Celestine of Rome

Today, we commemorate Celestine of Rome. According to Orhthodox Wiki:

Saint Celestine, a zealous champion of Orthodoxy, lived during the reign of the holy Emperor Theodosius the Younger (408-450). He received an excellent education, and he was known for his extensive knowledge of the Holy Scripture and his theological ponderings.

The virtuous life of the saint and his authority as a theologian won him the general esteem and love of the clergy and people. After the death of St Boniface I, St Celestine was chosen to be the Bishop of Rome.

A strong character, Saint Celestine was active against pelagianism, he sent St. Germanus of Auxerre to Britain and St. Palladius to Ireland.

During this time, the heresy of Nestorius emerged. At a local Council in Rome in 430, St Celestine denounced this heresy and condemned Nestorius as a heretic. After the Council, St Celestine wrote a letter to St Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria (January 18), stating that if Nestorius did not renounce his false teachings after ten days, then he should be deposed and excommunicated.

St Celestine also sent a series of letters to other churches, Constantinople and Antioch, in which he unmasked and denounced the Nestorian heresy.

For two years after the Council, St Celestine proclaimed the true teaching about Christ the God-Man, and he died in peace on April 6, 432.

Martyrs of Lesbos

Today we remember the five virgin Christian maidens who suffered martyrdom for the faith on the Greek island of Lesbos.

Calvinists and Lutherans: Why the Differences?

I was not planning to write on this topic again but after some conversations with a Calvinist friend who had some questions about Lutheranism I thought it might be helpful to summarize, condense, and add to some of the things I have already said on this topic. As you may already know, I am an ex-Calvinist. As a Calvinist I was trained to understand Lutherans as being a step in the right direction in regards to their differences from the Roman Catholic Church but that they did not go far enough. Of course Baptists tend to think Calvinists did not go far enough and so on and so on. Lutheranism was understood as sort of a spot in between Roman Catholicism and Calvinism. This makes sense on a superficial level but if you dig deeper you will find that although certain outward practices of Lutherans tend to be closer to that of Roman Catholics, what stands behind those things at times reveals that Calvinists have not gone further than Lutherans but have actually run in the opposite direction.

Throughout this post I will use the term "Lutheran" to refer to Evangelical-Lutheran Liturgical Congregations. This is not a denomination but refers to confessional Lutheran churches that worship in a way that is consistent with the way Lutherans have historically worshiped. When I use the term "Calvinist" I will be referring to confessional Reformed and Presbyterian church bodies.

Theologically, one of the biggest differences that stands behind all the related differences between Lutheran and Calvinist theology is a difference in belief as to how much we can trust human reason when it comes to knowing who God is. For Roman Catholics who follow in the footsteps of Thomas Aquinas, "Revelation can never contradict reason." For Luther, "Reason is the Devil's whore." Revelation is almost always contrary to reason and in order to know something about God, God must reveal it to us. Calvinism actually occupies a middle ground between Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism in this case. The Calvinist believes that through a series of logical inferences he can arrive at doctrinal truth. Some of these inferences are what separate Calvinists from one another when it comes to inferences that they have drawn in differing directions on issues like the covenant.

When the Calvinist looks at the Lutheran, the Calvinist views the Lutheran as standing somewhere in between Calvinism and Arminianism. When the Lutheran looks at the Arminian, the Arminian understands the Arminian to be a kind of Calvinist. Both Calvinism and Arminianism have a similar confidence in human reason and learn about God through logical inference but have followed slightly different paths. The Lutheran does not attempt to fit God's plan of salvation into a nice reasonable package. The Lutheran knows that God's ways are not our ways and God's thoughts are not our thoughts and that God's wisdom is foolishness to man. The Calvinist doctrine of the limited atonement is not found anywhere in the Scriptures. In fact certain passages explicitly speak of those who deny the Lord who bought them (2 Peter 2:1). The Arminian concept of free will is also explicitly denied in the Scriptures.

When it comes to the Lord's Supper it is common for Calvinists to view Lutherans as occupying some middle ground between Roman Catholic transubstantiation and the "truth" of Calvinism. Calvinists even try to force Lutherans into some kind of philosophical category by referring to the Lutheran position as "consubstantiation." But Lutherans reject the Calvinist position for many of the same reasons that they reject Roman Catholic transubstantiation. Lutherans trust in Christ and the Words of Institution. Lutherans believe we receive Christ's very body and blood in the Lord's Supper because that's what Jesus said that we receive. Lutherans reject transubstantiation because they do not believe that by logical inference we can arrive at how this is the body and blood of Christ. The Calvinist belief that in the Lord's Supper the Holy Spirit lifts us up into heaven to partake of Christ's body and blood is not found anywhere in the Scriptures and neither is the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation.

The difference between the Lutheran idea that in the Lord's Supper where Christ descends to us and the Calvinist idea that we ascend to Christ reveals a characteristic difference between Lutheran and Calvinist "worship" that extends beyond the Lord's Supper. Lutheran worship is all about Christ descending to us and Calvinist worship is all about us ascending to God. Calvinists often understand Lutherans as occupying some middle position when it comes to worship between Roman Catholics and Calvinists. Calvinists vary to some degree on what practices they consider to be too Roman Catholic. Some are opposed to singing anything but the Scriptural Psalms, others permit them. Lutherans do not practice exclusive Psalmody but do chant a Psalm as part of the service. But there seems to be general agreement that Lutherans did not go far enough. But in this it almost seems as if Lutherans are on one side with Calvinists on the other side and Roman Catholics sit somewhere in between. Christ said that He did not come to be served but to serve (Matthew 20:28). Lutherans believe that when Christians gather in the name of Christ, they do not do so primarily to give God glory but to receive God's good gifts--we receive forgiveness of sins in the preaching of the Gospel, we receive forgiveness of sins in the washing of baptism, we receive forgiveness of sins when we partake of Christ's body and blood in the Lord's Supper. We certainly give thanks in response to these things but we do not gather together to give something to God. We gather to receive. Lutherans recognized that the historic liturgy did the best job of demonstrating that worship is all about receiving God's good gifts through faith. Certain elements had crept in that distracted from this fact and needed to be removed but if they threw the whole thing out they would end up doing the exact opposite of what they were trying to do. Calvinist worship tends to focus on us giving glory to God and most of the debates in Calvinist churches are over whether or not we are doing it right. It's as if God needs us there to give Him glory. Those who practice exclusive Psalmody even speak of the Biblical Law of worship--they turn what is Gospel into Law. If you read the Book of Acts, the early Christians met to "break bread" which is a way that early Christians spoke of the Lord's Supper. The service did not center around us giving glory to God in the right way but around Christ giving us His body and blood. The historic liturgy has always existed in some form. It grew out of the worship of the synagogue and temple. Christians Christianized the liturgy that was already there and handed it down. When people start talking about the Biblical Laws of worship they often end up with a type of service that never existed prior to the Reformation. But the church did not start at the time of the Reformation. When we gather in the name of Christ we join in the worship of the church of all ages. Strangely, many who are obsessed with the Biblical Laws of worship celebrate communion infrequently, even though it seems from the Scriptural record alone that the Lord's Supper was celebrated once a week or more. During Pentecost it was happening every day and we have records from some very early church fathers that daily celebration of the Lord's Supper was normal.

Since Lutherans have a different understanding of why we gather in the name of Christ, Lutheran sermons tend to differ quite a bit from Calvinist sermons. Calvinist sermons can vary quite a bit in content but they tend to be either a doctrinal study or about holy living. In either case the pastor is understood to be primarily a teacher. The Law is generally preached as doable. Lutheran pastors, rather than being primarily teachers, are dispensers of the forgiveness of sins. In John 20, when Jesus met with the apostles, He gave them the power to forgive sins. Teaching is part of what any pastor should do, but it is not the main thing. Lutherans believe that Christ-crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2) ought to be the central message of all of Scripture. The appointed reading is explained in such a way that every person present is shown that they are guilty before God and worthy of his present and eternal punishment for violating His Law. And every person present must be told that they have been forgiven--that Christ has paid for his sins. The style of delivery may vary by the pastor but the general message should be the same. You can listen my pastor's sermons, Bill Cwirla's sermons, or David Petersen's sermons and hear essentially the same thing. They differ stylistically but they all deliver the forgiveness of sins--they all preach Christ-crucified.

In much the same way, Lutherans and Calvinists differ in how they interpret the Scriptures. Jesus said that all of the Scriptures are about Jesus (John 5:39-40). Calvin was actually the first commentator in the church to make a distinction between Messianic and non-Messianic Psalms. The church fathers regarded all the Psalms as being about Jesus and so do Lutherans. Lutherans are much more likely to consult the church fathers when interpreting the Scriptures than Calvinists are. Sometimes Calvinists will adopt interpretations of Scripture that would have been completely unknown to the pre-Reformation church. Rather than viewing "Christ" as the central message of all of Scripture, many Calvinists will understand "predestination" or the "covenant" (which varies by sect) to be the central teaching of all of Scripture. Lutherans believe that predestination and the covenant can only be understood in relation to Christ.

Lutherans believe that visible objects are not only permissible but helpful as teaching tools. Calvinists tend to be opposed to them. Historically, there was great controversy in the church over whether or not images of Christ ought to be made. Some believed that to do so broke the commandment against making images of God just as Calvinists do today. But after many years of controversy it was decided that making images of Christ did not break the commandment against making images of God. In Deuteronomy 4, God tells Israel that they are not to make images of Him because God did not take on any form when He appeared to the Israelites. But in Jesus, God most certainly did take on a form. Colossians 1:15 specifically refers to Jesus as the image of the invisible God. Lutherans do not attribute any power to art that depicts Jesus and do not worship it, but it does provide a helpful teaching tool. Some people don't have a problem with pictures of Jesus in general but are opposed to a crucifix that has a bloody Jesus hanging on it because they say they worship the risen Jesus. In Galatians 3:1 Paul says that what he placarded was Christ-crucified. It is certainly true that Jesus rose from the dead but we see God's great love for us most clearly in the crucifixion where God hangs dead and naked on a cross for us.

Lutherans tend to observe the traditions handed down in the church that point us to Christ and do away with those traditions that point us away from Christ. During Lent, Lutheran churches will place veils over some of the artwork in order to draw our attention away from everything except Christ-crucified. It also reminds us that Christ's glory was hidden during His suffering. There are many other traditions that Lutherans maintain. Calvinists tend to regard them as foolish and unnecessary or possibly even sinful. But Lutherans recognize that since the time of the Israelites, Biblical worship was a multi-sensory experience. God does not just address our brains. He is concerned for our entire person. God not only gives us the forgiveness of sins in Word but also gives us His body and blood to drink and washes our sins away with water.

I'm hoping this post will help Calvinists understand Lutherans better. If there are any questions about specific practices I would be happy to try to answer them.

Ambrose

Today, we remember Ambrose. Earlychurch.org.uk has a short summary of his life:

Born the son of Aurelius Ambrosius, the imperial viceroy of Gaul, Ambrose followed in his father's footsteps and became governor of Aemilia-Liguria (Northern Italy) in AD 370. He might well have remained in a political career had not dramatic events overtaken him. Ambrose had his official residence in Milan, where he was a catechumen in the church. When the bishop of the city, a pro-Arian named Auxentius died, the election of a new bishop was hotly contested by the Arian and Nicene parties within the church. The contest became so violent that Governor Ambrose was summoned to the church where the election was taking place because of reports of a riot. The story goes on to tell how someone shouted out "Bishop Ambrose!" a cry that was taken up and resulted in his being elected bishop. Being only a catechumen he was hurriedly rushed through the various church orders and was ordained only eight days later, on 7th December 373. Whatever the reasons for his election Ambrose proved his determination to succeed in his new position. His training and particularly his knowledge of Greek set him in good stead. He devoted himself to prayer and to the study of both the Scriptures and pagan literature, rapidly becoming an accomplished preacher and writer. His was able to read the works of the eastern writers in their original language and he made use of Philo, Origen, Athanasius, Didymus the Blind, Cyril of Jerusalem, Basil of Caesarea, Hippolytus of Rome and the Neoplatonist, Plotinus. Ambrose is credited as being chiefly responsible for the final defeat of Arianism within the Western church. Familiarity with Greek also enabled Ambrose to introduce allegorical interpretation to the western church. He was deeply influenced by Philo and Origen, seeing in Scripture three levels of meaning: the literal, the moral and the allegorical, but also making use of typology. His hermeneutic was of great help to Augustine, who refers to Ambrose in his Confessions, in removing his objections to the Old Testament Scriptures.

Agape, Chionia, Irene, Virgins, Martyrs

Today, we remember Agape, Chionia, and Irene. According to Wikipedia:

Agape, Chionia, and Irene (Greek: Αγάπη, Χιονία, Ειρήνη meaning Love, Snowy, and Peace, born in Thessalonica) were three virgin sisters who were martyred for their faith in 304 CE. Their feast day is April 3.

They were brought before Dulcitius, the then governor of Macedonia, on the charge of refusing to eat food which had been earlier offered in sacrifice to the gods. He asked Agape and Chionia where they had developed this objection to such food, and Chionia responded that she had learned it from her Lord Jesus Christ. She and Agape again refused to eat the sacrificed food, and were burned alive.

Meanwhile Dulcitius found that Irene had been continuing to keep Christian books, in violation of existing law. He examined her again, and she declared that when the decrees against Christians had been published, she and several others fled to the mountains. She would not name the others who had fled with her, and stated that only they knew where the books were being kept. Upon returning home from the mountains, they hid the books they had kept. Dulcitius then ordered Irene to be stripped and exposed in a brothel. This was done, and no one mistreated Irene at the brothel. The governor then gave Irene a second chance to abide by the laws, which she refused. Dulcitius then sentenced her to death. The books that had been found (with her) were burned as well.

Three other individuals were tried with the sisters. Of these, one woman was remanded as she was pregnant. The fates of the other two are unknown.

Theodosia, Virgin, Martyr

Today we remember Theodosia. According to Eusebius:

THE persecution in our days had been prolonged to the fifth year. And it was the month Nisan, and the second day of the same month, when a godly virgin, and holy in all things, one of the virgins of the Son of God in the city of Tyre, who was not yet eighteen years old, out of pure love for those, who on account of their confession of God were set before the tribunal of the governor, drew near and saluted them, and entreated them to remember her in their prayers: and because of these words which she had spoken to them, the wicked men were filled with anger, as if she had been doing something unjust and improper; and the officers seized her forthwith, and took her before the governor Urbanus, for he still held the power in Palestine. And I know not what happened to him, but immediately, like one much excited by this young woman, he was filled with rage and fury against her, and commanded the girl to offer sacrifice: and because he found, that although she was but a girl, she withstood the imperial orders like a heroine, then did this savage governor the more inflict tortures on her sides and on her breast with the cruel combs; and she was torn on the ribs until her bowels were seen. And because this girl had endured this severe punishment and the combs without a word, and still survived, he again commanded her to offer sacrifice. She then raised her lips and opened her eyes, and looking around with a joyful countenance in that time of her suffering, (for she was charming in beauty and in the appearance of her figure), with a loud voice she addressed the governor: Why, oh man, dost thou deceive thyself, and not perceive that I have found the thing which I prayed to obtain at thy hands? for I rejoice greatly in having been deemed worthy to be admitted to the participation of the sufferings of God's martyrs: for indeed, for this very cause, I stood up and spake with them, in order that by some means or other they might make me a sharer in their sufferings, so that I also might obtain a portion in the kingdom of heaven together with them, because so long as I had no share in their sufferings, I could not be a partaker with them in their salvation. Behold therefore now, how, on account of the future recompense, I stand at present before thee with great exultation, because I have obtained the means of drawing near to my God, even before those just men, whom but a little while ago I entreated to intercede for me. Then that wicked judge [p. 25], seeing that he became a laughingstock, and that his haughty threats were manifestly humbled before all those who were standing in his presence, did not venture to assail the girl again with great tortures like the former, but condemned her by the sentence which he passed to be thrown into the depths of the sea.

And when he passed on from the condemnation of this pure girl, he proceeded to the rest of those confessors, on whose account this blessed maiden had been called to this grace, and they were all delivered over to the copper mines in Palestine, without his saying a word to them, or inflicting upon them any sufferings or torture; for this holy girl prevented all those confessors by her courageous conduct against error, and received in her own body, as it were on a shield, all the inflictions and tortures which were intended for them, having rebuked in her own person the enemy that opposed them; and subdued by her valour and patience the furious and cruel judge, and rendered that fierce governor like a coward with respect to the other confessors. It was on the first day of the week that these confessors were condemned in Caesarea; and in the month above written and in the year noted by us was this act accomplished.

Hugh of Grenoble

Today we remember Hugh of Grenoble. According to Wikipedia:

Saint Hugh of Châteauneuf (1052 – 1 April 1132) was the Bishop of Grenoble from 1080 to his death. He was a partisan of the Gregorian reform and opposed to Guy of Burgundy, Archbishop of Vienne, later Pope as Callistus II.

Born at Châteauneuf-sur-Isère, Hugh showed piety and theological facility from a young age. While still a layman, Hugh was made a canon of Valence. His piety was such that it was said of him that he only knew one woman by sight.

At the Council of Avignon in 1080, he was elected bishop of Grenoble, though he was not yet ordained. The see of Grenoble had fallen into a very poor state, and Hugh was selected to be its Gregorian renovator. Conducted by a papal legate to Rome, Hugh was ordained by Pope Gregory VII himself. Upon his return, he immediately set to the task of reforming the abuses in his new diocese.

When he had succeeded in countering abuse and fostering devotion after two years, he tried to resign his bishopric and enter the Benedictine monastery at Cluny. However, the Pope ordered him to continue his episcopal work.

For the rest of the eleventh century, his episcopate was marked by strife with Guigues III of Albon over the possession of ecclesiastic lands in the Grésivaudan. Hugh alleged that the count of Albon had usurped the lands from the bishopric of Grenoble with the help of Bishop Mallen. To reinforce what he judged to be his right, Hugh fabricated a story of the Bishop Isarn reconquering by arms the diocese of Grenoble from the hands of the Saracens. That was the object of the preamble to a series of documents designed to establish the right of the diocese over those lands, documents known as the "Cartularies of Saint Hugh." An accord was finally reached between Hugh and Guigues only in 1099. Guigues agreed to cede the disputed territories while Hugh admitted to the count's temporal authority within the vicinity of Grenoble.

Hugh was also instrumental in the foundation of the Carthusian Order. He received Bruno of Cologne, perhaps his own teacher, and six of his companions in 1084, after seeing them under a banner of seven stars in a dream. Hugh installed the seven in a snowy and rocky Alpine location called Chartreuse. They founded a monastery and devoted their lives to prayer and study, being oft visited by Hugh, who was reported to adopt much of their way of life.