Orbis non Sufficit

Thomas Nagle, philosopher, atheist, socialist, has unforgivably doubted the probability that neo-Darwinian materialism can explain everything. Andrew Ferguson explains Nagle's heresy in The Weekly Standard and also describes the auto-da-fé to which Darwinist heresy hunters are subjecting him. Excerpts from Ferguson's article:

...Thomas Nagel is a prominent and heretofore respected member of the country’s intellectual elite. And such men are not supposed to write books with subtitles like the one he tacked onto Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False. ....

You don’t have to be a biblical fundamentalist or a young-earth creationist or an intelligent design enthusiast—I’m none of the above, for what it’s worth—to find Mind and Cosmos exhilarating. “For a long time I have found the materialist account of how we and our fellow organisms came to exist hard to believe,” Nagel writes. “It is prima facie highly implausible that life as we know it is the result of a sequence of physical accidents together with the mechanism of natural selection.” The prima facie impression, reinforced by common sense, should carry more weight than the clerisy gives it. “I would like to defend the untutored reaction of incredulity to the reductionist neo-Darwinian account of the origin and evolution of life.” ....

The incredulity is not simply a matter of scientific ignorance, as the materialists would have it. It arises from something more fundamental and intimate. The neo-Darwinian materialist account offers a picture of the world that is unrecognizable to us—a world without color or sound, and also a world without free will or consciousness or good and evil or selves or, when it comes to that, selflessness. “It flies in the face of common sense,” he says. Materialism is an explanation for a world we don’t live in. ....

Materialism, then, is fine as far as it goes. It just doesn’t go as far as materialists want it to. It is a premise of science, not a finding. Scientists do their work by assuming that every phenomenon can be reduced to a material, mechanistic cause and by excluding any possibility of nonmaterial explanations. And the materialist assumption works really, really well—in detecting and quantifying things that have a material or mechanistic explanation. Materialism has allowed us to predict and control what happens in nature with astonishing success. The jaw-dropping edifice of modern science, from space probes to nanosurgery, is the result.

But the success has gone to the materialists’ heads. From a fruitful method, materialism becomes an axiom: If science can’t quantify something, it doesn’t exist, and so the subjective, unquantifiable, immaterial “manifest image” of our mental life is proved to be an illusion.

"A lively, general introduction"

Michael Dirda likes C.S. Lewis: A Life, by Alister McGrath (and so do I):

...[H]e bases his new life on a recently completed multivolume edition of Lewis's letters and his own reading, in chronological order, of the complete works. Most of all, though, his biography of Lewis isn't another rehearsal of the vast army of facts and figures concerning his life, but an attempt to identify its deeper themes and concerns, and assess its significance. This is not a work of synopsis, but of analysis.”

That word "analysis" may sound off-putting, but McGrath is a sprightly writer, quite colloquial in tone, speeding over many aspects of his subject's life, but slowing down to reflect on those he finds significant. What are some of these key elements and turning points? McGrath stresses young Lewis's Protestant Irish background, the early death of his beloved mother, the disastrously unhappy years at school in England and the trauma of trench warfare in World War I. He speculates, as many have done before, on Lewis's relationship with Janie Moore, the mother of one of his friends killed in battle. ....

What chiefly interests McGrath is Lewis's religious writing, and in this category he includes The Chronicles of Narnia. Lewis lost his faith as a young man but rediscovered it in 1929, according to his own account in Surprised by Joy. McGrath argues from a study of the letters, however, that this should be early 1930. A long night-time talk in 1931 with J.R.R. Tolkien — a devout Catholic — further cemented Lewis's conviction that Christianity was a "true myth." That friendship with Tolkien eventually led to the founding of the now famous literary club known as the Inklings. Over beer at the Eagle and Child pub, its members would gossip, discuss their research and read early drafts of their books (including Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings).  ....

McGrath stresses that the seven Narnia books shouldn’t be viewed as a strict allegory but rather as a “supposal.” As Lewis himself wrote to a fifth-grade class in Maryland: "Let us suppose that there were a land like Narnia and that the Son of God, as He became a Man in our world, became a Lion there, and then imagine what would happen." McGrath devotes three chapters to exploring the creation and theological implications of the lion Aslan, the White Witch and the four children — Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy — who transform the destiny of Narnia. ....

Lewis...died, after much suffering from “renal failure, prostate obstruction, and cardiac degeneration,” at the age of 64, on the same day that John F. Kennedy was shot. ....

Since then an immense amount has been written about C.S. Lewis, but if you’re looking for a lively, general introduction to this multitalented thinker and writer, Alister McGrath’s new biography is a good place to start. (more)

‘C.S. Lewis: A Life,’ by Alister McGrath - The Washington Post

"I pray Thee Lord my soul to take"

Re-posted from 2008:

Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep;
And if I should die before I wake,
I pray Thee Lord my soul to take.

That was the prayer I learned to say when I was a child. This version of the prayer dates back at least to the 18th century. Wikipedia quotes two more modern versions as replacing the last two lines with:

When in the morning light I wake,
Teach me the path of love to take.

and

Guard me Jesus through the night,
And wake me with the morning light.

John Mark Reynolds comments that "Contemporary Christians worry that the story of the crucifixion may be too intense for children. Death is uncomfortable to our consumer driven and decadent popular culture. There is nothing we can buy on late night television to cure it. It is the end of our choices and our pleasures. It cannot be defeated...."

Talking about death is considered morbid. We are insulated from death in ways unknown to people in any other time in history and in most of the rest of the world today. And yet it is as unavoidable for us as it has always been for everyone else. Reynolds goes on to write:

The end is coming. This makes me sad of course. I am quite happy and have no desire to die, but die I must. It is more certain that taxes. After that?

After that best reason, divine Revelation, and experience says that after that comes the judgment. The universe has not been nice to humankind, but just. The universe is not fair, but fiercely good. The other side is not going to be Disneyland with fully effective safety devices, but full of goodness, truth, and beauty.

That means full of awe and terrible with splendor.

And I have mucked up and muddled through far too often to trust in my own good works or have confidence that my soul is, in itself, ready for such unadulterated joy. My wiring for pleasure is too little and the current of goodness too great for any such easy hopes.

My hope is in God. I really might die before I wake. These few paragraphs may post after I am no longer around to edit it. I hope not, but I do not know. This much I know:

What difference a pope?

How should evangelical Protestants feel about the new pope? I found these relevant comments in the last couple of days. The first is from a Christianity Today interview with Luis Palau, a native Argentinian Protestant evangelist based in the US, who knows and likes the new pope:

What was your reaction when you heard that Bergoglio had been selected as pope?

It was exciting because of Argentina, because of his personality, and because of his openness toward evangelical Christians. I got kind of emotional, simply having known him. ....

You count the pope as a personal friend. What can you tell me about his character—as a man, and a Christian, not just as a Cardinal?

You know he knew God the Father personally. The way he prayed, the way he talked to the Lord, was of a man who knows Jesus Christ and was very spiritually intimate with the Lord. It's not an effort [for him] to pray. He didn't do reading prayers; he just prayed to the Lord spontaneously. It is a sign that good things will happen worldwide in the years of his papal work.

He's very warm and gentle and spiritual. He may not go around smiling all the time—he's not a Hollywood actor—but he's a very warm person; you don't feel cold and distant from him. He's always been warm. He likes to mingle with people.

He's gentle in his conversation. He's always asking people for prayer. It's surprising that he did it in public [at his first address], but anybody who knows him, [knows that] he always would say, 'Please pray for me.' He really meant it. He said it always. ....

What can you tell me about Bergoglio's leadership style?

He's a very Bible-centered man, a very Jesus Christ-centered man. He's more spiritual than he is administrative, although he's going to have to exercise his administrative skills now! But personally, he is more known for his personal love for Christ. He's really centered on Jesus and the Gospel, the pure Gospel. ....

Although he's gentle, he has strong moral convictions and he stands by them even if he has to confront the government. And he's done it before. With the evangelical community, it was a very big day when we realized that he really was open, that he has great respect for Bible-believing Christians, and that he basically sides with them. … They work together. That takes courage. That takes respect. It takes conviction. So the leaders of the evangelical church in Argentina have a high regard for him, simply because of his personal lifestyle, his respect, his reaching out and spending time with them privately. ....

If that's the case, what can evangelicals expect from the Francis papacy?

He's a man of strong convictions. He isn't swayed by the powers that be of any kind, even political. He's very strong on moral issues. I think we'll see a papacy that will make relations easier and lessen tensions. It doesn't mean [evangelicals and Catholics] will agree on every angle; that should be said. He is the Roman Catholic pope, and there are issues that need to be talked about, prayed about, looked at the Bible about. … Those differences in doctrine are there, but when there's a proper attitude toward one another and to the word of God, and you take it seriously, light comes from the Lord. .... (more)

And then, via Justin Taylor, from Carl Trueman, reviewing a book by a Catholic about the state of Catholicism, some reasons a Protestant should care:

First, Protestants benefit from a conservative papacy: on public square issues such as abortion, marriage and religious freedom, the RCC has a higher profile and more power—financial, legal, institutional—than any Protestant group. We all benefit from the cultural and legal power of the RCC in these areas.

Second, your neighbours probably do not distinguish between Christian groups. A sleazy, morally corrupt RCC is like a sleazy, morally corrupt televangelist ministry: we are all marked with the same brush in the public eye and our task of evangelism becomes that much harder.

Third, RC authors often offer more penetrating insights into secular culture than their evangelical equivalents. Comparing George Weigel to Rob Bell in such circumstances is akin to comparing Michelangelo to Thomas Kinkade. .... (more)

Luis Palau: Why It Matters that Pope Francis Drinks Maté wit... | Christianity Today, Why Protestants Should Be Interested in Rome – Justin Taylor, A Tale of Two Popes - Reformation21 Blog

The Gray Seal

Frank L. Packard was an early 20th century writer of thrillers. I discovered several of his Jimmie Dale books on the shelves of an uncle while in my early teens. As was then my habit I prevailed on him to let me borrow them [I later possessed several of those titles, perhaps feloniously, I don't recall]. The Packard books I read were all from the six Jimmie Dale's written between 1917 [The Adventures of Jimmie Dale] and 1935. A description of the series:

Dale, also known as the "Gray Seal" for the stickers he left as calling cards, is a wealthy New York society St. James club-crawler figure by day, and an expert safecracker by night. He is often blamed for crimes he didn't commit. At his halfway house, "Sanctuary", he can surreptitiously change from one identity to the next. He's a suave and sophisticated cat burglar working to expose the corrupt and seedy underbelly of New York. In the detective romance Phantom Clue the mysterious unseen woman "Tocsin" blackmails the gentleman thief Dale, luring him into the dark underworld of the city, only to be hounded by the police. He haplessly falls in love with the siren but ultimately exposes the evil-doers. ....

Packard's books are deemed a critical bridge between late 1800s Victorian era style writings and the newer grittier Rogue school of the 1930s and 1940s. His city of New York is immoral and dirty with evil-smelling tenements, the back alleys the haunts of dope fiends, thieves and murderers. Jimmie Dale's life work and passion was to clean it up, usually with a happy ending. ....

I found them fascinating when I was twelve, and now I find I can re-experience them as e-books. I suspect I won't have quite the same experience reading them this time. The first two of the Jimmie Dale's are available as e-book downloads at ManyBooks: Free ebooks by Frank L. Packard

Frank L. Packard - Biography and Works. Search Texts, Read Online. Discuss., Free ebooks by Frank L. Packard

Revival

Kevin DeYoung on what revival looks like:

The year is roughly 640 B.C. Judah is in bad shape. After some good years with King Hezekiah, the nation has gone down hill in a big way with fifty-five years under the wicked Manasseh. The next two years under King Amon were hardly better: “And he did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, as Manasseh his father had done. He walked in all the way in which his father walked and served the idols that his father served and worshiped them” (2 Kings 21:20-21).

The country looked bleak. God’s people were languishing. There wasn’t a lot to cheer about.

But God, by a sovereign, surprising work of his Spirit, brought reformation and breathed new life into his people. The God-given renewal in Judah, like all true revival, was marked by several distinguishing characteristics. Let me mention five.

The first and most important mark is a rediscovery of the Word of God (2 Kings 22:1-2, 8-10). Can you imagine this scene? Someone on your church staff comes up from the boiler room, “Pastor, you are not going to believe this. I found a Bible down there! Remember hundreds of years ago when we used to read the Bible. Well, I found one! And I have to tell you, I think we’re in big trouble. I’ve been looking at God’s commandments for us, and we are way off.” ....

The second mark of true revival is a restored sense of the fear of God (2 Kings 22:11-17). Here’s something to put on your prayer list: “Lord, help me fear you more than I fear people.” ....

The third mark of true revival is a return to God through confession and repentance (2 Kings 22:18-20). A broken heart and a contrite spirit God will not despise. .... True repentance is an about-face–a turning away from the ugliness of sin and running to God for mercy. ....

The fourth mark of true revival is renewed spiritual commitment and accountability (2 Kings 23:1-3). .... When God brought revival, his people began to say to each other, “It’s time to ante up. Time to recommit.” There was more than an individual experience of refreshment. There was a public, corporate commitment to godliness. ....

And finally, true revival is marked by a reformation of true piety (2 Kings 23:21-25). When revival comes to a church or community, piety is reformed. People start to live like they profess. Instead of blending in with their cultural surroundings, God’s people stand out. They return to God and reform their ways. They pursue faithfulness to the word, not the fashions of the world. .... [more]

Kevin DeYoung » A Surprising Work of God (2 of 2) » Print

Morality and crime fiction

David Masciotra asks "Where's the Faith in Fiction?" and answers:

.... The case for faith in fiction is to be made by those who deal with cracking cases for a living—the fictional detectives, private investigators, and troubled protagonists who inhabit the scandalous, seductive, and serpentine setting of noir.

Crime fiction weaves its tale in the threshold between right and wrong, just and unjust, good and evil. It is because of its naked confrontation with philosophy and ethics, and its depiction of drifters, confidence men, femme fatales, petty criminals, serial killers, and agents of the law beset by iniquity and caught in the web of moral turpitude, that it is so effectively and naturally able to deal with doubt, faith, and the inner combat of spiritual warfare. ....

Crime and noir have always told the story of people who decide to cross an invisible but palpable moral line. It then measures the wreckage—physical, emotional, and spiritual—that results from the voluntary crossing over into another ethical universe—a colder, tougher, and uglier universe. These same questions haunt the tales of the Bible and the lives of the saints. ....

His examples are contemporary crime novelists — two of whom I've read and enjoyed.

Via Brandywine Books

Where’s the Faith in Fiction? Try Crime Novels - The Daily Beast

Orthodoxy

Suzannah recommends that you read Orthodoxy by GK Chesterton

.... “If you’re studying apologetics,” I said, “you should really read Orthodoxy. Shouldn’t she, Justin?”

My brother paused. “If,” he said tentatively, “I could produce a marching band, a fireworks extravaganza, and a troupe of cheerleaders to second that suggestion, I would; but as it is, all I can do is…” and he gave two thumbs up.

Orthodoxy means, loosely translated, “right belief”; and in the book, Chesterton means the Apostle’s Creed by it. The book is, according to Chesterton, “a sort of slovenly biography”; it tells the story of how as a young atheist he tried to found a heresy of his own, “and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy.” ....

One of the reasons why we Chesterton fans rave about him so much is that, unlike most commentators writing a hundred years ago, he had an uncanny knack of spotting the ideas that would still be plaguing modern thought a century later. In Orthodoxy this talent is functioning at full capacity. ....

Orthodoxy at Manybooks [free downloads in many formats, including Kindle]. (The link has been corrected.)

In Which I Read Vintage Novels: Orthodoxy by GK Chesterton

Intrinsically disordered

When we pray "We have offended against Thy holy laws. We have left undone those things which we ought to have done; And we have done those things which we ought not to have done; And there is no health in us." [BCP], or discover that we are very like St Paul in Romans when he confesses "I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate," we are confessing ourselves "intrinsically disordered" [i.e. sinners "prone to wander"]. Elizabeth Scalia had read an exchange about the Catholic designation of homosexual acts as "intrinsically disordered" and discovered some comfort in the identification of her own status:

...[A] cleric said, “I think that any of us would struggle with being told that some aspect of our humanity—as creatures of God—was intrinsically disordered,” and a layman shot back, “My desire to overeat, my desire to drink to excess, my desire [for] fornication, my desire to swindle people out of money for my own gain are also intrinsically disordered.”

And there it was—the intrinsic disorder that is part and parcel of desire when it so profoundly permeates our lives as to separate us from God; desire that stands between us and God until it becomes the idol in God’s place. Suddenly, in the course of a minor internet thread, I was face to face with my own intrinsic disorder. [....]

I am “intrinsically disordered” when it comes to food, and it doesn’t really matter how I became so. Whether it is due to a genetic pre-disposition, or a habit of psychological buffering—or some combination of nature and nurture—the fact remains that I am disordered, and I must deal with it. Every day. Sometimes hour by hour, sometimes minute by tempted minute.

Up to now I have done a very poor job of dealing with it, largely because until that moment of clarity, I had not recognized the disorder. Like most same-sex attracted persons, I had thought of my battles and defeats in terms of weakness, shame; discipline, programming, and willpower; there was no connection to the transcendent, so how could I ever transcend myself?

We are told that the phrase “intrinsically disordered” is hurtful or hateful, and yet I find the words ironically healing; they give me precisely the hook into that transcendent understanding (and into notions of original sin and even idolatry) that I have been missing. Far from taking any offense at the idea that I am “intrinsically disordered,” I am actually consoled.

In identifying my disorder as “intrinsic”—that it resides within me as naturally as the marrow in my bones—I understand that there is no point in attempting to further fool myself or run away from myself; I am released from self-hate, shame, or defensiveness. At the same time, I am now and forever obliged to acknowledge—with every temptation—that I am disordered, and within that acknowledgement to then choose whether I will serve the disorder, at the cost of Heaven, or serve God.

In choosing God, I will have to both rely on God and actively work toward obedience to what is natural in his law, rather than what is natural to me. This is no small thing. It is a daily tension between my love of God and my love of an idol intrinsic to me—original to me. ....

The Intrinsic Disorder of Me | First Things

Hypocricy

N.T. Wright is annoyed by journalistic accusations of Christian hypocricy. What exactly are the alternatives to failing to live up to high standards? Not having any standards at all? Wright:

There are two alternatives to hypocrisy. Either you set high moral standards and keep them absolutely. According to Christian teaching, only one person has ever done that. Or you set standards so low that they aren't really standards at all: you simply "do what comes naturally". Angels aren't hypocrites. Nor (I think) are animals. Granted we are none of us in the first category – the only way to avoid hypocrisy is always to follow instinct: do whatever you feel like at the time.

Some ethicists advocate this. "Spontaneity" or "authenticity" appear attractive alternatives to hypocrisy. Go with your heart, we're told. But if you always do what you most feel like doing, you may avoid hypocrisy but you will be inconsistent, unreliable, and probably downright amoral. The heart, Jesus said, was where most of the problems began. The great ethical theorists, from Aristotle and the stoics to the leading religious teachers, saw the point. Virtue, in the strict sense of a character formed by habit and practice, doesn't just happen. You don't become courageous, or just, or prudent, or temperate, by a sudden overnight decision. You might as well wake up and decide to play a Brahms concerto. You have to practise. Of course, if you're a piano teacher it helps if you can play most of the right notes yourself, most of the time. But you're not there to clone yourself. You're there to help others to play Brahms.

The Christian has a particular angle on virtue. Some Protestant traditions have frowned on it: doesn't it mean we are trying to earn salvation by "good works"? Answer: no – it is all based on God's grace. But God's grace doesn't work "automatically". Part of the "fruit of the spirit," along with faith, hope and love, is self-control. That doesn't come overnight, either; and while you're practising the moral scales and arpeggios, and playing wrong notes, you are being, technically speaking … a hypocrite. Christians don't (or at least shouldn't) claim to have "made it" yet. We claim to follow Jesus. The church is composed of prodigal children who have discovered, to their astonishment, that their father still loves them. It was the older brother who thought the whole thing was a sham.

The church may be hypocritical about sex, but is no one else guilty? | Tom Wright | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

The wave of the future

From Anthony Sacramone, "This Is You, on the Wrong Side of History":

.... Empire builders and revolutionaries, reformers and moral scolds, civil libertarians and uncivil prohibitionists—all believe History is on their side. Beware anyone who imputes to History an inevitable, self-directed, Forward march, as if it were as fixed as a bar code, as predetermined as male-pattern baldness, as sovereign as any voluntaristic deity. Most risible are those strict secularists who act as if the expanding energies of a supposedly random and causeless Big Bang could even possess an ultimate purpose. (Also beware the self-appointed prophets of God who have gleaned from the pages of Holy Writ the mind of the Almighty on every conceivable subject, from the date of the Second Coming to whether the Dowager Countess should keel over in season 4 of Downton Abbey.)

Who, exactly, will stand at the goal line of History, yellow legal pad in hand, ticking off all the criteria for satisfying ultimate Justice, Equality, and Fairness?

Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Confusing what you think immediately, politically desirable with the Will of History, Evolution, or God is almost certainly an excuse to stop thinking altogether.

That doesn’t mean what you want is always wrong. It does mean that it is not necessarily right. ....

Via Mollie Hemingway, at Ricochet.com

Confusing Political Goals with the Will of History - Ricochet.com, This Is You, on the Wrong Side of History | Intercollegiate Review

The myth that doesn't fit

From an interesting review by Tom Gilson of The Bible Among the Myths (2009) by John Oswalt:

Somehow we've been led to believe that the main apologetic issue in the first chapters of the Bible is whether they're good science. John N. Oswalt has raised a more interesting question: Are they good myth? ....

"Myth" has multiple meanings. Some writers conceive of it as including any story purporting to explain where we came from and what we’re doing here. Some limit it strictly to false stories, some to stories of the unknown, some to stories of gods. Oswalt, a specialist in Ancient Near East (ANE) history and literature, takes it that the most helpful way to define “myth” is according to way it is most often used.

On that view, stories labeled as myths have certain common features. Above all they communicate belief in continuity: that wherever we came from, in many ways it’s a lot like where we are. Thus:

• In the beginning there were gods having family squabbles just as we do, or
• In the beginning there was stuff (matter) everywhere, and it wasn’t terribly cooperative, so it took someone to work it into shape, or
• In the beginning there was some combination thereof…

…as in the Baylonian Enuma Elish, where Chaos (Tiamut) had to be vanquished by the god Marduk, out of whose very blood and bone man was fashioned. These all exhibit the common them of continuity: from matter to mankind to the gods, everything is on one continuum.

This is myth, and in one form or another this idea of continuity is universal in creation stories—almost. There is an exception.

The “Myth” That Doesn’t Fit

Exactly once in the history of mankind there arose another creation account that opened with, “In the beginning God…” There is only one monotheistic creation account among the religions of man, and its contrasts with the other accounts could not be more stark. The God of the Old Testament is serenely supreme. He struggles with no other god. Rather than subduing chaotic matter he creates it according to his will, and it is good. Matter is no emanation of himself, and humans are not his flesh and blood; rather there is a distinct separation: transcendence rather than continuity. .... (more)

The Bible Among the Myths - Thinking Christian

Anti-science

Michael Rosen, reviewing Science Left Behind, notes that there are a lot of "anti-science" folks out there other than the usual suspects. From the review of Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left:

A meta-study that appeared in the Annals of Internal Medicine last September found no “strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods.” A dozen Stanford researchers combed some 237 studies that analyzed food consumption and health outcomes among thousands of people, only to conclude (in the words of the study’s senior author) that “there isn’t much difference between organic and conventional foods, if you’re an adult and making a decision based solely on your health.”

In the weeks that followed, progressive foodies and activists were, predictably, apoplectic. The study was “an exercise in misdirection” and “junk science” that “conveniently obscur[ed] important features of organic agriculture,” according to Mark Bittman of the New York Times, who likened the Stanford findings to “declaring guns no more dangerous than baseball bats” and to “comparing milk and Elmer’s glue on the basis of whiteness.”

When scientific facts collide with the ingrained worldview of left-wing activists like Bittman, chaos ensues—and it is such disorder among progressives that Alex Berezow and Hank Campbell capably catalogue in this penetrating, entertaining world tour of what they label the “anti-scientific left.” ....

Berezow, who holds a doctorate in microbiology and is the editor of Real Clear Science, and Campbell, founder and editor of Science 2.0, traverse the unplowed terrain of left-wing Luddism—ranging from vaccine refuseniks to nuclear energy opponents to anti-animal-testing zealots to ANWR lovers to Keystone XL haters—methodically demonstrating how progressives seek to “replace scientific research with unscientific ideology.” A prime example is genetically modified (GM) organisms, which present no significant health risks but which promise better, cheaper, and more environmentally friendly living for humanity, especially for those mired in poverty. As the authors point out, “GM crops are spreading across the entire continent of Africa because of the numerous advantages they confer over conventional crops.” ....

Ignoble Experiment

"Well meaning, but..."

Jonathan Ryan [who has no Rob Bell books in his library] has been asked to review Bell's new book. Ryan thinks other evangelicals get altogether too worked up about Bell and he isn't inclined to consign him to the outer darkness — but he has identified what he thinks is Bell's most serious defect. From the review of What We Talk About When We Talk About God:

.... [Bell] reminds me of the annoying guy I've seen in campus ministries or youth groups everywhere. You know the one I mean. He dances during worship, raises his hands up and points to the heavens like God is a hot rock star. Youth Group Guy is also the type of person who'll come up to you and say, "Dude, God is awesome, man, He really is." Nothing wrong with the sentiment. However, you can't help hide your laughter at his over enthusiastic and somewhat superficial anthems. ....

So, what about the answers Bell proposes about who God is?

His answers are a bunch of rambling, rumbling, shucking, jiving, beat poet, train wrecks that make very little sense. They’re “Youth Group Guy’s” answers. They’re well meaning, but mostly incoherent. The answers might be fine for an open mike poetry night, but not as answers to the important questions Bell raises.

This is probably why he gets in so much trouble with people like Piper and Driscoll. Instead of saying, “Dude, Rob, your book kinda sucks because I have no idea what the hell you’re saying.” Instead, they’ll probably bring the rod of overreaction and bray like asses.

For me, I go back to Youth Group Kid. He says a lot of stuff that seems profound and good. In fact, some of what he says IS profound and good.

Yet, in the end, you keep wondering when the kid is going to make any sense. You wonder if he really knows what a jumbled mess he is making.
I’m sure there will be many blogs out there about Rob Bell being a heretic, etc. and so on. I’m not going to cast him out of the Kingdom. I like his questions. I hope he keeps asking them.

Yet I would say to him ”Youth Group guy, you’re scaring your brothers and sisters. They don’t get what you’re saying because you’re not making much sense.”

Rob Bell is Youth Group Guy

"Not a bad public, that"

Last Friday I watched A Man for All Seasons with a friend who had never seen it. On Facebook he reminds me of one of my favorite pieces of dialogue in the film. A young poor student, Richard Rich, has asked Sir Thomas More for a position. More is willing, but not to provide the kind of position Rich really wants:

Rich: What post?
More: At the new school.
Rich: A teacher! [….]
More: Why not be a teacher? You'd be a fine teacher. Perhaps a great one.
Rich: lf I was, who would know it?
More: You! Your pupils. Your friends. God. Not a bad public, that.

Toward the end of the film More is on trial and that same Richard Rich — who has advanced considerably in the world — provides false but damning testimony against More. More now knows he will be executed. Before Rich is excused from the court:

More: There is one question I would like to ask the witness. .... That's a chain of office you're wearing. May I see it? .... The Red Dragon. What's this?
Cromwell: Sir Richard is appointed Attorney General for Wales.
More: For Wales. .... Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world. .... But for Wales...

The film and the play on which it is based is about very good dialogue delivered by very good actors about very important principles.

Psmith

Suzannah, at her great site, reviews a P.G. Wodehouse book she hadn't read before (neither have I) about her favorite Wodehouse character:

Rupert Psmith (the P is silent, as in pthisis and ptarmigan) has been my favourite Wodehouse character ever psince I made his acquaintance in Leave It to Psmith, one of Wodehouse’s masterpieces. Sadly, Wodehouse felt he’d done as much as he could with the character and went on to focus on Bertie Wooster, Lord Emsworth, and the rest. ....

...[R]ecently I had the opportunity of reading a really good one. Psmith Journalist sees Psmith holidaying in New York City, where he meets a Wild West journalist, Billy Windsor, chafing silently in the undereditorship of a cozy little paper for cozy little families. With the editor away on a rest cure, Psmith entices Windsor to leap into a little psensational journalism. ....

Before you can say “psychology” Psmith and Windsor are neck-deep on the hit list of an unpscrupulous real estate magnate and playing a dangerous game among the rival street gangs of New York. ....

Through this two-fisted tale of the New York lowlife walks the dandified figure of Rupert Psmith, quoting Pshakespeare and Latin tags, and occasionally needing an interpreter .... (more)

manybooks.net has a lengthy list of "Free ebooks by Pelham Grenville Wodehouse" — all of them available in Kindle format — which list includes several Psmith titles, including Psmith, Journalist. (I downloaded it, along with Psmith in the City.)

In Which I Read Vintage Novels: Psmith, Journalist by PG Wodehouse (the book illustration is also from Suzannah's post)

On C.S. Lewis

Thomas Kidd favorably reviews Alister McGrath's C.S. Lewis - A Life:

Alister McGrath's C.S. Lewis: A Life comes with endorsements from Eric Metaxas, Timothy Keller, N.T. Wright, and perhaps most weightily given the topic, from my soon-to-be Baylor colleague Alan Jacobs, who calls it “a meticulously researched, insightful, fair-minded, and honest account of a fascinating man’s life.” As I have written earlier, I admire Jacobs' own Lewis biography, The Narnian, and his assessment of McGrath's book is apt. McGrath's book is a judicious and accessible treatment of Lewis's remarkable but controversial career. ....

This is not fawning hagiography, but an honest, charitable assessment of a great but flawed man.

The aspect of the book that I found most fascinating is Lewis's handling of fame and his role as a public intellectual. Until World War II, Lewis was a little-known Oxford scholar, but The Screwtape Letters and his wartime talks on the BBC launched him into international fame for which he was ill prepared. ....

I liked Jacobs' The Narnian very much. It is my favorite of all those I have read about Lewis. I have begun to read McGrath and it thus far seems very good.

C.S. Lewis, Public Intellectual

Bid my anxious fears subside

Sean Curnyn has just discovered one of the greatest of great hymns:

.... It is a song from Wales. The lyric is by a great 18th century Welsh writer named William Williams, also known as Williams Pantycelyn (there being so many “Williamses” in Wales that it is necessary to give them nicknames in order to be sure that everyone receives the appropriate royalties). The song became what it is today, however, sometime around 1904/05, when the English version of the lyric was wedded to a recently-composed tune by yet another great Welshman named John Hughes, i.e. the tune titled “Cwm Rhondda,” after the Welsh valley of the same name. This was during what is known as a Great Awakening or religious revival in Wales, and one that spread (not unlike the tune) to many other quarters.

This marriage of words and music was one made in heaven, apparently, as the song became very quickly and deeply beloved of the Welsh. It has ultimately come to be known as the unofficial national anthem of Wales, and can be heard sung ceremonially at important sporting events (i.e. rugby matches).

In Wales itself, it is generally known either as “Bread of Heaven” (a line from the first verse) or as “Cwm Rhondda,” the name of the melody. ....

It is a hymn which derives its imagery and narrative directly from the story of the Israelites, led from slavery in Egypt and guided to the Promised Land, as in the Bible from Exodus through Joshua. Key touchstones from that story are invoked to convey the prayer of just one poor sinner, wishing for God’s guidance, trusting in His grace, and offering humble praise. .... [more]

When I tread the verge of Jordan,
Bid my anxious fears subside;
Death of death, and hell’s destruction
Land me safe on Canaan’s side:
Songs and praises, songs and praises,
I will ever give to thee;
I will ever give to thee.

Cwm Rhondda – Bread of Heaven – Guide Me O Thou Great Redeemer | The Cinch Review

McGrath's top five

Alister McGrath, who has just published C.S. Lewis - A Life: Eccentric Genius, Reluctant Prophet (which I have just begun reading), lists and comments on his "Top Five Books" which include, unsurprisingly, two Lewis titles.

His list:

• C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
• Thomas a Kempis, The Imitation of Christ
• G.K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man
• St. Augustine, Confessions
• C.S. Lewis, Surprised By Joy

Alister McGrath: My Top Five Books

Uncle Abner

I am a native of West Virginia and although I didn't live there for more than a few months after I was born I did return every summer while I was growing up and periodically since then. My mother's family were early settlers in that part of Virginia that became West Virginia. My identification with the place is primarily familial and nostalgic and I have many friends with a less tenuous claim to familiarity. Nevertheless, when I come across some piece of history or literature related to the state I usually pay attention. Some years ago I discovered that one of the great American mystery writers was Melville Davisson Post, a West Virginian. I just downloaded several of his books from the Many Books site: Free ebooks by Melville Davisson Post. I noted that one of the stories in Dwellers in the Hills [1901] refers to Lost Creek, a West Virginia location familiar to me and to many of my Seventh Day Baptist friends. Many of Post's stories are set in the state. Post's most famous collection of mystery stories is Uncle Abner [1918] - about which I've posted before.

Joseph Bottum wrote

There is a case to be made that the Uncle Abner stories—the twenty-two tales of the Virginia hills written by Melville Davisson Post between 1911 and 1928—are among the finest mysteries ever written. .... [H]igh as Post's tales rank in general mystery fiction, they stand at the very top of the subgenre of religious mysteries. In the deliberate tone of the stories and the matching of the writing's pitch to its subject, in the uniting of the religious element with the detective's action and the sense of good's battle against evil in the solution of a crime, only G.K. Chesterton's Father Brown belongs beside Melville Davisson Post's Uncle Abner. ....

Uncle Abner is another of Post's books available, free, as an e-book for Kindle, Nook, and other electronic formats: Uncle Abner, Master of Mysteries by Melville Davisson Post - Free eBook.