+ Pádraig of Ireland, Bishop and Missionary + 17 March AD 466
Pádraig (Patrick, Padraic), one of the best-known missionary saints, was born to a Christian family in southwest Britain around the year 389. While he was a teenager, raiders captured and took him to Ireland. There, he was forced to serve as a herdsman.
After six years he escaped and found his way, home, and then traveled to a monastery community in France. Imagine the surprise of those who knew him — even by his own reckoning, he left Britain as one who cared little for God.
With his new trust in the Lord, Patrick threw himself wholeheartedly into monastic life. Ordained a bishop in 432, he made his way back to Ireland, where he spent the rest of his long life spreading the Gospel and organizing Christian communities.
He staunchly defended the doctrine of the Holy Trinity during a time when it was not popular to do so. His writings include his autobiography, Confessio, and several prayers and hymns still used in the church today.
Pádraig died around the year 466. Many people attribute the Lorica (see below) to him. One of the symbols used for Patrick in ecclesiastical art is a red Cross Saltire on a white background. This was added to the overlaid crosses of Saint George and Saint Andrew to form the current Union Jack of the United Kingdom.
The legendary account of Patrick driving snakes off of the Emerald Isle is just that — a legend. There's no evidence that snakes ever slithered across Irish soil. Much more likely is the story that he used the shamrock or some other type of clover to roughly illustrate the Holy Trinity to the unconverted folk of Ireland.
If he were to return to earth in present day, one can only imagine the disdain with which this hero of the faith would view the drunken celebrations in many places which are held to "honor" his memory.
Lection
Psalm 97:1-2,7-12 or 96:1-7
1 Thessalonians 2:2b-12
Matthew 28:16-20
Collect
Almighty God, in Your providence You chose your servant Pádraig to be the apostle of the Irish people, to bring those who wandered in darkness and error to the true light and knowledge of You; grant us so to walk in that light, that we may come at last to the light of everlasting life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now forever.
The Lorica or Saint Patrick's Breastplate
I bind unto myself today
the strong Name of the Trinity,
by invocation of the same,
the Three in One, and One in Three.
I bind this day to me forever,
by power of faith, Christ's Incarnation;
his baptism in the Jordan river;
his death on cross for my salvation;
his bursting from the spiced tomb;
his riding up he heavenly way;
his coming at the day of doom:
I bind unto myself today.
I bind unto myself the power
of the great love of cherubim;
the sweet "Well done" in judgement hour;
the service of the seraphim;
confessors' faith, apostles' word,
the patriarchs' prayers, the prophets' scrolls;
all good deeds done unto the Lord,
and purity of virgin souls.
I bind unto myself today
the virtues of the starlit heaven,
the glorious sun's life-giving ray,
the whiteness of the moon at even,
the flashing of the lightning free,
the whirling wind's tempestuous shocks,
the stable earth, the deep salt sea,
around the old eternal rocks.
I bind unto myself today
the power of God to hold and lead,
his eye to watch, his might to stay,
his ear to hearken to my need;
the wisdom of my God to teach,
his hand to guide, his shield to ward;
the word of God to give me speech,
his heavenly host to be my guard.
Against the demon snares of sin,
the vice that gives temptation force,
the natural lusts that war within,
the hostile men that mar my course;
of few or many, far or nigh,
in every place, and in all hours
against their fierce hostility,
I bind to me these holy powers.
Against all Satan's spells and wiles,
against false words of heresy,
against the knowledge that defiles
against the heart's idolatry,
against the wizard's evil craft,
against the death-wound and the burning
the choking wave and poisoned shaft,
protect me, Christ, till thy returning.
Christ be with me, Christ within me,
Christ behind me, Christ before me,
Christ beside me, Christ to win me,
Christ to comfort and restore me,
Christ beneath me, Christ above me,
Christ in quiet, Christ in danger,
Christ in hearts of all that love me,
Christ in mouth of friend and stranger.
I bind unto myself the Name,
the strong Name of the Trinity,
by invocation of the same,
the Three in One, and One in Three.
Of whom all nature hath creation,
eternal Father, Spirit, Word:
praise to the Lord of my salvation,
salvation is of Christ the Lord.
Translation by Cecil Francis Alexander
This was retrieved from over at Aardvark Alley....
(P.S. - Poor St. Patrick must be rolling over in his grave at the debauchery celebrated on this day of his commemoration. Let's be sober and chaste on the day of this great saint and attempt to lead a life as noble as his.)
.
(This story was originally found in the "Toledo Blade" publication:)
Meet Rev. (or I guess now Father) Daniel Hackney.
He is not what would be considered a "high-rank" Lutheran converting over to the Eastern Orthodox tradition so to speak, however, his case does give us an object lesson into how the deep-roots of heterodoxy in ones past can easily influence one to stray from true apostolic Christianity, such as the kind found in orthodox Lutheranism. (I will abstain from any distinctive critique at the moment in saying that he was apart of the LC-MS, which could possibly mean he never valued orthodox Lutheranism, but that for now is neither here nor there, because of my personal ignorance to aspects of his life and the inconsequential nature of such a thing to the ultimate moral of the story.)
In his early life he was raised as an "ecumenical mutt", a term he affectionately applies to himself, and his life was not unlike many "boomers" his age. Here's a brief biography provided by David Yonke, religion editor of the Toledo Blade:
"...his parents were Baptists who attended church with his older siblings but had lapsed after he was born."
His affectionate self-description as "ecumenical-mutt" is pretty accurate given his personal history, but, for now pay close attention to the Pentecostalism of his background and just keep that fresh in you minds as I shall return to it later.
It is also evident that he was ambitious in "deeds-oriented" evangelicalism, yet, unfortunately, the article does not touch on anything regarding the evolution of his stance on theology, in that, at a certain point in his life, one of couple of things may or may not have occurred in his Christian walk so as to perhaps drastically change his views, theologically speaking of course.
Here is what I'm driving at, first, it's hard to know if he ever left behind any of his affiliations with Pentecostalism, and the Jesus Movement oriented Christianity of his youth, I mean, did he choose Lutheranism because he saw it as being more conservative, grounded, what have you, than the "hocus-pocus" nature of Pentecostalism; or, was he one of those who believes it's possible to strain out and keep the good "stuff" from the kettle-top of such heterodox organizations while being able to dispense the rest easily down the drain? Alas, we shall never know! However, depending on what path, if either he took, there are two profound conclusions of dire warning to all Lutherans who are not careful when playing "footsie" with other denominations.
The first warning is to beware of sources from church bodies other than your own! Not that this is any guarantee against heterodoxy, for liberalism is rife EVERYWHERE, however, you have, in my opinion, a better chance at staying true to your own confession by viewing everything outside your tradition with a jaundiced eye no matter what time in your life you read it, or have read it. Yet, that is not to say that everything within Lutheranism is beyond reproach, or everything without to be leavened with error. At this point though, it must be said that the best attitude is always that of the Bereans, to test everything in light of the scriptures.
In Rev. Hackney's case, he was turned on to Orthodox Christianity when:
"...he was in high school and read a book by Bishop Kallistos Ware titled The Orthodox Church."
In his opinion this really, "whet [his] appetite..."
And, we all know the rest of the story regarding his "spiritual" upbringing and life history. Yet, if we were to map out the devil's strategy in the life of a believer we would be astounded by the fact that he doesn't always build roadblocks in the path of a Christian, but that sometimes he builds bridges.
The bridge can serve as the second warning to be gained by Father Hackney's story, which is really the same as the first; beware of sources outside of orthodox Lutheranism!!!
You see, early in his life he was turned onto the Orthodox Church, and he then seemingly went in a different direction by embracing Pentecostalism and the Jesus Movement tripe of his youth. All the while he was interested in church history and was a student of it in one form or another. Then, in the middle of it all he embraced Lutheranism; so much so that he became a Lutheran minister in the LC-MS for ten years. Only to embrace the Orthodox Church after his lapse from the LC-MS. Little is said about his thoughts on Missouri, and it's shame that the interviewer didn't ask, yet what we have is what we have.
However, the real kicker is that beside the formalities, theologically speaking, there really is very little difference between the "juvenile" Pentecostalism of his youth and the "mature" Orthodoxy of his current years, for one of the main tenants of both Church bodies theologically speaking is that revelation and authority are capable of being given outside of scripture.
Now, granted, the way that each of these faiths present this facet of their theology is different; with the Orthodox it's about tradition and the consensus of the Father's (ie. Church Fathers), and how that tradition and consensus jives with Scripture. Where it does not jive, it is open to interpretation as long as it doesn't coherently contradict any other theological or traditional dogma as agreed upon by the Fathers. This ultimately means that Scripture is not solely the rule and norm of all things Christian, and the only Scripture that is authoritative is that which is in agreement with the Fathers and prior Church traditions.
It is different, yet similar to Pentecostalism in this sense; Pentecostalism believes that there is human authority outside of scripture like the Orthodox Church, but that this human authority can only be trusted if they are the Lord's "anointed". This "anointing" is proven by signs and wonders like healing the sick, speaking in tongues, prophesying, et. al., and the "anointed ones" are capable of prophesying things as direct revelation from God outside of His Word. This revelation is expected to be, and accepted as authoritative for their parishioners.
Also, with the Orthodox, both the relationship with Christ and the Holy Spirit are essentially two different things, and not necessarily one dependent upon the other in the order of triune procession. According to the Orthodox, they both proceed from the Father, but it is not the Son proceeding from the Father, and the Spirit proceeding from the Son, thus they are subsequently related, yet mutually independent entities only related by the Father. So, if one were to take this to it logical consequence, one would be forced to admit that the Trinity, at least by human understanding, is related, is even of one essence, but is not in any way unified. This disagreement between the Western and Eastern Church is one that goes all the way back to the 879-880 Council of Constantinople where the filioque controversy was anathematized by the Eastern Orthodox Church.
While the Orthodox view of the Trinity is definitely not in line with Scripture, they at least still affirm a Trinity, where Pentecostals affirm what only could be called a "modalistically-uncertain" concept of our Triune God. Now, depending upon the "type" of Pentecostal, for it's hardly a unified Church body, I have heard everything affirmed about the Trinity from, Jesus was just a really good "Dude" adopted by the Father because of his goodness, too, there was God the Father at first, and then He came as the Son on Earth, and now He is the Holy Spirit. There are iterations upon iterations regarding everything in between those two spectrum's, but hopefully you get the point, which is, as regarding the Trinity, they are obviously way out there in left field far from any sound Scriptural teaching.
Most of the problem, as usual, has to do with human reason's need to understand something that's basically beyond all comprehension. How can God be three in one and one in three; how could Christ be God, while praying to God the Father, etc.? It doesn't make sense, that is at least according to human reason. But does not the Orthodox as well suffer from this worship of reason, for when we seek to put man as the authority over God and His Word, all sorts of errors are bound to spring up like Lillie's in April. Human reason always demands supremacy, even, unfortunately, over the Lord our God.
While, admittedly, these two Churches are different, there are similarities between them, and one can see that it wouldn't be too hard for a deceiver like Satan to bridge the errors of both, that is if one still harbored a soft spot in their heart for the heterodoxy of their youth.
Now, that is not to say that this is what happened to Rev. (or now Father) Hackney. I don't know the man personally, and I wouldn't want somebody speculating about me when they had no idea who I was, or what the circumstances of my life were personally. Yet, his story I believe is an excellent springboard for discussion on this strange phenomena of people with a liberal past all-of-a-sudden embracing Eastern Orthodoxy, or Roman Catholicism based on superficial reasons, such as:
"...[he] felt drawn by the history and continuity of Orthodox Christianity."
(this one is hard to understand, the age of the Church lends to its authenticity? If so, how?) or that,
"Most people come into contact with God through the worship services. Most people don't read their Bibles, really,...And so [he] wanted to be a part of something whose worship transcends categories such as traditional and contemporary, something that remains the same so that [he] can have the assurance that [his] children and their children will be praying the same prayers, singing the same hymns, and worshiping in the same way."
(excluding his statements about reading Bibles and transcendance, could the rest not be achieved in confessional Lutheranism?) or that,
"...there was a desire for something else..."
(I suspect another desire for something else will perhaps arise in time, but then again who knows?) or that,
"[He] found in the Orthodox Church a richness in their daily prayer lives,...They had a structure. They had offices of prayer that are easy to follow. And by daily commemorating the saints that have gone before us, [he is] now connected with them in a way that has found its fullness in the Orthodox Church."
(once again, excluding the statement regarding commemoration of the saints and his connection to them through the Church, couldn't he have had just as rich a daily prayer life with the offices of prayer found in pastoral service books, or hymnals, etc.?)
However, if there is one ray of sunshine in regards to Father Hackney it is this:
"I'm committed to religious pluralism, and by that I mean everyone has a right to worship as they deem necessary according to their conscience," Father Daniel said. "This does not mean that we have to accept what everyone believes, we have the right to disagree." [emphasis mine]
I do not share his same enthusiasm about religious pluralism, however I do agree that we don't have to accept what everyone believes, and in that spirit I do not accept what Father Hackney believes. Perhaps one day he and others like him will see, and I pray it happens sooner rather than later, that what he and others like him are looking for, this style over substance, this personal fulfillment over the resignation of our will unto God's, this restless heart that we feel must be tamed by what pleases us, will one day find rest in the comfort given us by the pure doctrine of the Lutheran Church, something he already had in his hands and unfortunately let slip away.
.
.
.
The Christians as the Romans Saw Them
by: Stephen C. Lomax
September, 2008, a study of the Epistle to the Romans was begun. On the first week, pastor touched on preparatory matters and spoke about the character of Roman civilization at the time, particularly how it might have resembled or differed from our way of life. Permission was obtained to distribute this brief study to the Adult Bible Study class.
Because we are especially familiar with the historical record of the times left us by the Church fathers and apologists in the generations directly succeeding the apostles, we are apt to overlook any other. Pagan observations of the Christians living amongst them indeed are meager in comparison to the documentation we have from Christians themselves. Our knowledge, for example, of Celsus’ charges come not from a surviving document authored by him, but from the many quotes from Celsus contested by the early Church father, Origin, in his massive eight volume polemic, Contra Celsus (Contra Celsum). Thus the existing record tends to confirm the adage that history is written by the victors for, with the conversion of the Emperor Constantine in the 4th century AD, Christianity became state-sanctioned under revised religious toleration statutes. Many pagan manuscripts explicitly critical of Christians and the Church were destroyed in due time.
The Roman citizen in the street at that time (commendable cultural traits are accentuated) was pious in ritual observances, zealously honored his ancestors, and his religion was largely of a “civil” type (religion bound to the State), featuring “Emperor worship.” He was orderly, industrious, a respecter of subordination, disciplined but enterprising, possessed an original genius for organization, temperamentally favored action over contemplation, and was open to foreign influences, all of which served things practical rather than abstract. Much of this seems distinctly American.
At the same time, the Romans were energetically extending themselves in every direction through road-building, their legions on the march or under sail. The Roman Empire is a hitherto unexampled demonstration of how a moderately gifted people -- for they never produced a Plato, Aristotle, or Thucydides -- could rise and rule for hundreds of years over virtually the entire known world.
These are the people, along with Jews living in Rome, in words the Holy Spirit communicated to him by inspiration (II Tim. 3:16; II Pet. 1:21) to whom St. Paul wrote. Soon enough reproach and cruel pitiless persecution would be inflicted on the earliest Christians by the greater pagan society surrounding them. Though some Emperors were more temperate and equitable than others, it is nonetheless obvious from that which we will read that most pagan Romans found Christians a detestable and strange people. They also found many Christians to be intractably faithful to Christ even under threat of death....
...Click here to read the rest of this article...
.
.
Likewise, and in turn, one can't truly understand Luther and his diametric opposition to Medieval Scholasticism unless he first understands Luther's educational environment and its unspoken opposition to "scripture alone".
This audio is a good little introduction to Medieval Scholasticism, and Luther's reaction to the educational zeitgeist of the later 15th century, with "ad fontes", "or as translated "back to the sources". Up until shortly before Luther's time great strides had been made by many scholars of the same vein, in dissecting Medieval philosophy from ancient church theology. This "back to the sources" attitude regarding the study of God helped give birth to the reformation maxim "Sola Scriptura" which is so essential to Lutheranism and the legacy Luther's given us.
Listen and enjoy!
Also, thank God for the resource that is Issues Etc.; it's truly a blessing! If you've never listened to the program before, then please visit the site and lend your ear, there really is something for everyone, and the Gospel for everyone too!
