Weblog

Sunday, 01 November 2009

  • For the Love of Aprons

    apron towel A few months ago at an antique mall, I saw an apron with a dish towel sewn on the front. I thought it was a clever idea, but I didn't like the colors of the one I saw. When I went back to the antique mall the other day, the apron was gone, and I have never seen another one. Today I decided to do a google image search to see if I could find one I liked. I stumbled across this one and in the description it said that the towel is held on with a button. Hmmmm, I can sew on a button, and I can sew button holes. Hmmm, this could get interesting....lol

Saturday, 31 October 2009

  • 95 Theses by Martin Luther

    THE 95 THESES

    by Martin Luther

    1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, "Repent" (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

    2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

    3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

    4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

    5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.

    6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.

    7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.

    8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

    9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

    10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.

    11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Mt 13:25).

    12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

    13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.

    14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.

    15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

    16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.

    17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.

    18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.

    19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.

    20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words "plenary remission of all penalties," does not actually mean "all penalties," but only those imposed by himself.

    21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.

    22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.

    23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few.

    24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.

    25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.

    26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.

    27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.

    28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.

    29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.

    30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.

    31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.

    32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

    33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.

    34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.

    35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.

    36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.

    37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.

    38. Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the divine remission.

    39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need of true contrition.

    40. A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes men to hate them -- at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.

    41. Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously think that they are preferable to other good works of love.

    42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.

    43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.

    44. Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.

    45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God's wrath.

    46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.

    47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.

    48 Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.

    49. Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear of God because of them.

    50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.

    51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.

    52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.

    53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

    54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.

    55. It is certainly the pope's sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

    56. The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of Christ.

    57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.

    58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.

    59. St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

    60. Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.

    61. For it is clear that the pope's power is of itself sufficient for the remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.

    62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.

    63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Mt. 20:16).

    64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

    65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly fished for men of wealth.

    66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.

    67. The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.

    68. They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.

    69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.

    70. But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.

    71. Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.

    72. But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence preachers be blessed.

    73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.

    74. Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.

    75. To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.

    76. We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.

    77. To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

    78. We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written, 1 Co 12[:28].

    79. To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is blasphemy.

    80. The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread among the people will have to answer for this.

    81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or from the shrewd questions of the laity.

    82. Such as: "Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church? The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.

    83. Again, "Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

    84. Again, "What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, because of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love's sake?"

    85. Again, "Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences as though they were still alive and in force?"

    86. Again, "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?"

    87. Again, "What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?"

    88. Again, "What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred times a day, as he now does but once?"

    89. "Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously granted when they have equal efficacy?"

    90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.

    91. If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed, they would not exist.

    92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace! (Jer 6:14)

    93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

    94. Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, death and hell.

    95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).

Friday, 30 October 2009

  • Health Update

    I'm am currently day 21 post-op and feel wonderful! Well, except for abdominal pains when I overdo things. Lately, I have a renewed sense of creativity and emotional energy (physical energy will hopefully follow suit in time) that I have not felt in years. It's almost as though my mind is remembering who I once was. I can hear my sister's voice in my head as she says, "I told you so." And, yes, she did tell me I would feel ever so much better. :) I haven't read; I have been naughty and watched a lot of HGTV, so while I'm brimming with creativity for my home, I don't have anything to blog about...sorry. The good news is that I've had about all I can take of the TV and will be reading soon. I hope to get a lot read as I still have 4 weeks off, so I'll be back to blogging soon. :)

Wednesday, 07 October 2009

  • Do you hear what I hear?

    Media_Overload There are so many distractions in life these days that did not exist when I was growing up.  There was no facebook (gasp! oh, horrors!) or other social networking tools.  There was no email, twitter, or blogs.  There were video games, but they were exceedingly boring and not much of a distraction for me.  There were no cell phones where you could not escape from texts or calls.  There were no Mp3 players filled with 1,000 of your favorite songs; only radio, records, and live music (the best of the three).  There was no cable TV with 100's of nonchoices, no VCR's or DVD players; there were 4 basic networks, and they didn't run 24 hours a day.  When I was growing up, we didn't have five or more extra curricular activities....you were something special if you had just one.  I would say that the family generally had only one or two cars in my day, but I can remember a time when there were more cars and trucks in our driveway than we had drivers for.  But there didn't seem to be this insatiable need to be entertained; we were busy with work.  I don't know; maybe your own experience was different.  In our house, if you admitted to being bored, it was quickly remedied with extra work.  What scares me the most about present day trends is not the prolonged adolescence or irresponsibilty so much as it is this culture's inability to listen to God's still, small voice because we're so busy drowning it out with noise and activities that have no value in eternity.

Thursday, 17 September 2009

  • Crazy for God

    "Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back" by Frank Schaeffer
    William H. Smith
    Printer Friendly Version Email Link to a Friend
    Image for Article

    Crazy for God is a sassy, angry, honest, revealing, vulnerable, unsettling, insightful, frustrating book. In other words, it sums up Frank Schaeffer. It is not, however, the tell-all, reject-all book about his parents and evangelicalism that I thought it might be.

    I do have serious misgivings. He has been accused of dishonoring his parents, especially his aged, impaired mother who is not able to defend herself. Reading the book is much like sitting in as a damaged child of famous parents unburdens himself to his therapist. If saying such things at all, or saying them in public, breaks the Fifth Commandment, then he is guilty, but I'm not ready to declare that this is the case.

    As I read the book, the words of the psalmist, "If I had said, 'I will speak thus,' I would have betrayed the generation of your children" (Ps. 73:15), came to mind. The psalmist wrote honestly of his doubts only after they were resolved. But what if one has not resolved his doubts and no longer believes they can be resolved by any "answers"? Is he bound to hold his peace? I don't know.

    Schaeffer's language is earthy. He uses both the "s" and "f" words freely. If Paul had this kind of thing in mind when he directed "let no corrupt communication come out of your mouth," then Schaeffer is guilty. It does seem that he could write a soul-baring book with the same punch with less frequent use of such language. That he uses it at all will offend many.

    He is a man who is still angry with his parents for who they were, what they did, and how they reared him. But this book is not a hate-filled temper tantrum. He has come to terms with his experience of his father better than of his mother, but he has sincere affection for both. The descriptions of times of tenderness and intimacy with his father are moving. His appreciation of his mother's frustrations in marriage and life shows genuine empathy, while his sensitivity toward her in the times he spends with her in her frailty is admirable.

    One reviewer has said that Schaeffer is obsessed with sex, but I don't think obsession is the right word. He has the fascination and conflicted feelings about sex that is not uncommon among those who grew up in fundamentalism. In addition, he has an excuse for his "level of interest," if he is telling the truth about his parents. His mother was unusually open with her children about her intimate marital relations (distinguishing her from the vast majority of fundamentalists) and his father's sexual needs were (shall we say) intense.

    Schaeffer may be wrong in terms of the accuracy and balance of his memories and perceptions of his parents, but he does not seem motivated by a desire to smear and discredit them. His father had a temper, experienced periods of doubt and depression, was both indulgent and negligent toward his son, and allowed himself to be pushed by his son and others toward a political and public role that negated much of the good he had done earlier. His mother was vain, at times dismissive of his father, self-righteous, and for the most part (unlike her husband) blissfully unaware of her faults.

    But Frank does not spare himself. He may confess his sexual sins with a little too much glee and be a bit too proud of his doubts, but for the most part he is honest-honest about his rebellion, his arrogance, his hypocrisy, his failures as a husband and a father, his intensity, and his impulsiveness.

    He is also honest about his doubts and his rejections of the Christian faith. It is somewhat surprising that he is so honest about them inasmuch as he does not write to debunk faith. Most markedly he has his doubts about God, not an uncommon doubt to have but an uncommon one to admit. He has dismissed the inerrancy of the Bible as a view that can be sustained only by denying or explaining away the things that argue against it. He can no longer accept, and was never really comfortable with, the glib and formulaic expressions of Christian belief and practice so common among the old fundamentalists, the parachurch organizations, and the "faces" of current evangelicalism.

    Yet he is not entirely without faith. He knows that his persistent search for meaning comes from somewhere. He does not expect to get closure in his search, but he takes even that as evidence of a universal quest for the infinite. He hopes that "maybe there is a God who forgives, who loves, who knows." Is this saving faith? Not exactly? He has not rejected Christian ethics, but, if anything, has become more consistent in their practice as he aged. Perhaps the fact that Frank cannot let go of his faith says he is in the grip of a God who will not let go of him.

    He probably did not intend it to be so, but the book throughout points to the fundamental weakness of twentieth-century evangelicalism—its ecclesiology.

    His father had little regard for the church as an historic and concrete institution. Both Francis Schaeffer and L'Abri were, like so many evangelical stars and all parachurch ministries, beyond the accountability to and the oversight of the church in her governing role. Revivalism, pietism, fundamentalism, liberalism, and spiritual pugilism had all done their parts in emasculating the church and putting the individual, his conscience, and his ministry outside the authority of the church. As Frank observes about his father, "Dad was our 'holy tradition.' He was bigger than any church." And so it is with them all.

    The weakness in ecclesiology is revealed also in the church's worship. Frank got to the point that he could not put up with the tackiness of so much of evangelicalism. Take its music for an example: "How I wished that God had never made any men or women with a 'ministry in music.' I wish he would strike them all down so I'd never have to spend another minute listening to another fat lady (even the men were 'fat ladies' to me) sing another Jesus-is-my-boyfriend song synthesized to violins." Preach on, brother!

    His father's funeral, which was held in a gym and not conducted by a minister, shows evangelical worship at its worst. "Dad's funeral embodied all the chaos, make-it-up-as-you-go insanity of evangelicalism. It was to funerals what 'personalized' weddings are to marriage, one where the young couple compose their own vows while some friend 'really like into guitar' provided the music."

    One of the most insightful paragraphs in the book comes from Frank's experience of that funeral. "There is good reason we humans take refuge in the collective wisdom accumulated over time as expressed in the liturgies and cultural habits of long practice. And the arrogance of the Protestant notion that one's individual whims are equal to all occasions manifests itself in innumerable bad hair moments and in dreadful worship services, let alone innumerable do-it-yourself weddings. But funerals are supposed to be serious. Creativity isn't always good."

    Frank Schaeffer regrets his role in the rise and development of the religious right, which is an example of the church getting confused about why it exists. This is a significant admission. I can remember thinking to myself in the 70s that his father had gone off the tracks with his Christian Manifesto and that Frank's A Time for Anger was over the top. The church then was guilty of hitching its wagon to the various horses of politics, and the faithful still do not always understand that the kingdom does not come about in this way.

    He has rethought his position on abortion. He remains essentially conservative though no longer absolutist. He scorns and skewers the liberal position far more than the conservative, but he now thinks that it was a mistake in the wake of Roe v. Wade for evangelicalism to move to the "no abortion for any reason" position. I can remember being in a seminary class pre-Roe where there was a discussion of abortion. One student spoke of his wife's having had an abortion upon a doctor's recommendation, and there was no horror expressed. It still seems to me that it is impossible to draw a line, so it is safe and wise to mark the beginning of life and of its protection at conception, but we have got ourselves in a situation where rational discussion of national policy is impossible for either side.

    For some reason Schaffer has turned sour and mean about Calvinism, identifying it with fundamentalism in its simplemindedness, rigidity, smug piety, and legalistic rules. On this he is wrong. But, perhaps, the problem is that he learned his Calvinism from his father, and his father never understood it either. Francis "didn't like" Calvin. Added to Frank's attribution of most of the things he doesn't like about his parents to Calvinistic sources, and I guess you can understand.

    Surely the book needs to be answered, as Os Guinness has sought to do. But what we need first to do (and Guinness I think has tried) is to hear Schaeffer. We may not like it. It may make us uncomfortable. Heaven, forefend! It may make us think. But hear and think we must because he's telling us a lot of truth about ourselves.


    Related ArticlesRelated Articles
    Rate This Article Rate This Article
    Rating: Majority voted that they would share this article with others. (2 Votes)

    William H. Smith is pastor of Covenant Presbyterian Church (Louisville, Missouri).

    Issue: "Discipleship: Wisdom for Pilgrims' Progress" Sept./Oct. Vol. 18 No. 5 2009 Pages 43-44

    You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you do not make more than 500 physical copies. We do not allow reposting an article in its entirety on the Internet. We request that you link to this article from your website. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by Modern Reformation (webmaster@modernreformation.org).

    Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: This article originally appeared in the [insert current issue date] edition of Modern Reformation and is reprinted with permission. For more information about Modern Reformation, visit www.modernreformation.org or call               (800) 890-7556         (800) 890-7556. All rights reserved.

Top Tags - Weblog

[no tags]

MrsCallaLilly

  • Visit MrsCallaLilly's Xanga Site
    • Name: Ruthie
    • Gender: Female
    • Member Since: 8/17/2006

Weblog Archives

Don't worry - your calendar is here… to see it in action just click "Save" above and refresh the page.

About Me

[no info]