Coffee and Bears

Posted in Non-fiction writing with tags on March 9, 2010 by Wes Bredenhof

This is an excerpt from chapter 3 of the book I’m working on.  Just a rough draft, but you get the idea.  Enjoy!

*************************

When I arrived at Mary’s place, I had a wonderful visit.  Before we moved to Fort Babine, I was never really a big coffee drinker.  I could never understand the kind of people who could drink a whole pot in one morning all on their own.  Well, here I am all these years later and I am that person.  Sure, I can get by without it – I don’t get withdrawal symptoms if I don’t have it.  But I do enjoy a litre or two of the darkest brew imaginable on any given morning.  There’s a saying that “Coffee, like love, should be stronger than death.”  I learned that in Fort Babine and I blame it completely on Mary Michell.

At Mary’s house, I had the opportunity to ask lots of questions and get a few answers.  For instance, I asked her about how many people speak Babine (or Carrier as she called it).  According to Mary, quite a few still spoke it, most could understand it.  The young kids, however, were a different story.  Their level of comprehension and speaking ability was quite superficial, though it was taught in the school by a local woman.  Mary herself, like most adults in the village, was more fluent in Babine than in English (although her English was very good).  I also asked about other aspects of the traditional Babine culture.  She told me that many people still go to Burns Lake for potlatch feasts.

Her sons Lyle and Jason were also there that day and so I was able to meet them too.  Before I left, Mary forced me to eat three pieces of freshly fried bannock – very tasty!  Before I left, she made sure that I took home some more bannock for my family and some sockeye salmon.  I was thinking that I could get used to this place.

One of the things that took getting used to was the presence of bears.  That fall there was a young grizzly bear roaming around the village.  He usually showed up at night and would rummage through people’s garbage.  One evening over at our house, I ran into a black bear.  The building where we were staying had a loft and that was where I had my study set up.  However, to get up to the loft, I had to go outside and go to the stairs at the back of the house.  There were only the one set of outside stairs going up there.  There at the back of the house I saw him and he gave me quite a fright.  I remember camping in the Rocky Mountains as a kid and while the rest of my family was safely in the trailer, I had to sleep outside in a tent.  In bear country.  I heard sounds.  One time I was outside taking care of business and I was positive that I saw a bear and ran for the only building nearby – the bathrooms.  My dad heard the commotion and he came to get me and showed me “the bear.”  It was our portable barbeque sitting on the picnic table.  It was black and it was dark outside – it sure looked like a bear to me!  So, I have a history of bear frights.  My turn to frighten a bear or two was coming.

You Can Pray to Christ!

Posted in prayer with tags on March 8, 2010 by Wes Bredenhof

One of the strangest teachings floating around some Reformed churches is the idea that we are not allowed to pray to the Lord Jesus, but only to the Father.  By that same token, hymns of praise to Christ are also out of the question.  The problem with this view is that we find examples in Scripture of the early church and the apostles praying to Christ.  I mentioned this in my sermon yesterday morning:

While he was being stoned to death, we hear Stephen praying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” and “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.”  Stephen prayed to the Lord Jesus and in the centuries to follow, thousands of martyrs would repeat his prayer. In 1 Corinthians 12, we read of how Paul prayed to the Lord Jesus and pleaded with him to remove the thorn in his flesh.  In 1 Corinthians 16:22, we read the brief prayer of Paul for the coming of the Lord Jesus, “Maranatha!  Come, O Lord!”  The apostle John echoes that prayer in Revelation 22:20, “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.”  If the apostles and early Christians prayed to the Lord Jesus and their example is in the Bible, certainly we also have that freedom.

This morning as I was preparing my notes on Volume 2 of Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics, I noticed that he commented on this as well:  “…the Holy Spirit dwells in and among us, with the result that our prayers are directed more to the Father and to the Mediator than to him” (311).  Notice that Bavinck speaks of directing our prayers to the Mediator — and this is fine.  It’s also okay to pray (and sing) to the Holy Spirit, though it would not be our regular practice.  Wherever this thinking came from, it didn’t come from Bavinck.

For those who do think that it is sinful to pray to the Lord Jesus, I would want to ask:  which commandment is being broken?  Further, if it is sinful to pray to the Lord Jesus, then it is also sinful to sing to him — in which case the Canadian Reformed Churches (and other Reformed churches) are living in sin and should be called to repentance.

Finally, I am convinced that this line of thinking contributes to the depersonalization of the Saviour.  It robs our faith of vitality.  By saying that it is a sin to speak with him, we are in danger of making him into an abstract concept rather than recognizing him as a person and treating him as such.  Think about it:  what sense does it make to have a Mediator with whom you’re not even allowed to speak?

Andrew Bird — Lull

Posted in Music with tags on March 6, 2010 by Wes Bredenhof

One of my parishioners recently introduced me to the music of Andrew Bird.  It’s growing on me.  I’d say he’s rather like Sufjan Stevens meets Joanna Newsom meets Great Lake Swimmers…well, you get the idea.  Enjoy.

“We Are His Family”

Posted in Book notes with tags , on March 5, 2010 by Wes Bredenhof

I have resisted the temptation.  Here I was going to share some excerpts from volume 2 of Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics, but I resisted.  There is a necessary being “against,” but it can consume you and eat away at your soul.  Philippians 4:8-9 is still in my Bible.  There is growth in sanctification even in a sinner like me, believe it.

So, instead of Uncle Herman (the brother of Father Abraham), I have a beautiful passage from Bryan Chapell’s Reformed Expository Commentary on Ephesians.  Here he’s commenting on Ephesians 2:19-22:

God says in this passage that we are his family.  We are treasured in his house always, always.  Whatever transitions come, whether they are transitions away from current location or away from his approval, whether they are transitions of success or failure, whether they are transitions of family or difficulty or career, the love of our Father will never waver.  His heavenly power and protection are active in our behalf wherever we go — near or far, to places familiar or alien — because we are citizens of his kingdom and members of his family.  Through Christ we not only have access to our Father’s presence, we also have access to our Father’s heart.  There his Spirit advocates for us with tenderness beyond our provoking and pronounces to our heart what the heavens announce to the world: “You are our child, and you will always be.”

Praise God for the gospel!

Book Review: The End of Secularism

Posted in Book Reviews with tags , on March 3, 2010 by Wes Bredenhof

The End of Secularism, Hunter Baker, Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2009.  Soft cover, 224 pages, $21.99.

Secularism has been a Christian boogeyman for many years.  Reformed Christians in the Netherlands in the nineteenth century were already concerned about it.  In the 1960s and 1970s, worries about secularism provided part of the rationale behind the drive towards a new confession in the Christian Reformed Church.  This would result in “The Contemporary Testimony: Our World Belongs to God.”

In this book, Hunter Baker takes on this difficult subject from historical, political and philosophical perspectives.  The subject is difficult partly because of the way that it eludes easy definition.  On the one hand, secularization is a sociological theory hypothesizing that, as humanity evolves, it will inevitably become increasingly irreligious.  On the other hand, secularism can also refer to theoretical and practical irreligiosity or to a determined effort to isolate religion from other spheres of human activity, especially from politics.  However one defines it, there is a growing realization that secularism is dead and dying, and probably never was all that vital to begin with.  Human beings are incontrovertibly religious, even if seldom Christian.

The first part of The End of Secularism is historical, outlining the development of the relationship between religion and the state.  In the subsequent chapters, Baker gives special attention to the American context.  Baker then investigates postmodern critiques of secularism and finds something of value in these.  In the concluding chapters, we find a case made for pluralism as a viable alternative to secularism.  According to Baker, pluralism works because it keeps the public square open to all, is more realistic, and has been proven historically to bring religious peace.

Being a Canadian, I find it difficult to evaluate the large swaths of this book that deal with the American situation.  For instance, when Baker deals with the fourteenth amendment, I have no idea what he is talking about.  This book is geared to an American audience.  However, I do think that his critique of secularism and secularization theory may be found helpful by people on both sides of the border.  As far as political theory goes, secularization is obviously defective and pluralism appears to be a better alternative.  However, with regards to what exists in our culture, it would seem better to refer to a world of unbelief and wrong belief than it would be to a secular society – unless by “secular” one means non-Christian.  He portrays the Reformation “as a reaction by some Christians against what they viewed as an unacceptable accommodation of the church to worldliness” and John Calvin and Martin Luther as “protesting against secularization” (104).  This is short-sighted.  The protests of the Reformers were not merely geared towards moral vices (“worldliness”), but towards theology gone adrift from God’s Word.  The Reformation context was not irreligious, but religious in the wrong ways.  Would Baker agree that this is the situation we find ourselves in today too?

The End of Secularism is not written for a popular audience.  I would say that it’s aimed towards those with a college or university education.  It’s pedantic at points and takes some patience to engage.  One final criticism:  in chapter 14, the author rightly discards the warfare model for the relationship between science and religion.  However, he seems to be comfortable with the idea of an earth that is millions of years old (88) and states that Darwin’s evolutionary findings are innocuous when it comes to the foundations of the Christian faith, such as the resurrection (88-89).  This is unpersuasive.  The same hermeneutics which say we should focus on the message of Genesis 1 and 2 have also led scholars to say that one should focus on the message of the resurrection rather than its historicity.  Of course, the Apostle Paul (in 1 Corinthians 15) would have something to say about that.  Historicity still matters.