Category Archives: Religion

‘It Is Well With My Soul’

Yesterday, the anniversary of Charlie Kirk’s contemptible murder. Today the 25th anniversary of the terrorist destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City. I have nothing to say that’s worthy of the occasion. So I post above Mahalia Jackson’s performance of “It Is Well With My Soul.” You young people probably never heard of Mahalia, but in the days of my youth she was the queen of authentic Black Gospel music. Listen and you’ll understand why.

I have no moving tale to tell about 9/11/01. My story is just like everybody else’s. Somebody told me about it at work, and we spent the rest of the day following the news reports. Which just got more and more awful. Far away, thousands of my countrymen were suffering unthinkable horror, with no one to help.

If I said any more, I’d get preachy, and I’m not worthy to be preachy on this topic.

May each of them find mercy. And may justice be done.

‘The Screwtape Letters,’ by C.S. Lewis

And now for your blunders. On your own showing you first of all allowed the patient to read a book he really enjoyed, because he enjoyed it and not in order to make clever remarks about it to his new friends.

I was in high school when I first read C. S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters. It had been recommended by a Sunday School teacher. The story of two devils consulting on a human’s damnation set off something like a series of small explosions in my brain. I’d never run across Christian thought anything like this before (pleasures weren’t necessarily sinful? Who knew?), and it dispensed a guilty thrill of possible heresy. It was for me the beginning of a lifelong grappling match with both Lewis himself and with orthodox Christian theology.

I’m not sure how many times I’ve read it in my life. The depressing part of revisiting it again is observing how little progress I’ve made in resisting my own personal Wormwood. To make it more uncomfortable, I understand the nature of sin and temptation better now than I did when I was in high school. The knives, therefore, are sharper.

I was also impressed, in reading the sequel essay, “Screwtape Proposes a Toast,” to note how prescient it is. Writing in the 1950s, Lewis observed trends in society and in education that have since metastasized in a way no one could have conceived of at the time.

The Screwtape Letters is a clever, masterfully written, insightful book about temptation that is actually extremely uncomfortable for anyone with any moral insight. And it gets more uncomfortable as you get older.

So I recommend it.

Sissel: ‘Eg veit i himmerik ei borg’

When I lack a book to review, Scandinavian hymns are my go-to fallback, as you’ve probably noticed. I’m sure I’ve posted Sissel singing ‘Eg Veit i Himmerike Ei Borg‘ before, probably in a different performance (she does it here with the Heretic Tabernacle Choir), but I never get tired of this particular one.

The song sounds to me like a medieval hymn, but it’s not quite that. The tune is an old Norwegian folk song, and the words were translated from a pre-17th Century German hymn. The Norwegian translation was done in 1905. James Cameron, so the story goes, heard Sissel’s rendition and hired her to do the background vocals for “Titanic.”

You can see the lyrics and a translation on this Wikipedia page.

I like to sing this one to myself sometimes when I’m hanging around the Viking camp, since it seems period-appropriate. Only I can never remember the verse that starts “Men visst eg veit ein morgon renn” probably because I misheard the lyrics completely.

No blog post from me tomorrow. See you Monday, God willing.

A day trip, and historical meditations

I shall tell you the tale of my adventures last Friday. I was part of a group of members of the Georg Sverdrup Society, and we went to visit a seminary not our own.

I think I won’t mention the name of this seminary, though there’ll be enough clues to work it out, if anybody cares to. It is an impressive cluster of buildings on an impressive campus, with a  history going back to the 1870s. However, the church body it serves, which I generally refer to here as the Very Large Lutheran Church Body That Shall Remain Nameless, finds itself now unable to support the institution’s real estate, so the property is being sold. The seminary will continue, but in more modest quarters.

Because of this approaching change, our society president arranged a visit. It would allow us to view the buildings, the library (now being packed up) and the archives (soon to be packed up). We got to see a number of interesting items on display. Below is a copy of Martin Luther’s death mask, with matching hands (his right one swollen and cramped from much writing). Luther was a man who liked his carbohydrates:

There was also the legendary bust of Hans Nielsen Hauge, the Norwegian lay evangelist about whom I’ve written a lot on this blog. I had the pleasure of informing those present that this bust is not actually a portrait, but the product of an artist’s imagination, originally carved in wood for a ship’s figurehead.

Our guide was very cordial, so nobody mentioned the well-attested fact that seminary students have a tradition of holding a beer bash on Hauge’s birthday, with the bust present, in order to demonstrate their contempt for the man and his movement.

We also got to visit Old Muskego Church:

Old Muskego Church from Muskego, Wisconsin is often called the first Norwegian Lutheran church building in America. This is not true – I, for one, favor the Haugean church in Fox River, Illinois. But Old Muskego, which was moved here in 1904, is the oldest surviving one. A new location will have to be found for it. All our guide would tell us was that they were in negotiations about the matter. I have my suspicions, and I wish the project well. The old place deserves preservation.

We sang the old Scandinavian hymn, “Children of the Heav’nly Father” in harmony before we left.

Afterward we wove our way through circuitous highway repairs to Lakewood Cemetery, traditional resting place of Minneapolis’ great and good. There we visited the graves of Professors Georg Sverdrup and Sven Oftedal, the founders of the Lutheran Free Church. Our guys.

This outing got me thinking about our tradition, the Haugean movement, and its place in history.

Continue reading A day trip, and historical meditations

‘The Bishop’s Wife,’ by Robert Nathan

He discovered the wealthy lady in a small house near the river, furnished in the style of the last century, which is to say that everything was uncomfortable. She received the archdeacon in her library, in which there still remained a few books.

I approached Robert Nathan’s The Bishop’s Wife with some hesitation. Fond as I am of Nathan, he was a Jewish writer, and I wasn’t looking forward to finding out how he dealt with the Christian church. In the event, it was indeed a little awkward, but that wasn’t the only awkwardness I experienced with this story.

The Bishop’s Wife was made into a movie in 1947, starring David Niven (as the bishop), Cary Grant (as the angel), and Loretta Young. It’s a minor Christmas classic, not as popular as “It’s a Wonderful Life,” but like the Capra movie it features Christmas and an angel. The movie isn’t bad; I was surprised to discover how far it veers from the book at the end.

Bishop Henry Brougham is a dignified, earnest churchman (one assumes he’s Episcopalian, but references to Luther and the Augsburg Confession suggest to me he might be Lutheran). His great vision is to promote the Christian home, but he believes (for some reason) that the way to nurture good homes is to build a cathedral. The challenge of raising funds is daunting to him, so he prays to God for an archdeacon gifted in fundraising. That’s when Michael appears. He informs Henry that he’s an angel, and that he’s here to do that job. Henry accepts him, but they keep the angel part to themselves.

Henry introduces Michael to his wife Julia, and Michael immediately falls in love with her. It’s a novel experience for an angel, except that it reminds him of the world before the Fall, when all was innocence and love. Julia is a frustrated wife – there’s no passion in her marriage, and she pours her affections out on her daughter Juliette. (I did not like Juliette much – her dialogue seemed very artificial to me.)

Both Michael and Julia are strongly tempted, but (spoiler alert) nothing more than a kiss happens between them. Unlike in the movie, where the angel (called Dudley there) helps the bishop to understand his deeper ministry and to appreciate his wife, the book ends with nothing much changed in that regard. Michael completes his assignment and returns whence he came, with a deep and tragic and new understanding he never had before. Julia gains one thing in her life, but her marriage is left pretty much the same.

It’s hard to know what to say about The Bishop’s Wife. My orthodox Christianity made me an argumentative reader. The overarching theme seems to be that the joy and love of Heaven, which permeate Michael, are so much higher than Christian theology and morality that they render them rather irrelevant. (I’m sure that’s true in a sense, but it’s hard for a Christian to conceive of an angel being indifferent to the Son of God.) Henry is both a bad churchman and a bad husband, I think – he overspiritualizes his marriage and overmaterializes his ministry. It’s disappointing that he leaves the stage as clueless as he was before.

The Bishop’s Wife left this reader oddly flat. It’s remarkable to me that it’s one of Nathan’s most famous works.

Milestone

Photo credit: aaronburden. Unsplash license.

I hesitate to post this, because it sounds like bragging – even worse, it sounds like bragging about a spiritual matter. Even worse, I might actually be bragging and in denial about it. Maybe I can pour enough self-deprecation on to counterbalance the sin of pride.

Last night, at bedtime, I finished the Book of Malachi in my Bible (I always do my bedtime Bible reading in Norwegian, to multitask, stacking education on top of edification. I’ve done this for more than 50 years.) I started (in English) when I was in confirmation class at church; I must have been about 13 years old. I’m now… considerably older.

Since I read from the Old Testament and the New Testament at different times of the day, I get through the New Testament several times for every full reading of the Old Testament. I don’t know how many times I’ve read the New Testament. But last night marked my 20th reading of the O.T. (Actually, it may be my 21st. There was a time I lost track of the hash marks I put in the inside cover; I opted for the lower count to be sure I wasn’t cheating.)

At the rate of one chapter a night, five nights a week (I give myself a break on weekends), it takes me a little over four years to read the Old Testament through.

Twenty readings seems to me like a milestone. I could have racked up more hash tags, certainly; there have been periods in my life when I got out of the habit, not without guilt. (At one point I grew deeply concerned about my spiritual state, as I was having such a hard time picking the book up at night. Then it occurred to me that the print was awfully small. I procured a pair of reading glasses and found my spirituality restored.)

I’m sure there are a lot of people who’ve read the Bible more times than I have, adjusting for age or not. Some people follow reading plans that get them through the whole thing (New Testament included) in a year. I respect that, but I’ve never felt right setting goals in my Bible reading. It’s like scheduling visits to one’s grandmother.

There was an age when the number of times you’d read the Bible earned you esteem in the United States. Emotionally, I suppose I still live in that time.

Rewards in Heaven? I believe there are such things, but I generally don’t consider them in practice; when we get Over There, we’ll cast whatever crowns we’ve acquired at the feet of the King. So the only reward I expect for my Bible reading is whatever wisdom manages to work its way into my mind and spirit. That ought to be enough. Adults don’t expect a reward for eating healthy food – the food’s effects are the reward.

‘His Eyes,’ by Mark Charles Powers

Sometimes you read a book that’s so well-meaning that you just want to root for it. Especially if it’s a Christian book. I wish I could say that Mark Charles Powers’ His Eyes was a successful work of art, but I’m afraid I can’t.

As the book opens (the opening is quite well-written), Michael Judson, a teenager in a suburb in an unnamed southern state, is in shock. His younger brother Lucas has just died in a freak gun accident, and Michael doesn’t know whether he, his (single) mother, or Lucas himself pulled the trigger.

This is the most successful part of the book, as the horror and finality sink in and he and his mother deal with it, each in their own ways. Michael finds some comfort in the friendship of an old neighbor, who lends him a cassette tape (this story is set in 1997) featuring a Christian song that’s brought him comfort. He also makes friends with a neighbor boy who has unspoken problems of his own. Meanwhile his mother sinks into depression and guilt, becoming increasingly dependent on prescription tranquilizers. Their grief is only aggravated by her ex-husband’s accusations that she’s responsible for Lucas’s death.

I think it’s a general truth that in fiction it’s easier to portray grief and pain than to portray comfort and healing. That problem is only aggravated when a Christian message is being proclaimed. One tends (and I know this from experience) to fall into preachiness. One’s words sound like platitudes, even when the truths expressed have been hard-learned through suffering and tears. Such scenes require a deft handling of dialogue – and I regret to say that author Powers hasn’t quite mastered that skill. Michael, in particular, tends to fall into verbiage that sounds nothing like a teenager talking.

I wish Mark Charles Powers well. I think he has talent, and is capable of very good things. But he’s not ready for prime time. I fear that His Eyes, well-intentioned though it is, will not do the good he intended (though it certainly may in some cases, with readers less picky than I).

How to Develop a Precocious Mind

Young writer Bethel McGrew describes growing up with scholarly parents in a house of ten thousand books.

The ideological benefits of homeschooling are obvious, but besides these I’m moved to reflect on this simple freedom of time—time to train my attention on good and beautiful and difficult things, to furnish my mind with them at my own pace. I have sadly lost some of that gift of attention in the digital age. I flip through a decades-old memo pad logging all the books I read in a given year, in between the little to-do lists I would make for an afternoon of reading, chess study, or whatever else nine-year-old me was working on, and I’m filled with envy.

Bethel is a good columnist with strong opinions of her own, not simply all the correct ones. I recommending her Substack and whatever she releases into the wild, like this piece today on what the revival of Michael Jackson says about America.

Concerning audacity

Hard as it may be to believe, there are things I don’t understand. Tonight, purely on a whim, I shall ponder one of them. I rarely know what I think about anything, after all, until I’ve written it out.

When Elisha became sick with the illness of which he was to die, Joash the king of Israel came down to him and wept over him and said, “My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and its horsemen!” Elisha said to him, “Take a bow and arrows.” So he took a bow and arrows. Then he said to the king of Israel, “Put your hand on the bow.” And he put his hand on it, then Elisha laid his hands on the king’s hands. He said, “Open the window toward the east,” and he opened it. Then Elisha said, “Shoot!” And he shot. And he said, “The LORD’S arrow of victory, even the arrow of victory over Aram; for you will defeat the Arameans at Aphek until you have destroyed them.” Then he said, “Take the arrows,” and he took them. And he said to the king of Israel, “Strike the ground,” and he struck it three times and stopped. So the man of God was angry with him and said, “You should have struck five or six times, then you would have struck Aram until you would have destroyed it. But now you shall strike Aram only three times.” (II Cor. 13:14-19, NASB 95)

A little background, as I understand it: When you read the Old Testament prophets (which you definitely should do), you get the impression that the Israelites, especially those of the northern kingdom of Israel, pretty much apostatized. Turned their backs on Yahweh. Because the prophets are always condemning them for doing just that.

But if you pay attention to the historical books, you get a little more nuance. Very few of the kings seem to have gone so far as to convert to the Canaanite religion. They recognized the Lord as the God of their people, but (like all their contemporaries) they assumed religion was an ethnic thing. We’ve got our God, they’ve got theirs. And of course, when you did business, political and mercantile, with the pagans, you had to accommodate them. Show up for the occasional feast. Authorize construction of a temple to Baal or Ashtaroth here and there. Diversity is our strength, right? And the people of Israel had old traditional ties to the golden calves set up by Jeroboam; you had to be sensitive to that sentiment.

So the prophet Elijah had raged at King Joash (reigned around 801–786 BC) , and Joash had tolerated it. Now the old man was dying, and, like a small boy summoned to the deathbed of an uncle with whom he’d never gotten along, he paid a visit out of a sense of obligation.

Then the dying prophet asks him to do a crazy thing. He tells him to open a window and shoot an arrow out. Then he tells him to strike the rest of the arrows on the ground. Joash sighs (probably), and to humor the old man he strikes the arrows down three times, then stops. And in one final act of nagging, Elijah tells him he did it wrong. He should have struck more times. Then he gets the last word by dying.

This is a story that’s always troubled me. I identify strongly with Joash here. I grew up in an environment where both disinterest and enthusiasm were likely to get you in trouble. I respond to challenges cautiously, in a measured way. But God so often wants all-out enthusiasm. Jesus says, in Matthew 11:12, “From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force.” (There’s dispute on the meaning of that verse, but I take it as condemning weenies like me.) Jewish culture celebrates “chutzpah,” audacity, a quality I lack almost entirely.

Jordan Peterson has reminisced about his youth in a small town on the Alberta prairie. He said that there were only two groups of guys to hang around with there – the bad boys, who got into trouble and mostly had poor futures in store, and the church boys. But he didn’t like the church boys either. They were “good,” he says, not because they loved virtue, but because they were afraid of taking risks.

That hits home at my house.

I wish the world understood this. I wish they understood that “church boys” like me are not actually Jesus’ target market for disciples. I’d wager there wasn’t a guy like me among all the twelve disciples. Sentimental illustrations always depict the Apostle John (for instance) as a clean-shaven, long-haired, slightly effeminate figure. Yet Jesus called him and his brother James “the Sons of Thunder.” They got in trouble with their buddies for asking for the top spots in the coming Kingdom (Mark 10:37). Chutzpah on parade.

All my life I’ve gotten into trouble (ironically) because I have difficulty asking for anything. Were James and John even embarrassed by their audacious request? Maybe the other disciples were upset because they didn’t think of it first.

For such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.” (John 4:23)

‘God’s Word Is Our Great Heritage’

I’m in the middle of reading a very interesting book whose review must wait till Monday. So, this being Friday, I have ferreted out another Scandinavian hymn for you.

“God’s Word Is Our Great Heritage,” I think, is not familiar to non-Lutherans, though the tune will be. (I find, to my chagrin, that most of the YouTube renditions feature the wrong tune – by which I mean a tune I didn’t grow up with. Almost the only version with the right tune is the one I’ve posted above, featuring a solo singer who does a pretty good job.)

The author of the hymn, once again, is the problematic N.F.S. Grundtvig of Denmark. It’s rather odd that we have a hymn in praise of Scripture from his pen, as one of his eccentric doctrines, at least at one point in his career, was that the Apostle’s Creed was older than the Gospels. Nevertheless, there it is, and I think it’s to his credit. The translator, Ole C. Belsheim, a Norwegian immigrant, attended, among other schools, Luther College, Decorah, Ia. and Augsburg Seminary, Minneapolis (both of which I attended too, except that Augsburg was just a college by the time I got there. It calls itself a university now, probably on the strength of its association with me).

The hymn is also peculiar in having just one verse, as far as I can tell. C. S. Lewis, who hated long hymns, would have loved this one, if he ever heard of it, which I doubt.

Happy weekend.