When we propose to ignore in a great man's teaching those doctrines which it has in common with the thought read more

When we propose to ignore in a great man's teaching those doctrines which it has in common with the thought of his age, we seem to be assuming that the thought of his age was erroneous. When we select for serious consideration those doctrines which "transcend" the thought of his own age and are "for all time", we are assuming that the thought of our age is correct: for of course by thoughts which transcend the great man's age we really mean thoughts that agree with ours. Thus I value Shakespeare's picture of the transformation in old Lear more than I value his views about the divine right of kings, because I agree with Shakespeare that a man can be purified by suffering like Lear, but do not believe that kings (or any other rulers) have divine right in the sense required. When the great man's views do not seem to us erroneous we do not value them the less for having been shared with his contemporaries. Shakespeare's disdain for treachery and Christ's blessing on the poor were not alien to the outlook of their respective periods; but no one wishes to discredit them on that account.

Man does not live for himself alone in this mortal body, in order to work on its account, but also read more

Man does not live for himself alone in this mortal body, in order to work on its account, but also for all men on earth; nay, he lives only for others, and not for himself. For it is to this end that he brings his own body into subjection, that he may be able to serve others more sincerely and more freely... Thus it is impossible that he should take his ease in this life, and not work for the good of his neighbors, since he must needs speak, act, and converse among men, just as Christ... had His conversation among men... It is the part of a Christian to take care of his own body for the very purpose that by its soundness and wellbeing he may be enabled to labor... for the aid of those who are in want, that thus the stronger member may serve the weaker member, and we may be children of God, and busy for one another, bearing one another's burdens, and so fulfilling the law of Christ.

I have this running quandary about Christmas. I get upset about it, because I feel that we American Christians make read more

I have this running quandary about Christmas. I get upset about it, because I feel that we American Christians make too much of it, and too little. Too little of it, because we pile all sorts of other things onto it, including some that have only the feeblest connection with the Event it is supposed to commemorate. If God did become a man, in any real sense, it is the most important thing that ever happened. Surely we, who believe it, could well devote one day a year to uninterrupted contemplation of the fact, and let Saturnalia fall on the winter solstice, where it belongs. On the other hand, we make so much of the actual birth, and forget the things that make it more than just the birth of a baby (though even that is, in Walt Whitman's phrase, "miracle enough to stagger sextillions of infidels") -- more, even, than the birth of the greatest man who ever lived. We forget the promise to Eve of a descendant who will solve the problem of Evil; the promise to Abraham of one by whom all mankind will be blessed; the promise to Moses of a greater prophet than he, to arise from his people; and the promise to David of a Son who would be his Master. We forget about the eternal Purpose behind it all: it's like telling a story and leaving out the point. Yes, it is true that God gave us His Son, and so maybe we ought also to give gifts -- but what, and to whom? It is also true that God gave us Himself, and the only sensible response to that is to give ourselves to Him. There is nothing else that He wants from us, or, if there is something, He can take it. Only I, my ego, my heart, is truly mine to give or to withhold -- and is therefore the appropriate gift to Him.

As the wife of a state Supreme Court justice in Arkansas put it, "My husband has been a Methodist all read more

As the wife of a state Supreme Court justice in Arkansas put it, "My husband has been a Methodist all his life, but if it comes to choosing between being a Methodist and an American, he'll be an American every time." But this was not the issue, quite. In this case the choice was between being a good Methodist and a good American, and being a tribal religionist. But the theological problem of churches without discipline comes into stark outline in the quotation. Inadequately trained for membership, admitted without preparatory training, without the proper instruments of voluntary discipline, many members have never had the discontinuity between life in Christ and life in the world brought home to them. Here the ordinary members are less at fault than the leadership of the churches, who -- though sworn to uphold the form of sound words and doctrine -- neglect catechetical instruction and concentrate solely on the acquisition of more new members at any price.

Feast of John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, Teacher, 407 Feeding the hungry is a greater work than raising read more

Feast of John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, Teacher, 407 Feeding the hungry is a greater work than raising the dead.

Feast of Matthew, Apostle & Evangelist Paul Tillich can show us that the unity which we seek as read more

Feast of Matthew, Apostle & Evangelist Paul Tillich can show us that the unity which we seek as Christians must involve our denominations in changes even greater than those which many of us now expect. His insistence on taking seriously the gropings of all men for the truth about their lives must be allowed to remind the ecumenical movement that the word oikoumene is Greek not for "the Church" but for "the whole inhabited world". The ecumenical movement is more than Christian patriarchs kissing. Christian unity means the unity of mankind in finding and obeying God. Tillich can teach us that the Church must not shut its door to celebrate a family reunion while a single child of God remains outside.

Morning has broken like the first morning, Blackbird has spoken like the first bird. Praise for the singing! Praise for read more

Morning has broken like the first morning, Blackbird has spoken like the first bird. Praise for the singing! Praise for the morning! Praise for them, springing fresh from the Word! Sweet the new rain's fall sunlit from heaven, Like the first dewfall on the first grass. Praise for the sweetness of the wet garden, Spring in completeness where His feet pass. Mine is the sunlight! Mine is the morning Born of the one light Eden saw play! Praise with elation, praise every morning, God's re-creation of the new day!

Commemoration of Ethelburga, Abbess of Barking, 675 Most Christians would agree with C. S. Lewis when he says read more

Commemoration of Ethelburga, Abbess of Barking, 675 Most Christians would agree with C. S. Lewis when he says [of the doctrine of the Final Judgment], "There is no doctrine which I would more willingly remove from Christianity than this, if it lay in my power". But we cannot do so, for two reasons: first, because it enjoys the full support of Christ's own teaching; and second, because it makes a good deal of sense. If the gospel is extended to us for our acceptance, it must be possible also to reject and refuse it. The alternative would be for God to compel an affirmative response. It would be nice to be able to say that all will be saved, but the question arises, Does everyone want to be saved? What would love for God be like if it were coerced? There is a hell because God respects our freedom and takes our decisions seriously -- more seriously, perhaps, than we would sometimes wish. God wants to see hell completely empty; but if it is not, He cannot be blamed. The door is locked only on the inside. It is not Christians but the unrepentant who "want" it [to be locked].

The underlying questions are always: What is the Church? What is the Church for? If that is not kept in read more

The underlying questions are always: What is the Church? What is the Church for? If that is not kept in mind, the lay ministry, about which so much is being said at present, remains on the level of a many-sided activity in which the self-assertion of the laity threatens to be more evident than a new manifestation of the Church in modern society. The responsible participation of the laity in the discharge of the Church's divine calling is not primarily a matter of idealism and enthusiasm or organizational efficiency, but a new grasp and commitment to the meaning of God's redemptive purpose with mankind and with the world in the past, the present, and the future: a purpose which has its foundation and inexhaustible content in Christ.