Quote of the Day – Christ(mas)

First, TC took on Christmas and then Matt left this comment

On a side note, I wonder why those same people (Protestants at least) don’t say anything about putting the “mass” back into Christ(mas).

via Christmas was never really About Christ « NEW LEAVEN.

Before their public demise at the hands of carolers, Matt and TC had provide quality blogging…

You Might Also Like

39 Replies to “Quote of the Day – Christ(mas)”

  1. It is a recent thing for protestants to “celebrate” “christmas”. I personally do not celebrate it as a religious holiday though my particular congregation (PCA) does and so to maintain order I go along with it as I am in the choir etc. ( I am not an elder in the PCA having hung up my Anglican hat in the last millennium I am not anywhere, though my membership in the PCA in my mind over rides my anglican ordinance)

      1. I did not lose Christmas as it was never authorized (by scripture) to begin with. As to your question there is such a wide diversity of usage of the term incarnational I do not know what you mean. If it helps you understand what I believe I will say this: I agree with the 3 forms of unity + the 3 Westminster standards with the caveat of the use of the definitive article in relation to the Pope being “the” antichrist. I will give him an “an” instead. Which of course means I am not a full historist but rather an eclectic in the family of Beale’s eclecticism.

        1. Interesting.. I can see you are Reformed and Calvinist, with the Westminister, etc. You must have been Low Church as an Anglican? I was myself raised Irish Roman Catholic, in Dublin Ireland (just turned 60, same age as Beale). I have been somewhat Reformed in the past, but cannot seem to maintain that rigor in my theology. Thus I am more with Barth at present (this change has even been rather recent), and still Roman friendly. With that I am reading Scott Hahn’s new book: ‘Covenant and Communion ; The Biblical Theology of Pope Benedict XVI’.

          1. In the current usage of the term I would be considered low church. In the original usage of the term I was and still tend to high church. High view of the sacraments, and church tradition. I am mildly ambivalent of the 3 fold ministry with the general assembly taking the place of bishops.

            I resigned my position with the acceptance of episcopate on March 14,1994. You can ascertain why by the date.

          2. Yes, Calvin’s view of the Sacraments was really High, as was Peter Martyr Vermigli. What do you think of Mercersburg theology? This will be my last question, due to respect the original post, and Christmas.

          3. I think I really have not spent enough time looking at it to give a critical appraisal, on the surface it looks intriguing, I have liked Schaff’s work in the past. MOst of my research and study has been on the rise of North American fundamentalism from its roots in British enlightenment and evangelistic practice through the Niagara conferences up to the establishment of Chafer’s DTS (in time frame) with a specialization in Scofield. I believe my next area since I am no longer interacting with Baptists regularly will be Reformed Scholasticism rather than German Reform but it would be interesting.

            Is there a decisive work?

    1. I don’t care much of the celebration either, finding it a relatively new invention and acceptance in the West. I don’t see the validity of celebrating the Truth with a lie?

          1. As any Evangelical production would. The Mosaic is a fine devotional material, but it is not the bible. Not sure your point.

  2. Well, Judaism was all about making time sacred, wasn’t it? And earlier forms of Christianity followed that tradition. The liturgical churches still do. Protestantism has done a “baby with the bathwater” in some ways by abandoning a sacred calendar. You have to look real quick in many Protestant branches to catch a holy day.

    I’m rather fond of John Chrysostom’s liturgy, myself. But anything can get old and lose it’s meaning with too much repetition. To say nothing of the problems of our depravity or what Zen calls the “monkey mind”.

    1. No Judaism was all about pointing to the coming Messiah. That is why the feasts were put in place. Those that were fulfilled no longer bear the witness they once did and having been fulfilled should no longer be practiced. Most of the “Holy Days” you refer to are not Christian in origin and were appropriated from the pagan surroundings.

      As to your leap to liturgy, liturgy has meaning and should direct the worshiper to Christ. If it does not it fails. Personally I like Ambrose and Chrystostom’s liturgies. If I ever have the opportunity to do an STD I will do it at Aberdeen in early Liturgy, likely however I will never get that opportunity 🙁 .

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.