|
| Valedictory Speech - Ian Hugh Clary - May 2, 2008 |
| Wednesday, May 07, 2008 |
President Thompson, Principal Wellum, Faculty, Staff and Students. It is my great privilege to stand before you this evening as Valedictorian for the academic year of 2008. I am greatly humbled by the honour that you have bestowed upon me and am thankful to God for the work that he has done in my life through TBS.
I first came to Toronto Baptist Seminary and Bible College in the summer of 2003. Michael Haykin had just become Principal and he asked me to join him as his research and administrative assistant. It was an interesting period in my life; a period of great change. I am originally from Windsor, Ontario and before coming to Toronto, I had never moved. The house that I came home from the hospital in as a baby was the same house that I left to come to the big city. For any of you who know me, I am much more at home in a boat with my fishing rod in the water than I am in a place like this. Coming to Toronto was an eye opening experience with its size, its cultural diversity, its population and its noise all beyond what I was used to. I would sometimes joke that I came to a city where the Rolling Stones held a concert whose number more than doubled the population of my hometown!
Yet, moving to Toronto and enrolling at Toronto Baptist Seminary, first as an undergrad, and now as a grad student, was one of the best decisions that I have ever made in my life. What I have received from TBS far surpasses merely academic knowledge, though it certainly includes that! TBS has developed my character, it has shaped my spiritual life and it has given me the tools to be able to approach this world with the life-changing gospel of the living Christ.
I want to take a moment and speak about character. This is a word that is so misunderstood in our day. No longer do we live in a society where good and evil are clearly distinguished. Gone are the days of John Wayne who could squarely face a tough situation and you could be sure that he would do what is right. But what I have found amongst the community of TBS is character. It is character that was clearly modeled to me in the lives of my professors. These men and women who sit before you today are not just teachers who sit coldly removed from their students as in so many universities. Rather, these are people who care deeply for not only the academic achievements of their students, but also for the character of each person who sat in their classes. TBS is a place where we learn that doctrine is practice, that you cannot have right living if you do not have right belief. When we learn about the mysterious depths of the Trinity, or of Jesus as the God-man, or how a holy God can forgive sinners, we are learning how to live our lives. Such living is manifested in the regular daily devotions of the Christian life, in prayer and in Scripture reading. It is manifested in character.
One of the most profound memories that of I have of TBS is of a trip to England that I went on with Dr. Haykin four years ago. What struck me, just as much as seeing all of these fantastic sites from church history, was the time we spent praying and reading the Bible together in a hotel room. Those were glorious times where I saw the depths that Christians were willing to go to honour Christ, as in the case of Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley, sixteenth century Protestant martyrs whose place of burning I stood in Oxford. Yet, just as profound, I saw the Christian life modeled before in the life of one of my professors.
Probably the most spiritually enriching class that I have ever had, and probably ever will have, was Prof. Martin’s course on pastoral leadership. It is not often that one sits in a class in tears having just been confronted powerfully with the reality of my own sin and the even greater reality of the grace of God in the gospel. Each one of us men who took that course were changed deeply and would count Prof. Martin not only as a teacher, but as a mentor. I can never thank Prof. Martin enough for that life changing experience.
Character development also manifested itself in the relationships that I have shared at TBS. We are a small school and that has many wonderful advantages. Over the course of five years of study I have made deep and long lasting friendships with some of the most amazing people that I have ever come into contact with. I can recall time spent in Prof. Humfrey’s office where the weight of spirituality was so heavy in the room that it was almost physically tangible. Although Clint was only ever my first year Greek professor, his impact upon my life will only be realised in the life to come. I have found great friends in former students like Justin Galotti, John Bell, Josh Moser and Scott Bowman. Friends who have so shaped me that I would not be the Christian I am today if it were not for them. And I credit all of this to the glorious plan of God who brought me to TBS.
Toronto Baptist Seminary is a school that has high academic standards. I have heard testimony of students who have attended both the University of Toronto and TBS and who swear that our Seminary is much more rigorous. We learn languages like Greek, Hebrew and Latin. We take courses on western philosophy and church history. We delve deeply into the bible both in terms of biblical and systematic theology. We learn first hand applied theology in our fieldwork, internships and pastoral theology classes. When a student graduates from TBS you can be assured that he or she, to quote Prof. Humfrey, “Knows his onions.” Yet all of the rigour, all of the late nights writing papers and studying for exams, all of the long classes and Greek and Hebrew exegesis, all of this is for nothing if it does not help us come to know God more in Christ.
The measure of a school is taken by how well it prepares the student for whatever line of work they have trained for. The value Toronto Baptist Seminary is immeasurable because of what they have both taught and shown their students is priceless. You have shown us Christ and for that I am profoundly thankful.
Last year TBS celebrated its 80th anniversary. May it be in the providence of God that we will celebrate another 80 years with the same commitment to academic rigour, biblical fidelity and the building of Christian character. And may it all be to the glory of the Triune God.Labels: friends, tbs |
posted by Ian @ 12:11 PM   |
|
|
|
| TBS Graduation 2008 |
| Friday, May 02, 2008 |
Tonight is the 2008 graduation ceremony for the students of Toronto Baptist Seminary and Bible College. And your's truly is one of the graduates! Our keynote speaker is Dr. Tom Nettles who teaches historical theology at Southern Seminary. The ceremony starts at 7:30pm and is held at Jarvis Street Baptist Church. It is open to the public. Come one, come all! Labels: graduation, tbs, tom nettles, toronto |
| posted by Ian @ 11:20 AM |
|
|
|
| Worship in Song Conference Report |
| Tuesday, April 15, 2008 |
The following is a report that I had to hand in for my class on worship this semester. It is an evaluation of the excellent Worship in Song conference hosted in March by Grace Fellowship Church of Toronto. I don't note it in the report, but we received some cool free stuff, including a sample CD from Sovereign Grace Music. I also picked up a couple of SGM CDs including the amazing Valley of Vision. The three lectures are available for download at Sermon Audio.
On March 1, 2008 I attended the Worship in Song Conference at Grace Fellowship Church of Toronto. This was an excellent conference that sought to share theological and practical insights on worship with area churches. About 80 were in attendance. The conference was well organized, with a full staff of volunteers who did everything from registration to parking lot attendance. It was very helpful having them available.
The conference itself consisted of three lectures by Rev. Paul Martin. First called, “Why Do We Sing?” the second “How to Pick Songs” and the third “How Do We Lead Worship in Song?” In between the second and third lecture was a breakout session. Attendees had to choose which session they were going to attend. I chose Julian Freeman’s very useful “Why We Do What We Do – Planning Workshop.” Opening and closing as well as between each lecture was the actual practice of worship in song led by GFCTO’s lead worshippers called “Band of Brothers.” A vibrant and worshipful group, they consist of vocals, guitars, keyboard, bongos and bass. They did a great job in leading in worship; one could tell that they were well practiced and that they had engaged their hearts in worship as well. They did not overdo their playing and managed to keep attention off of them an on God. They were true leaders. Their attitude was contagious and it was a delight to be led by them.
The first lecture, “Why Do We Sing?” set the theological foundations for singing in worship. Pastor Martin noted that singing was something that people rarely consider though we do it often. A biblical answer to this question needs to be given. Martin offered two “artificial” categories to think about regarding the nature of worship: all of life worship and corporate worship. AOLW is something done all the time by the individual Christian, whether in a gathering with other Christians or by themselves. To be a true worshipper one must be a true follower of Christ (Col. 3:17; Rom. 12:1). Corporate worship is specifically when God’s people come together to respond to who God is. CW is part of AOLW.
The time of CW is whenever Christians gather, the location is wherever they gather, the purpose is to respond to God and the means is growth in the knowledge and delight of God. As a result, the true worshipper should experience affection for God. It should be ordered both by structure and spontaneity (1 Cor. 14). Singing is an important part of worship (Eph. 5:19) and is a result of joy in the Lord. Jesus sang (Mk. 14:26); God exalts over us with singing (Zeph. 3:17); the inhabitants of heaven sing (Rev. 5:9); Paul sang (1 Cor. 14:26); and genuine singing should be whole hearted (Eph. 5/Col.3).
In terms of structure, Martin offered a modified regulative principle that was very helpful to think about. All of worship (and life) should be regulated by the bible. But the Puritan form of the RP is both inconsistent and impracticable. Worship should excite the affections (Edwards).
The second lecture, “How to Pick Songs” was very practical and at times quite funny. Songs should be chosen first based upon their biblical, theological content. There should be variety and richness to the choices (Wright) but they should not be frivolous (Calvin). In terms of style of music, the bible does not address this, and though the primary focus is content, music style is also important. The content should be personally relevant and applicable, theologically rich and culturally appropriate.
Not all traditional hymns are worth singing nor are all contemporary songs. A good resource to help choose hymns is www.cyberhymnal.com. The person choosing the songs should be walking with Jesus (John 4) and be theologically informed. Good books to read in this respect are Bob Kauflin’s Worship Matters; J.I. Packer’s Concise Theology and Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology.
When choosing songs the person should begin by reading it without the melody before evaluating the music. This protects the person from choosing tune over theology. But, the music must also be intelligible; its tune should match the words (negative example: O Happy Day), it should be singable with a melody that is easy to pick up. The style should be common to the people and should fit the instruments. Thematic choices coinciding with the sermon is also highly recommended.
The third lecture, “How Do We Lead Worship In Song?” was again very practical. Rev. Martin emphasised that what the church needs is “lead worshippers” not “worship leaders.” The difference is that lead worshippers worship God first and shepherd and direct second. Their primary objective is to engage with God, they are not just “hired guns.” A helpful definition by Kauflin was given: they are to be led by the Spirit, combine biblical truth with music to magnify the work of God to motivate the church to cherish this truth and live it.
Therefore worship is not performance, nor is it only the singing that is part of worship. Preaching as well as the other parts of the service are worship as well. Lead worshippers must walk with Christ (contra Keller’s model) and must be theologically informed.
The group of lead worshippers has to be careful of their own sin, as the one major hindrance to worship is the self and sin. It is easy to default into idolatry when we worship, this is something we must always be ware of. Our appearance, the quality of our playing/singing, etc. can all play a sinful part.
Julian’s breakout session was very helpful. It was well-presented, clear and informative. It was also practical. Julian’s first emphasis was humility. When planning worship, humility is key. Attention must be shifted to Christ, not the worshippers. The chief end of planning is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. Julian showed us some samples of his music database, which is a list he keeps of songs to make sure that good ones are rotated and played equally. He gave websites such as http://www.sovereigngraceministries.com/ and others that offer worship resources. They are good to watch for new songs. Julian also emphasised prayer and openness with the congregation. Being attuned to their preferences is important, so long as it meets the criteria learned about in the lectures (i.e. theology and singability).
The conference was a success in many ways. I was thankful to be able to take all of the principles learned in the worship class at TBS and see them worked out before my very eyes. Having taken copious notes and having the lectures on CD will prove to make the impact of this conference last in my life and ministry. I can’t wait until the next one!Labels: conferences, gfcto, tbs, toronto, worship |
| posted by Ian @ 10:03 AM |
|
|
|
| Augustine, the Letter to Sixtus and the Monks of Hadrumetum |
| Friday, January 25, 2008 |
Well, if Allen can post is thesis proposal for his doctorate on John Gill, then I guess I can post my measily proposal for my master's thesis on Augustine. I refrained from posting the four page bibliography, as that would be a little much! I hear that the proposal should get approved by the faculty at TBS. Dr. Haykin is set to be my supervisor, I'm pretty excited. So here goes:
“GOD CROWNS HIS GIFTS”: SAINT AUGUSTINE’S DE GRATIA ET LIBERO ARBITRIO IN LIGHT OF EPISTLE 194 TO SIXTUS
In 426 the monastic community of Hadrumetum in Byzacena (now Sousse, Tunisia) experienced disturbance after the arrival of a copied letter written some eight years previous. The letter’s original recipient was a Roman priest named Sixtus, later to become Pope Sixtus III (432-441). Its author was Augustine of Hippo (354-430) writing near the end of the Pelagian controversy. In this letter to Sixtus (Epistle 194[1]) the bishop of Hippo argued for the “utterly gratuitous character of grace”[2] against the Pelagians whose teaching over-emphasized the freedom of the human will.[3] It proved to be the deathblow in the dispute and the Augustinian doctrine of grace seemingly won the day. However, when the monks in western Africa read the contents of the letter they were thrown into confusion. It appeared to them that Augustine’s teaching on grace negated human action, rendering meaningless the monastic life.[4]As a means of settling the issue the monastery’s abbot, Valentinus, sent three monks to consult personally with Augustine in Hippo. After spending a significant amount of time with him they returned to Hadrumetum in 427 with a letter from Augustine to Valentinus known as De gratia et libero arbitrio (Grace and Free Choice).[5] In it “the bishop of Hippo could now pay greater attention to resisting the denial of the existence of free will.”[6] This was the first of two treatises to the monks of Hadrumetum. The second is known as De correptione et gratia (Rebuke and Grace). These are included in a larger four-part collection of writings that deal with the problem of what is unhelpfully referred to as semi-Pelagianism.[7] Two other treatises were written to address a similar situation that occurred in a monastic community in Provence. These are De predestinatione sanctorum (The Predestination of the Saints) and De dono perseuerantiae (The Gift of Perseverance) respectively.[8]
Purpose
The general purpose of this thesis is to explore the relationship between Augustine’s teaching on grace and free will both in the letter to Sixtus and De gratia et libero arbitrio. In scholarly discussion concerning the events in Hadrumetum the relationship between Epistle 194 and De gratia et libero arbitrio is casually referred to. It has been observed in such introductory material that Augustine is especially attentive to grace when writing to Sixtus (and during the Pelagian controversy in general) while in the treatise to Hadrumetum the freedom of the will gains a greater hearing. For instance, Rebecca Weaver argues,
In this letter [to Sixtus] the bishop of Hippo had stressed his views regarding human nature and divine grace. He had insisted that the human condition as fallen in Adam is incapable of attaining merit on its own. Furthermore, he had argued that grace is utterly gratuitous; it is given totally apart from any human deserving to those whom it chooses. Somewhat in contrast to his position in this letter is the argument that he made in De gratia et libero arbitrio. In this treatise…Augustine tried to maintain the reality of the human free will, and he insisted that divine reward is given to human merit.”[9]
As well, Donato Ogliari says, “It is true that in the De gratia et libero arbitrio there is a kind of ‘front reversal’ with regard to the way Augustine approached the problem of nature and grace during the Pelagian controversy.”[10] Unfortunately in these and similar statements no further development of this relationship is offered and the historical survey usually carries on.
The particular concern of this thesis will be to evaluate the veracity of the claim that there is a difference in emphasis over grace and free will between the two documents. If such a difference can be established an attempt will be made to account for it both historically and theologically.
Methodology
The thesis will be divided into two main parts. In the first section thought will be given to Augustine’s teaching on grace and free will in Epistle 194 and De gratia et libero arbitrio. Each document will be dealt with individually and taken on its own terms with special attention given to doctrinal themes such as original sin, human inability, human merit, human responsibility, divine sovereignty, future rewards, etc., as they relate to either grace or free will. Section one will conclude with a bringing together of the two documents in comparison and contrast. The purpose will be to discover whether one theme, grace or free will, stands out against the other and in which document this occurs.
The second section will seek to provide an account for the difference in emphasis (if there is one) between the two documents. Issues concerning the historical background of each will be considered. Texts cannot be read without paying heed to context and a proper understanding of the occasions for writing will shed light on the reasons why certain emphases are found in each. For instance, Augustine wrote the letter to Sixtus because he feared that the future pope might support the Pelagians as he had in the past. In turn, his letters to Hadrumetum and Provence were intended to allay fears that divine agency would annihilate human freedom. The differences in authorial intent will hopefully explain why there is a difference in theological matter between the two.
Scholarly work on Augustine’s later anti-Pelagian writings would be profitable historically and theologically. In terms of history, the greater emphasis in Augustinian scholarship has been placed on the controversy between Augustine and Pelagians such as Pelagius, Caelestius, Julian of Aeclanum and the Massilian John Cassian. As noted below, some work has been done on the Hadrumetum confusion, but much more is needed. It is the intent of this writer to offer a unique contribution to this field of study by offering his comparison of Epistle 194 with De gratia et libero arbitrio. It is hoped that providing an adequate answer for their differences will either corroborate with the general claims made by scholars, or it will provide a necessary corrective.
Theologically a study such as this is helpful because the Massilian writings are essentially Augustine’s final words on grace and free will.[11] They represent the culmination of his thought on this subject and are written in a largely non-polemical fashion. The influence of Augustine’s teaching on grace is felt even today and a clear evaluation of it from both a polemical and pastoral perspective would be enlightening.
In terms of pastoral theology, Augustine’s letters to the Massilians are of immense value to the church. At the time of writing the author was near the end of a long and fruitful ministry. He wrote with great pastoral care, recognizing the genuine confusion in monasteries that had been generally sympathetic to his theological perspective and authority. Augustine took great pains to make sure that all confusion was dispensed with, even requesting that the visiting monks from Hadrumetum spend as much time as needed under his mentorship. When further questions were raised after the reception of De gratia et libero arbitrio, he again took up the pen to compose another treatise, De correptione et gratia, hoping to further clear the mists of confusion. The bishop of Hippo provides his readers, then and now, with a great example of both how to be a defender of the faith and a pastor of the flock. It is hoped that each of these emphases will be brought to light in this thesis towards greater encouragement for pastors and churches.
Survey of Current Scholarship
Augustine is surely one of the most studied of the church fathers and may even be the most studied figure in Christian history after the closing of the New Testament canon. In regard to writings on the Pelagian controversy proper there appears to be no end. If this is so, why should there be another study of this aspect of Augustine’s theology? Interestingly, when it comes to so-called semi-Pelagianism, much less has been written. Two of the most important English works on this dispute are Rebecca Harden Weaver’s Divine Grace and Human Agency: A Study of the Semi-Pelagian Controversy and Donato Ogliari’s excellent work Gratia et Certamen: The Relationship Between Grace and Free Will in the Discussion of Augustine with the So-Called Semipelagians. In both of these monographs a chapter is dedicated to the historical developments leading up to the Massilian controversy with particular attention paid to De gratia et libero arbitrio. Yet, as noted, no detailed theological comparison is made between it and Epistle 194. Each of them are more general studies of the Massilian dispute spanning from its beginnings in Africa and culminating with the Second Council of Orange in 529 (in particular Weaver).
A related study is Gerald Bonner’s Freedom and Necessity: St. Augustine’s Teaching on Divine Power and Human Freedom.[12] Bonner is a well-published Augustinian scholar who is a leading authority on Pelagianism. A later chapter in this work focuses on the issue at Hadrumetum and offers some insightful analysis of Augustine’s doctrine of grace in relation to free will. Unfortunately, Bonner is highly critical of Augustine’s theology of grace and often uses negative adjectives that mar the tone of his work.
The critical work of Roland J. Teske in Answer to the Pelagians, IV: To the Monks of Hadrumetum and Provence is indispensable to any study of the Massilian controversy. Teske has given to students of Augustine a translation that is not encumbered with the older English found in the Post-Nicene Fathers edition of the anti-Pelagian writings.[13] In addition to the four Massilian treatises, Teske has provided the background correspondence between Augustine and Valentinus and others, as well as relevant selections from the Retractationes. Also, Teske’s introductory remarks and commentary offer much in the way of guidance and direction.
A number of general studies on Augustine’s thought regarding grace and free will are worth noting. Eleonore Stump’s “Augustine on Free Will”[14] is a good place to begin to understand the bishop’s often-difficult teaching. Also helpful is Nico W. den Bok’s article “Freedom of the Will: A systematic and biographical sounding of Augustine’s thoughts on human willing.”[15] The former is introductory in nature while the latter is more detailed in its analysis; both provide helpful introductory material to this aspect of Augustine’s theology.
William Lane Craig’s “Augustine on Foreknowledge and Free Will”[16] is a philosophical discussion of Augustine’s “theological fatalism” that sets the bishop within the flow of western thought ranging back to Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Cicero. Craig assumes a “Molinist middle-knowledge” position on grace and foreknowledge and his article suffers from some of those presuppositions.
John M. Rist’s “Augustine on Free Will and Predestination”[17] is a survey of Augustine’s writings on grace and free will in more of a survey fashion. He deals with De gratia et libero arbitrio among others of the Pelagian and Massilian writings, but he branches out farther into other works of Augustine such as De ciuitate Dei and Enchiridion. He explains the categories and terminology in reference to grace and free will used by Augustine in relevant collected writings.
Other helpful scholarly discussions on Augustine, grace, free will and general Pelagianism can be found in the bibliography below.
Conclusion
This period in late antiquity was awash in theological controversy. It also saw the persecution of the church at the hands of political leaders. Arguably the most important defender of the faith “once delivered” at this time was Augustine of Hippo. A lengthy dispute that assumed much of Augustine’s later career was the Pelagian controversy. In it, the “doctor of grace” defeated theologians of various backgrounds and abilities. After the controversy itself had died down, a similar, but slightly different discussion arose amongst monastic communities in western Africa and Southern Gaul. Augustine handled these in a fashion somewhat unlike the one he used against the Pelagian heretics. Instead of heavy-handed language and political intervention he offered pastoral insight and care.
The influence of Augustine’s teaching on grace has been far reaching in the history of the church. During the medieval period theologians such as Anselm of Canterbury and Thomas Aquinas developed aspects of Augustine’s thinking, adding their own peculiar perspectives to it. In the sixteenth century, a rediscovery of Augustine’s doctrine of grace ignited a flame that burnt across Europe in the Protestant Reformation. Men like Martin Luther and John Calvin quoted often from Augustine in their development of the doctrines of grace, so much so in Calvin that Calvinism can rightly be referred to as Augustinianism. This flame continues to burn to this day as Christians continue to try and understand the relationship between God’s sovereignty and human responsibility.
May it be that this proposed thesis would offer an historical perspective on this certain aspect of Augustine’s writing and a theological and practical perspective that would be of benefit to the academy and the church. A comparison of Epistle 194 and De gratia et libero arbitrio will be useful to the historian who seeks greater detail in his or her understanding of the development of Augustine’s thought. For the Christian, theologian or layperson, Augustine’s teaching on grace and free will will hopefully become clearer in their minds. And may his pastoral care also be an example to Christians everywhere when they seek to correct brothers and sisters in Christ on such an important theological topic.
[1] Augustine, “Epistle 194” in Saint Augustine: Letters Volume IV (165-203) trans. Wilfrid Parsons (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1955), 301-332.
[2] Rebecca Harden Weaver, Divine Grace and Human Agency: A Study of the Semi-Pelagian Controversy (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1996), 5.
[3] Peter Brown, “Pelagius and His Supporters: Aims and Environment” in Journal of Theological Studies XIX.1 (April 1968): 93-114. See also Eugene TeSelle, “Pelagius, Pelagianism” in Allan D. Fitzgerald ed., Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids/Cambridge, Michigan/United Kingdom: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 633-640.
[4] Rebecca Harden Weaver, “Hadrumetum” in Allan D. Fitzgerald ed., Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids/Cambridge, Michigan/United Kingdom: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 633-640.
[5] Augustine, “Grace and Free Choice” in Roland J. Teske trans., Answer to the Pelagians, IV: To the Monks of Hadrumetum and Provence. In The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century 1.26 (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 1999), 71-106.
[6] Donato Ogliari, Gratia et Certamen: The Relationship Between Grace and Free Will in the Discussion of Augustine with the So-Called Semipelagians (Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2003), 58.
[7] For the sake of this proposal the terms Massilian/Massilianism will be used instead of semi-Pelagianism. For more on why the term semi-Pelagian is inappropriate see Mary Alphonsine Lesousky, The De Dono Perseverantiae of Saint Augustine: A Translation with An Introduction and Commentary (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1956), 35-39; Roland J. Teske, “General Introduction” in Roland J. Teske trans. Answer to the Pelagians, IV: To the Monks of Hadrumetum and Provence in The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century 1.26 (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 1999), 11; Conrad Leyser, “Semi-Pelagianism” in Allan D. Fitzgerald ed., Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids/Cambridge, Michigan/United Kingdom: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 761-766. See Ogliari, Gratia et Certamen, 5-9 for reasons why Massilian/Massilianism are better terms.
[8] The four treatises can be found in Teske, Answer to the Pelagians IV.
[9] Weaver, Divine Grace and Human Agency, 4 (emphasis mine).
[10] Ogliari, Gratia et Certamen, 58.
[11] In fact, they are the last works mentioned in Augustine’s Retractationes, see Augustine, “Revisions II 66 (93)” in Roland J. Teske trans. Answer to the Pelagians, IV: To the Monks of Hadrumetum and Provence in The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century 1.26 (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 1999), 70; Augustine, “Revisions II 67 (94)” in Roland J. Teske trans. Answer to the Pelagians, IV: To the Monks of Hadrumetum and Provence in The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century 1.26 (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 1999), 108.
[12] Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2007.
[13] Philip Schaff ed., Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Volume 5. Augustin: Anti-Pelagian Writings (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2004).
[14] In The Cambridge Companion to Augustine, eds. Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 124-147.
[15] Augustiniana 44 (1994): 237-270.
[16] Augustinian Studies 15 (1984): 41-63.
[17] Journal of Theological Studies XX.2 (October 1969): 421-447.Labels: augustine, patristics, tbs, thesis |
| posted by Ian @ 2:55 PM |
|
|
|
| Don Carson - Spiritual Life Conference |
| Wednesday, January 23, 2008 |
Also, Carson will be speaking at the January Sovereign Grace Pastor's Fellowship (aka. FRPS) on the Monday at 10am. The pastors meet at Thistletown Baptist Church on Kipling, near Albion.
On Tuesday he will be speaking at Tyndale College for their chapel service (don't know the details).
On Wednesday he will be at Toronto Baptist Seminary speaking in our chapel at 11:15am. We're at Jarvis and Gerrard in downtown Toronto.
So next week is definitely a Carson week. Make it worthwhile! Labels: conferences, d a carson, tbs, toronto |
| posted by Ian @ 11:51 AM |
|
|
|
| The Authenticity of Ignatius' Seven Letters |
| Thursday, November 22, 2007 |
I wrote this over the summer for a reading seminar I did on Ignatius of Antioch. Dr. Haykin supervised my work. I had great fun researching this very important church father and the transmission of his writings.
Introduction
The authenticity of the seven letters of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch (c. 34-c.107),[1] has been debated throughout the history of the church, particularly in the seventeenth century.[2] John Milton best captures the complexity of the debate in his satirical question, “In the midst therefore of so many forgeries where shall we fixe to dare say this is Ignatius? as for his stile, who knows it? So disfigur’d and interrupted as it is.”[3] While most contemporary scholars are in agreement that the so-called middle recension of letters is authentic, there have been some who have argued otherwise.[4] The purpose of this paper will be to survey the historical scholarship pertaining to the letters and how the conclusion was reached that the middle recension is the true collection. Particular attention to the role of James Ussher will also be paid in the discussion of the middle recension.
Recensions
It has been recognised since the work of Lightfoot that there are three different classifications of letters, called recensions, that claim to be of Ignatian character.[5] In chronological order the first is the middle recension, containing the seven authentic letters, referred to in Eusebius’ Church History.[6] The second is the long recension that appeared in the latter part of the fourth century. The third, known as the short recension was not discovered until the middle of the nineteenth century. In the following the short recension will be discussed first, followed by the long and concluding with greater attention to detail regarding the middle.
Short Recension
The short recension is so-labelled because of the brevity of its form and because the letters “lack phrases, sentences, and even long sections that appear in the text of the uninterpolated seven.”[7] It is thought to be a précis of the middle recension, specifically the letters to Polycarp, Ephesians and Romans with a paragraph from Trallians. Schoedel surmises that the summary was constructed for monastic purposes.[8] Corwin compares the letter to the Ephesians in the short and middle recensions showing that the former is one-third the length of the latter.[9]
The short recension exists only in a Syriac text.[10] William Cureton was the first to publish it in his Antient Syriac Version of the Epistles of Saint Ignatius to St. Polycarp, the Ephesians and Romans (1845) after the letters had been brought from the Nitrian desert to the British Museum. It was Cureton’s argument that these were the genuine letters and that Eusebius had not been absolutely certain of the letters (middle recension) he referenced.[11] Both Theodor Zahn[12] and J. B. Lightfoot argued against Cureton’s thesis in favour of the middle recension. Most scholars since their time have followed in their footsteps, dismissing Cureton’s arguments.
The most decisive blow levelled by Lightfoot against Cureton is the comparison he made between the short recension and fragments of a Syriac translation of the middle recension. “It is strange that Cureton should not have been struck by the close resemblance between the Syriac fragments (S1, S2, S3) and the Syriac version of the three epistles in the Short recension (S).”[13] Lightfoot felt that the coincidences between them were so strong that the only possible conclusion was that one had to be derived from the other. If it can be shown that the short is dependent upon the middle, “all the evidence for the genuineness for the Short recension disappears.”[14] Lightfoot observes, “Cureton failed to see the resemblance, and therefore did not enter into this question, though it was one of paramount importance to him, inasmuch as his theory of the genuineness of the Short recension stands or falls as it is answered.”[15] For Lightfoot, it makes more sense to think that a Syrian had found a copy of the middle recension and summarised it for one reason or another, than to think that it was expanded upon in forgery: “This is the more obvious explanation.”[16] Quoting C. C. Richardson, Brown says, “In the works of Theodor Zahn and of J. B. Lightfoot it was ‘convincingly shown that Cureton’s text represents a rather crude abridgment of the original letters.’”[17]
Long Recension
The long recension owns its name because it is the largest collection of letters, thirteen in all, vying for a spot in the Ignatian corpus. Schoedel claims that it first appeared in the late fourth century and was first referenced by the monophysite Stephen Gorbarus in 570 AD.[18] The long recension contains the seven letters found in the middle recension, namely those to the churches in Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralles, Philadelphia, Smyrna and Rome and to the bishop Polycarp. Yet, these seven differ from the middle recension as they have been interpolated with texts that expand the length of the letters. Accompanying these are five additional letters addressed to the churches in Tarsus, Antioch and Philippi as well as to a man named Hero (said to be Ignatius’ replacement in Antioch[19]) and a woman named Mary of Cassabola. There is also included a letter from Mary to Ignatius. Manuscripts for the long recension exist only in Greek and Latin.[20]
Of its style, excluding the letter from Mary, Brown observes,
These twelve letters bear a remarkable resemblance to the pattern of Paul’s corpus…There is an inner consistency of form, notably in the salutations and farewell greetings, and there is considerable homogeneity of thought, doctrine, and exhortation. The amount of writing is extensive enough for an application of the customary linguistic or stylistic tests.[21]
This description differs widely from the letters of the middle recension, which were apparently written in haste. Corwin describes the writings as “broken, marred occasionally with uncompleted sentences and above all lacking in connected argument. Nowhere is there development of ideas in measured, logical sequence.”[22] By noting the style Corwin does not seek to “dispose of the letters as inconsequential,” rather, the hurriedness of their style speaks to the external conditions suffered by Ignatius as he travelled in chains from Antioch to Rome. The letters of the middle recension, over and against the long, “bear the clear marks of having been written under external as well as internal pressures.”[23] Therefore, the structure and form of the long recension described by Brown militate against their being the genuine letters.
The authenticity of the long recension has been the subject of “learned and acrimonious” debate.[24] During the fourth century when the long recension first came into existence, the church was embroiled in a monophysite controversy regarding Christ’s two natures.[25] Much of the interpolated texts were anachronistic[26] having “reflected the religious and social realities of the time.”[27] Yet the long recension came to dominate in the medieval period, displacing the authentic letters.[28]
In the seventeenth century a debate over ecclesiastical polity erupted and Ignatius was again a key figure. Because his letters were the first in the early church to offer a tripartite distinction between the offices of bishop, elder and deacon,[29] those in favour of mono-episcopalian church order sought to establish an early date for his letters to demonstrate the antiquity of their view. Many of non-conformist background argued against this, hoping to either discredit Ignatian authorship of the letters altogether, or at least demonstrate that they were of a later date. A casualty of this debate was the spurious collection of letters and interpolations that contributed to the long recension whose true nature was realised. More detail on how this razing occurred is provided in the discussion of the middle recension.
Middle Recension
The middle recension contains seven letters, in uninterpolated form, that constitute modern collections of the letters of Ignatius[30] and are widely recognised as authentic. They exist in Greek (Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus), Latin and Armenian versions as well as fragments in Coptic and Syriac.[31] An early reference to them can be found in the Church History of Eusebius of Caesarea, who records Ignatius as the second bishop of Antioch after Euodius with Hero succeeding him.[32] The historian also draws attention to references to the letters by Irenaeus and Polycarp in their writings.
The authenticity of the long recension held sway throughout the medieval period. In 1623, when Nicholaus Vedelius published a text that contained the middle recension with an appendix of spurious letters attached, scholars began to question the long recension. Vedelius was of the opinion that even the Eusebian letters were interpolated and were dependent upon the Apostolic Constitutions that had been written long after Ignatius lived.[33] As much as he tried, Vedelius could not establish the original text of letters.[34] It was not until the work of an Irish primate that serious headway could be made in determining which letters were the ones that came from Ignatius’ own hand.
James Ussher (1581-1656), bishop of Armagh in Ireland, is memorialised for his Annals of the World that set the date of the world’s creation at 4004 BC. Unfortunately, Ussher’s brilliance as a theologian and historian has been overshadowed by contemporary creation/evolution rhetoric. Alan Ford, in the introduction to his biography of Ussher begins with a lengthy list of quotations from various figures in history that showered accolades upon the Irish theologian.[35] To cite but one, Robert Huntington, Provost of Trinity College Dublin, who said that Ussher was “one of the greatest scholars, which the reformed churches or the Irish nation ever bred.”[36]
One discipline that Ussher was regarded to be an expert in was patristic history.[37] Often engaged in debates with various Roman Catholic theologians, Ussher defended the antiquity of protestant thought by tracing it throughout the early church.[38] As the debate over the authenticity and date of Ignatius’ letters continued in the seventeenth century, Ussher was one of the key scholars to offer an opinion.[39] Most importantly, it was Ussher who made a major contribution to the final laying aside of the long recension.
In the thirteenth century Robert Grossteste (c. 1250), bishop of Lincoln, published works containing various Latin quotations of Ignatius. In the fourteenth century more quotations were to be found in the writings of John Tyssington (c. 1381) and William Wodeford (c. 1396). Upon reading them, Ussher recognised that these quotations coincided with the ones found in Eusebius, and differed with the long recension.[40] Because English writers quoted them, Ussher concluded that the Latin text of Ignatius’ letters must be housed in an English library. His search paid off as Ussher discovered two Latin manuscripts of the letters. As he studied them, Ussher discovered that the translation was likely by Grossteste himself. Notes in the margin betrayed an English author: “Incus est instrumentum fabri; dicitur Anglice anfeld (anvil).”[41] There were also comparisons made in the notes between the Latin translation and the original Greek. Knowing that Grossteste was one of the foremost Greek scholars in England at the time, he was the best candidate for translator.[42] Lightfoot himself determined that Grossteste was the author by accurately comparing a manuscript from Tours that testified to be authored by the bishop of Lincoln.[43]
The seven letters of the Latin translation were enough to convince Ussher that six of the seven were genuine; he rejected the letter to Polycarp thinking it false. Ussher came to this conclusion because of a statement from Jerome who argued that the Polycarp letter was inauthentic. In 1644 he published Polycarp et Ignatii Epistolae offering his conclusions to the greater scholarly community. Ussher’s work was so significant, moving criticism of the Ignatian corpus “beyond the speculative stage”[44] that at the time of publishing, Oxford University made an engraving of Ussher to be placed at the beginning of his edition of Ignatius.[45] Of his importance, Lightfoot could say, “To the critical genius of Ussher belongs the honour of restoring the true Ignatius.”[46]
In 1646 Isaac Voss published a short form of the Greek text found in the Medicean Library in Florence. Although the letter to the Romans was absent, it was later included as authentic after it had been found in a Latin manuscript of the “Acts of Ignatius” published by T. Ruinart in 1689 in his Acta Martryum Sincera.[47] The work of these seventeenth century scholars essentially closed the door on the question of which were the authentic letters. The final work of Zahn and especially Lightfoot placed final confirmation in the minds of scholars that they can rest assured that the seven letters of the middle recension are indeed those written by Ignatius of Antioch.
[1] To the Ephesians, To the Magnesians, To the Trallians, To the Romans, To the Philadelphians, To the Smyrnaeans, To Polycarp.
[2] For a survey of this debate see Virginia Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1960), 1-30; William R. Schoedel, “Introduction” in Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch, William R. Schoedel, ed., Helmut Koester (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Fortress Press, 1985), 1-7; Christine Trevett, A Study of Ignatius of Antioch in Syria and Asia Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 29 (Lewiston/Queenston/Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press, 1992), 9-15.
[3] John Milton, Of Prelatical Episcopacy, 1641 cited in Trevett, A Study of Ignatius in Syria and Asia, 10.
[4] For instance Josep Rius-Camps, The Four Authentic Letters of Ignatius, The Martyr Christianismos 2 (Rome: Pontificum Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1979). For a response to Rius-Camps and others see William R. Schoedel, “Are the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch Authentic?” in Religious Studies Review 6.3 (July 1980): 196-201; and Trevett, A Study of Ignatius of Antioch in Syria and Asia, 11-15.
[5] J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers: Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp (London: Macmillan, 1889; reprinted Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989).
[6] Paul L. Maier, Eusebius The Church History: A New Translation with Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1999), 123-125.
[7] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 5.
[8] Schoedel, “Introduction,” 3.
[9] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 5.
[10] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 72-73.
[11] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 5.
[12] Theodor Zahn, Ignatius von Antiochen (Gotha: Perthes, 1873).
[13] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 104.
[14] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 105.
[15] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 105.
[16] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 105.
[17] Milton Perry Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius: A study of linguistic criteria (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1963), xiii.
[18] Schoedel, “Introduction,” 2.
[19] Maier, Eusebius The Church History, 125.
[20] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 4.
[21] Brown, Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xi.
[22] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 19.
[23] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 20.
[24] Stephen Neill and Tom Wright, The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861-1986 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988, reprinted 2003), 44.
[25] For more on monophysitism see Iain R. Torrance, “Monophysitism” in The Dictionary of Historical Theology ed. Trevor A. Hart (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2000), 378-380.
[26] Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xii.
[27] Schoedel, “Introduction,” 2.
[28] Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xiii; Schoedel, “Introduction,” 2.
[29] Ephesians 3.1-6.1; Magnesians 3.1-4.1; 6.1-7.2; Trallians 2.1-3.2; Smyrnaeans 8.1-9.1; Polycarp 1.2-1.2.
[30] For instance, Bart D. Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers: Volume 1 Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2003).
[31] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 73; Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 4. Schoedel, “Introduction,” 3, notes an Arabic text close in relation to the Syriac.
[32] Maier, Eusebius The Church History, 123-125.
[33] Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xii; Trevett, A Study of Ignatius of Antioch in Syria and Asia, 9.
[34] Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 5.
[35] Alan Ford, James Ussher: Theology, History, and Politics in Early-Modern Ireland and England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 1-4.
[36] Ford, James Ussher, 3.
[37] J. E. L. Oulton, “Ussher’s Work as a Patristic Scholar and Church Historian” in Hermathena LXXXVIII (November 1956): 3-11.
[38] For instance An answer to a challenge made by a Jesuite in Ireland (Dublin, 1624).
[39] Ford, James Ussher, 237.
[40] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 76; Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xii; Corwin, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch, 5.
[41] “The anvil destroys the workman’s tool; says the Englishman’s anvil.”
[42] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 76.
[43] Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 76-77.
[44] Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xii.
[45] Oulton, “Ussher’s Work as a Patristic Scholar and Church Historian,” 9.
[46] Cited in Oulton, “Ussher’s Work as a Patristic Scholar and Church Historian,” 9.
[47] Brown, The Authentic Writings of Ignatius, xii. Labels: ignatius of antioch, patristics, tbs, ussher |
| posted by Ian @ 11:09 AM |
|
|
|
| Haykin Lecture on John Newton |
| Wednesday, October 31, 2007 |
The Sovereign Grace Pastor’s Fellowship will be holding it's November 19th meeting at Toronto Baptist Seminary with Guest Lecturer Dr. Michael A. G. Haykin (left in pic above).
“The Life of John Newton” Presented by Dr. Michael Haykin
November 19, 2007 - 10:00 AM
Toronto Baptist Seminary
130 Gerrard Street East,
Toronto, Ontario, M5A 3T4
(416) 925-3263
In the chapel of Jarvis St. Baptist Church (Limited free parking is available!). There will also be an excellent (both in content and price!) booksale upstairs at Jarvis - bring your wallets!
Register in advance by calling 416.925.3263
Labels: church history, evangelicalism, friends, john newton, tbs |
| posted by Ian @ 11:42 AM |
|
|
|
| Reflecting on Fuller's Letters |
| Sunday, April 29, 2007 |
 The following is a reflection paper that I wrote for Dr. Haykin's Baptist History and Heritage class this past semester at TBS. It is a meditation on Armies of the Lamb, a collection of Andrew Fuller's letters edited by Dr. Haykin.
The Particular Baptists have a spiritual heritage that is as rich as any in the Christian tradition. Although they might not have such spiritual writers in their fold as St. John of the Cross or Thomas à Kempis the Baptists are not lacking in terms of devotional literature. One collection of writings that stand out as an example of classic Christian spirituality are the letters of Andrew Fuller (1754-1815) now immortalized in Michael Haykin’s The Armies of the Lamb: The Spirituality of Andrew Fuller.[1] The following is a brief reflection upon a number of these letters and the spiritual impact that they have had on the life of this reader.
Of the various ways that Fuller’s letters have shaped my affections or changed my thoughts, three things stand out. The first is the humility that typically characterizes godly men and women, exemplified by Fuller. Not infrequently does the reader find letters of self-abasement in this collection. The second is the need for friendship in the Christian life. There can be no doubt that the accomplishments of Fuller and the men of the Baptist Missionary Society would not have been what they were had it not been for the uncommon bond of friendship between them. The third and final point noted in this paper is the great need for regular spiritual discipline. It was encouraging to see that Fuller shared in the same struggles as myself both when it came to personal devotion and the desire to become more devoted to Christ. Let us now turn to each one more specifically.
Humility
What struck me the most when reading Fuller’s letters was the humility displayed in their pages. Fuller was a theologian of tremendous insight, whose nickname “the Elephant of Kettering” fit him both in terms of physical stature and intellectual carriage. Fuller’s writings covered a vast array of controversial subjects including hyper-Calvinism, Sandemanianism, Socinianism, Unitarianism and a host of others. Alongside all of this highbrow theologizing, Fuller always maintained the proper balance between doctrine and praxis. This is evident in the energy he exerted as the secretary of the Baptist Missionary Society. Considering both his literary accomplishments and his work at bringing the gospel to “the heathen,” one could understand if he took the opportunity to proverbially pat himself on the back every now and again. But this is not the case, at least if his letters prove to be a good example.
One example of Fuller’s humility is see | | |
