The GA Junkie: Recent Comments

Comment on How Do You Get Your Message Out? New Development In Standing For Moderator

2012-02-10T19:35:48Z

Agreed.

I have to wonder if this is one approach to try to incorporate the media of choice for the younger demographic so as to position himself as having a new approach that incorporates those members of the church.

Comment on How Do You Get Your Message Out? New Development In Standing For Moderator

2012-02-07T01:39:31Z

FWIW ... considering the demographics of most voting commissioners at the GA, I seriously doubt that many will be influenced by text message campaigning.

Comment on A Giant

2012-02-05T22:12:17Z

I almost went there in the post and eliminated it at the last minute because I wanted to focus on the positive not analyze the scandal.

Having said that, I believe Joe did everything legally required of him in this situation. The Penn Attorney General seems to agree. The argument gets into what was morally required and Joe himself said he could have done more.

However, I have been through various forms of youth protection training for a number of different youth organizations I have worked with. In each one we are told not to play police - we are to report it to the appropriate authorities and then stay back and let them do their job. From what I have seen that is what Joe did and it was the supervisor of the police force that then had responsibility (which seems to be why he is charged with a crime).

Anyway, that is what I would have added to the post if I had continued.

Thanks for the comment

Comment on A Giant

2012-02-05T21:35:36Z

From my reading of events in State College, Joe Paterno DID report the events to the civilian head of the Penn State campus police.

Comment on How Do You Get Your Message Out? New Development In Standing For Moderator

2012-02-04T19:30:07Z

When it comes to communicating with teenagers, text is king. Although, not all of them have access to it, making it necessary to combine Facebook and snail mail to get important stuff to everyone. It's crazy, really.

Comment on Musings On The FOP NRB Theology Document - 2. Theology Comes First

2012-01-20T17:44:47Z

Our session this year is presenting the monthly opening devotional from the various confessions. Many have never read any of them except the Nicene and the Apostle's . Hard to "be guided by" what you've never been aware of! My parents required each of their 6 children to memorize the Shorter Cat and answer all questions at one sitting. My 4 sons had to read the SC and talk about it with me, but memory has not been as prized as it was in earlier generations. I look forward to more emphasis in the new church on shared theology and confession.

Comment on Musings On The FOP NRB Theology Document - 2. Theology Comes First

2012-01-16T03:47:19Z

I think you have read it right.

I caught that and it raised questions for me but I passed on commenting in the main post. This "word of God" versus "Word of God" scripture/incarnation distinction seems to have become one of the theological discussions de juor. While I have followed the general discussion there seem to be a number of nuances that I have not fully grasp and I have tried to not wade in too deeply here until I better understand the discussion. Thanks for your comments because I think you help navigate through some of the nuances.

I also think there is a tendency to fall back on scripture because of some of it's "you shall" and "you shall not" language that can be pointed to in support of an argument. While Jesus should get top billing sometimes the Word incarnate can be interpreted through too many lenses.

Comment on Musings On The FOP NRB Theology Document - 2. Theology Comes First

2012-01-13T15:41:14Z

Having finally read the Theology document, I liked a lot about it, but I was left wondering whether or not it puts Jesus and the Bible on the same level. It claims "God's Word" is "the sole authority for our confession" - ok, fine. But then to talk about the Word "both incarnate and written," as though they are equivalent, in 1:1 correspondence, rather than Jesus Christ being the one Word of God (so Barmen) and Scripture being the unique and authoritative witness to him (so C67). The document states, "We glorify God by recognizing and receiving his authoritative self-revelation, both in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments and also in the incarnation of God the Son."

Perhaps it's just my (sympathetic to neorthodoxy) bias; I would need to go back and look at Westminster and the older confessions; but I would think the Incarnation should get top billing over the Scriptures. The Word didn't become a book in our faith (as in Islam), the Word became flesh. The dcoument's sentence "The revelation of the incarnate Word does not minimize, qualify, or set aside the authority of the written Word" sounds, to my ears, almost like an apology for the Incarnation, as though we need to set up some kind of fence around the Bible to protect it from the incarnate Word.

Have I read it wrong? I do see that they state the Holy Spirit illumines us to receive "both the Scriptures and Christ himself aright." So I don't say the document discounts the ongoing role of the Spirit in reading and interpreting Scripture. But this (again, as I see it) lifting up of the Bible to occupy the same revelatory status as Jesus doesn't quite seem right to me.

Comment on Musings On The FOP NRB Theology Document - 2. Theology Comes First

2012-01-10T19:23:31Z

We have found it refreshing to utilize the shorter catechism to recite in our services as an affirmation of faith.

Comment on Musings On The FOP NRB Theology Document - 2. Theology Comes First

2012-01-10T16:43:46Z

Dear Peggy,
Thanks for sharing your experience. It is interesting that our pastor does make regular reference to the first question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism (The chief end of Man) on a regular basis. So we do frequently get a touch of the Westminster - but only that piece and only from the front.

Your other observation about the authorship of the FOP document I think is right on -- That was the next item of the "bunch of things in my head" that I alluded to at the end. I don't know if I will ever get back to that but I just ran out of time on this post. I know that seeing Joe's name on the document was a real surprise for me, and Carmen says that it was for her as well. I don't know if that will be an issue next week (I hope not) but a couple of people I've spoken with have mentioned it along the lines of the "elephant in the room." I don't know how much I would want to psychoanalyze this and his open letter, but his marks seem to be all over this document. As you say, a way to try to accomplish something he didn't get done while on the staff.

Having said that - I would add that I personally agree with a lot of Joe's writings that I have read. Don't know him very well personally, but on church leadership and the creeds and confessions we seem to have very similar thoughts.