wired Magazine recently ran an article with a pithy little title - Why Things Suck - 33 Things that make us Crazy.  Interestingly enough, one of the things that sucked was Science - as one who studied in the hard sciences during my undergraduate work at UNC, this was of some interest to me.  Personally, I like science and think it sucketh not.  Upon reading the little segment by Thomas Hayden, I realized why it sucks for him.  Let me copy his entire piece in for you so you can read it in context - really, it is actually quite brief.

Morality, spirituality, the meaning of life — science doesn't handle those issues well at all. But that's cool. We have art and religion for that stuff. Science also assumes predictable cause and effect in a world that's a chaotic, bubbling stew of randomness. But that's OK, too. Our approximations are usually good enough. No, the real reason science sucks is that it makes us look bad. It makes us bit players in the Big Story of the universe, and it exposes some key limitations of the human brain.

Look at it this way: Before science, we humans had dominion over Earth, the center of the universe. Now we're just a bunch of hairless apes on a wet rock orbiting a minor star in a marginal galaxy.

Even worse, those same cortexes that invented science can't really embrace it. Science describes the world with numbers (ratio of circumference to diameter: pi) and abstractions (particles! waves! particles!). But our intractable brains evolved on a diet of campfire tales. Fantastical explanations (angry gods hurling lightning bolts) and rare events with dramatic outcomes (saber-toothed tiger attacks) make more of an impact on us than statistical norms. Evolution gave us brains that crave certainty, with irrational fears of crashing in an airplane and a built-in weakness for just-so stories about intelligent design. Meanwhile, the true wonders revealed by the scientific method — species that change into new species over time, continents that float around the planet, a quantum-mechanical world where nothing is for sure — are worse than counterintuitive. To a depressingly large number of us, they're downright threatening.

In other words, thanks to evolution, half of all Americans don't believe in evolution. That's the universe for you: impersonal, uncaring, and ironic.

Now, I hope you realize why science sucks for Hayden - for in its reductionistic forms it makes us idiots.  All can be explained by science, even those idiots who think that all inexperience cannot be explained or reduced to naturalistic understandings.  Hayden is locked inside a materialistic prison, with artists and priests around...and proponents of intelligent design.  Yet he cannot really hear them - it is as if his ears are tuned only to hear the dance of the DNA.  Scientific or naturalistic reductionism leaves us in a universe that is impersonal, uncaring and ironic.  In other words, it just sucks - so you better laugh about it.  Yet what if you are like John and are tired of the naturalistic jailer telling you HIS just so stories about eggs.  Perhaps there is another view in which science sucketh not.  To this view we now turn.

It is no coincidence that the achievements of science found their cradle in the academy of Christian Europe.  For in the Christian worldview you do not have an impersonal, irrational, uncaring universe - even if it is a bit ironic.  To have the rise of the scientific method you must have certain intellectual presuppositions to pursue the scientific quest.  First, you must believe that the universe is itself rational rather than random.  That it displays an intelligibility.  The Christians of Europe and their deist children understood the world to be the creation of a rational mind - the mind of God.  As such they expected it to be orderly and rational - available for study if you will. Second, you must think that our minds are capable, even made for, such a task.  In other words we must expect that Reason is reasonable - not chaotic - our minds must be able to function in such a matter to arrive at True truth.  Nancy Pearcy and Charles Thaxton explain the rise of science in western culture much more thoroughly in their work The Soul of Science.  Highly recommended. 

In this universe, the one seen by the eye of the Christian believer, the world and all that is in it cannot be reduced to its material fluctuations.  It is highly personal, rational universe, yet with mysteries and puzzles which require both thought and trust.  It is a universe where we can pursue science without ruining your scrambled eggs or saying that love between persons is an illusion which is JUST our beastly urge to simply mount the opposite sex.  This is a prison to which we need not to submit...for a worldview where science sucks seems to suck even more.  Perhaps we need a prison break of our own.

The New Top Ten List for Voting for the POCBlog

The Blog Madness has come down to the final four blogs over at Said at Southern. Reid happens to be the only blogger in the final four who also graduated from a school who is in the actual final four. That is just a cool fact for the journey - the top 10 (ok, I snuck in 11) new reasons to vote for Power of Change are included below. Just so you know - that cute little monkey's life is in danger so you need to vote today. Thanks for supporting us in this noble effort. Power of Changers - unite - it is time to vote today.

• Ask not what your blog can do for you, ask what you can do for your POCBlog – vote now!
  
• Steve McCoy – aka the Reformissionary, is already spending the prize money…help me by voting to demonstrate that pride cometh before a fall.
• You all vote for American Idols…clear your conscience and vote for something other than idolatry.
  
• I just blogged about Mixed Martial Arts – ever hear of a guillotine choke? I am not a violent man, but I would vote today.
  
• The Kittens you already placed in heaven during the last round of voting are lonely. Every time you vote this round, a little baby seal will join your kittens. Additionally, if you know what capuchin monkeys are – well, I hear your vote saves them too (see my picture above...what did she say? save me!). 
  
• A vote for the POCBlog will slow global warming – Al Gore has confirmed this inconvenient truth!  Save your friends living on the coasts of Great Britain today!
  
• Did I mention that three Baptist blogs are ganging up on me? If you are a Baptist and a Baptist has ever made you angry, take out your frustration in a godly, non violent manner - vote POCBlog.
  
• I might end up spending grocery money on books if I don’t win – my kids need to eat – vote for the starving children!
  
• If I win and you are, say vote #500, I’ll buy you a book of your choice with the gift certificate – is this bribery? Not sure, but a book may be in it for you – vote today!
  
• All the other guys in the race are fine men with fantastical blogging skills. Most of them have lots of other bloggers and RSS subscribing people reading their sites. Our site is read by you – the people, our friends. Let’s win this online competition with an old fashioned people network. Do tell a friend…vote for Reid today.
• Finally, I am a church planter...a vote for us contributes 50 dollars towards church planting in the Northeast. 
  

Many thanks to all of you for your support - we are an underdog in this journey, but even though Davidson was eliminated tonight, Cinderella still lives if you vote for us today.

Edwards - searchable, downloadable...sweet

The complete works of Jonathan Edwards are now on prepub for the Logos Libronix system. The price is a very reasonable 69.95 for both downloadable and CD-ROM versions. The Logos Blog has more information for those who are interested...but the following is what most of you will want to know.

Soon you will be able to have access to Edwards' most important writings in your Libronix Digital Library System. The Logos edition is based on the standard 1834 edition that was reprinted by Banner of Truth and Hendrickson, both of which are still in print.

You can put your order in now at the prepublication page. 

Black Liberation Theology

There is a short video interview with Anthony Bradley discussing Black Liberation Theology availble on YouTube. This appeared on CNN's Glen Beck program.

(HT - Darin Patrick)

Consumed by Mixed Martial Arts - A Biblical Apologetic for MMA

I recently read a post by my not so punchy friend Owen Strachan over at his blog Consumed.  Owen has been wrestling out loud about Christian believers and their relationship to (or non relationship to) Mixed Martial Arts (MMA).  MMA has become wildly popular through the Ultimate Fighting Championship, aka the UFC.  He was provoked by an article in NY Times Magazine and some comments made by Mark Driscoll - a pastor and fan of MMA. His main question could be surmised by some simple questions: Should Christians beat the hell out of each other or enjoy watching other men do so?  Does being tough and masculine mean an endorsement of barbarism? Now he might not say it that way, but this seems to be the essence of his struggle.  I think this is a valuable struggle as our relationship to violence is a long tragic part of the tale of human history.

This question gets to the much larger issue of the role of violence in life and in the life of a follower of Jesus Christ.  This post does not seek to raise the pacifism/just war discussion in any detail but let me state at the outset that I do not see pacifism as tenable either practically or biblically.  Let me just say that the if you are a pacifist you will probably find much to disagree with when reading the coming reflections on ultimate fighting and mixed martial arts.  But I will make one promise to all the pacifists reading. If the evil horde invades; those who believe in a civil and noble defense will protect you, your home and family.  You’re welcome.

So, to reflect on fighting in general and ultimate fighting in particular I propose just a few things.  First, I will make some observations which I will call my recommendations.  These will be a few small reasons for “why we fight.”  Second, I will offer a rejoinder to qualify the beastly urge in all people to desire license rather than morality when dealing with delicate issues.  Fighting is not a good thing, but it is a real and unfortunate permanent feature of human existence in a fallen state.  I wish I could just shout - STOP FIGHTING, can’t we all just get along and the whole universe would realign to our wishes.  Yet because the world is full of human beings, like you and me, there may be times when it is necessary, in defense of what is good, to punch someone in the throat. 

Recommendations

My first recommendation is this.  There are times when men (and I do mean male men) must fight for what is good, right and true. 

The great philosopher Kenny Rogers once used a thought experiment called The Coward of the County to explore the struggle that men have in relationship to violence.  A violent father who had made bad choices and caused great harm teaches his son:

Promise me, son, not to do the things Ive done.
Walk away from trouble if you can.
It wont mean you’re weak if you turn the other cheek.
I hope you’re old enough to understand:
Son, you don’t have to fight to be a man.

The advice is well taken by the son until the life and limb of a loved one is violated by a group set on evil doing…the boy, having learned the lesson from his father and become a man, ends the treatise with the similar but slightly different chorus:

I promised you, dad, not to do the things you done.
I walk away from trouble when I can.
Now please don’t think I’m weak, I didn’t turn the other cheek,
And papa, I sure hope you understand:
Sometimes you gotta fight when you’re a man.

When do we fight…it must be in defense, for what is right, when there is no other option and when we must win.  Sam Wise Gamgee once encouraged his good friend Frodo with words I recommend for all men and women. 

Frodo: I can’t do this Sam.

Sam: I know. It’s all wrong. By rights we shouldn’t even be here. But we are. It’s like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger, they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you. That meant something, even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something.

Frodo: What are we holding on to Sam?

Sam: That there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo… and it’s worth fighting for.  

Some things require a fight.  Not all things - not greed, lust, covetousness - things all too often fought for in the world of men.  But the misdeeds of the vile and violent does not mean that others should never fight - in fact, it is precisely the reason we must. 

To learn to fight, you must fight…

It is my opinion that certain men should be trained to protect the common good and provide peace so that human society can flourish in goodness, truth and beauty.  Additionally, Christians have a great interest in a just state and a protected citizenry due to the commands and structure found in Romans 13.  Historically Christian thinkers Ambrose, Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin and many others have argued that defensive, just wars are sometimes necessary.  I found this message to come through powerfully just last night as my wife and I finished up Season 1 of the CBS television show Jericho.  In the finale, men were called to fight an aggressive invader with life and limb on the line (perhaps another post, but I find this to be a great show).  Yes, there was the token blond girl with the gun, so feminists you can be happy to fight as well, but the reality in the show demonstrated a common theme in history.  At times a band of brothers must be arrayed to fight and physically beat back a sinful invasion.  If this be the case, men must learn to fight during peace time as well as war time.  Those in the military are taught fighting techniques - martial arts, wrestling - lets just say they learn MMA.  Where are these techniques developed in peace time?  Where do men grow in toughness, discipline and fortitude when the enemy is at bay.  They learn through hard work, training, drills and sport.  In fact, in sport, better ways to wrestle are actually developed in relatively safe, controlled sporting environments.  As a wrestler for most of my life, I know this to be true.  Come try and take me - I am more prepared than most.  I suppose we could eliminate every sport but, say, golf…but I do not think that would be used by the marines to learn to fight and win war.

So we do not want a culture of violent thugs and brutes without honor.  What we really need is a society of men who live in meekness and strength, virtue and passion and strength under authority.  I will grant it is here that mixed martial arts is a very mixed bag.  It has both thugs and men of character slugging in the octagon.  Such is life.  Pull for the guy that is not a thug. 

The Bible uses fighting as a metaphor for life and spiritual growth

But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses.

1 Timothy 6:11-12 

Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. So I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

1 Corinthians 9:24-27

It seems to me if this be the case than God’s Word expects us to know what fighting actually is and that we should know how to do it.  Now this is one of those chicken and egg problems in theology.  Did God use fighting to accommodate a violent people in order to teach them of our greater spiritual battles with the world, the flesh and the devil?  Or did God understand he made the world and we would have to fight while living life outside of Edenic perfection?  In other words, because of the fall there will always be some sort of fight.  My thought would be the latter.  For humans to grow food…it is work, a fight.  For humans to create order out of the thorny, thistled world of sin…it is a battle, sometimes literally.  For humans to communicate, have honest commerce, to act according to conscience…it will be a fight.  For humans to overcome sin, find forgiveness, live in righteousness, be reconciled to God…it is a fight, but the battle is the Lords.  For followers of Christ to deny the flesh and turn their wills to God daily…it is a spiritual fight. 

If you hold to the presupposition of an inspired Scripture then you must see that God wants all of us to know what “fight” means.  It is human to struggle - internally and externally.  It is a wrestle with our own depravity and that of others.  Robert Hawkins, one of the characters on Jericho, was asked a question by his teenage daughter: Who are the good guys and who are the evil guys? His answer - there aren’t any such thing.  Some my take offense to that, but I find it biblical.  A human being is always a mixture of good (imago dei) and evil (sinful depravity and rebellion).  Jesus said it this way: there is none good but God.  If this be true, there will be a fight and God desires to teach and shape his people in the midst of the battle.

One last note is appropriate before moving on.  It is interesting that Paul is telling his younger padawan Timothy that he is to fight the good fight of faith.  As such I feel it is the fathers of a culture which must teach young men to respect and honor women, walk in self control and know when to fight and when not to.  Hence Kenny Rogers. Fatherless societies become base and excessively violent.  When Dad is at home young men can be strong and self-controlled…respectable - such men are exactly what we need.  They are in my opinion what every radical feminist desires. Unfortunately she has seen too much of the former to find much use in men.

Some Reservations

Now to MMA.  Any sport that involves the movement of the body risks to some degree bodily harm.  My Mom will testify that she freaked out every time I wrestled and played a football game.  As such any sport must have rules designed to make the competition as immune from death as possible.  Yet sometimes this too is unavoidable.  People die every year playing football, soccer and walking across the street.  We can do as much as we can to prevent death but it is simply not avoidable - it is amazing that I made it to 35 without wearing a bike helmet growing up!  So football has rules to prevent very dangerous contact (head to head, hits on QBs etc). Amateur wrestling, even soccer, have rules to prevent this type of contact.  There are underground MMA arenas without such rules; I find that deplorable and do not recommend any of this barbarism.  UFC has evolved from its early, more deplorable days, to have many rules.  The UFC now has just these type of rules; a very long list of fouls which are designed to protect the combatants.  

One final rejoinder about MMA culture.  Let me be very clear.  The culture surrounding the UFC is base.  It is hyper sexualized, full of some non thinking men and there is much disrespect for competitors and opponents.  If tattoos bother you, the UFC will provide lots of them to see.  Maybe the one place in the world that has more than the NBA.  Like boxing, basketball, football, etc. there is also a huge gambling culture that surrounds it as well.  I believe the UFC’s ownership is connected to the gambling industry.  I do not support this any more than I do people betting on the Tar Heels in the NCAA tournament.  Additionally, there is also an offshoot of the fighting culture that will likely continue to spiral downward into madness and barbarism. 

Yet does this culture’s existence not mean that it is precisely the place for the gospel?  Would it not be good to enter and tell of Jesus the saving one in such arenas?  Could not respect for opponents, civil sportsmanship and godly masculinity provide a contrast in the middle of the UFC world?  Could it not mean that Matthew 5:16 - so let your light so shine before men that they might see your good works and praise your father in heaven - might be true in UFC world as well?  If such worlds are not engaged - the only direction they can go is downward. Or one may conclude that it is unredeemable.  Some human activities do degrade to this status.  I do not think this is so of the UFC.  So I watch the UFC with guys I teach and lead; I also discuss it as a fan with non Christians.  I also teach godly masculinity and I believe we need to be able to mature and be able to discern and live the difference.  To do otherwise is to put one’s holy head in the sand. This course of action seems to quench any mission in culture and is pretty lame as well.  I would rather put my hand in the hand of God and walk out into the darkness…and let him light the world.  Yes, even the world of ultimate fighters.

Blog Madness 2008 - Vote POCBlog

OK, some of the men over at Said at Southern have created a sort of NCAA tournament for blogs associated with Southern Seminary.  The POCBlog was included and received enough votes to make it out of round one.  Now it has come to the second round and it has gotten a bit crazy.  I think the 50.00 gift certificate to an online bookstore has fired up the theology book guys.

So, I decided to do my own, very public, shameless plug.  Here is what you need to do.

• Go to this web site and vote for POC - we are in the South Division
  
• Vote, then get your family members to vote - your spouse, each of your children - you need not be a land owner to vote
  
• Then put it out to all your friends on Facebook and MySpace - ask all of them vote
• Then send it to any e-mail list you have - have all those people vote

It is time to hear the roar of the POCBlog - men and women - let's get to work.  There is great power to create real change.  Not convinced?

Top Ten Reasons to vote POCBlog 

1. Help out the minority - almost all the other guys are Baptists
2. Stand with the POCBlog - we are a family here - a family that votes together, stays together
3. I know how to apply UFC fighting techniques
4. Owen Strachan once called this blog "punchy" - it is time to punch back
5. Support Reid's addictive book buying habits
6. Every vote for the POCBlog saves a kitten...and that kitten will get to go to heaven
7. Jesus loves you
8. Because Friends are friends forever if the Lord's the Lord of them
9. If that song makes you sick - go do something about it - vote Power of Change
10. My kids want me to win - they will cry if I loose - you don't want to make my kids cry - please vote on behalf of Kayla, Kylene and Thomas Reid

Here is the link - you know what to do (-vote-) 

Ecclesiological observations of a six year old

This past Sunday my six year old Kayla and I were walking into our church.  Our church is a large church in a wealthy suburb of Nashville, Tn.  It is somewhat in the middle of the evangelical universe - Nashville and Dallas probably compete for the title "buckle of the Bible Belt."  We have been here for almost four years and my relationship to the community has been difficult but very good.  In my opinion this area needs prophets - nice ones though...so people might listen to them.  I realized a couple of years ago that I am not that guy; that God was calling us to different lands.  To be honest I didn't know that would mean New Jersey, but I am thankful for that assignment.  Anyway, back to six year old ecclesiology.

Ever since my kids were old enough to understand anything I have worked to teach them that the church, the New Testament ekklesia, is a people not a building where you go on Sunday.  I call our current church buildings - the buildings where our church meets, etc.  I really work hard on this because there are church buildings everywhere here.  For the most part I think Kayla (6) and Ky (4) are getting it.  Tommy of course is 20 months and doesn't have a clue yet - but he sports a mean head butt.   Anyway, this past Sunday I almost had a debate of sorts with my six year old about what the church actually is.  Too fun. 

This year we have talked quite a bit about the life we will soon be living in New Jersey "as the church," namely it will be in our living room.  No matter how much we talk about this, it will still likely be a very different experience than a big church with a multi-million dollar budget that is reflected in our surroundings here.  Maybe that was an understatement.  In our conversation this weekend I told Kayla that the church is called into existence by Jesus through the gospel, so a church gathering will be a Word-centered gathering that will include the Bible.  Second, I told her that the church visibly lives the gospel together in community "marked" by the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Table. The sign of baptism marks entry into the community when one repents and believes the gospel and that the Lord's Table is the sign of God's covenant faithfulness and our sustenance by Jesus over time.  In it we proclaim the gospel visibly, participate with Jesus, receive sustaining grace, remember his work for us on the cross, etc. So this means a church gathering is not only a Word-centered gathering it will also center on communion.  At this she disagreed...I was actually encouraged because I want my kids to think.

She basically said this: At church we hardly ever do communion so it cannot be central to the church's gathering.  She was concerned that Jacob's Well would participate in the Lord's Table every week in New Jersey as part of our life together in the gospel. This seemed strange to her. I reassured her that historically and biblically there was great precedent for the Table every week.  We see this in the first century church and of course historically, most Christians celebrate the Table weekly.

Justin Martyr's book Apology has a reflection on church gatherings from the 2nd century.  I wanted to tell her about that.  Here it is for those interested:

And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Justin Martyr The First Apology, chapter LXVII

Additionally, I wanted to tell her that the early pastoral manual of sorts known as the Didache, had this to say about our gatherings:

But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: "In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations."

I thought of some of the reformed confessions of the church which say of gatherings and ordinances:

The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear; the sound preaching, and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God with understanding, faith, and reverence; singing of psalms with grace in the heart; as, also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God. - Westminster Confession

Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered. - Augsburg Confession

Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ordinances of positive and sovereign institution, appointed by the Lord Jesus, the only lawgiver, to be continued in his church to the end of the world.  - London Baptist Confession

Yet I chose to simply listen to her thinking out loud about "the church" and it was beautiful.  I then told her that when the church observes the table it is doing more than having a memory or an object lesson - it is meeting with the risen Jesus who is spiritually present with us.  She thought that was a good thing to do every week...I agreed.  I am thankful to hear the buzz around our church to make communion "more central" - thankful indeed.  Yet I fear in many evangelical houses of worship that if you never came to the table it would not even be missed.  It has become such a small part of Christian worship and I think this is a great loss. 

My six year old reminded me of this - thank God for six year olds who see simply what we do (or don't do) in life as worship.