This is an experience that requires an immediate post.
At lunch just now Drs. Gagnon and Humphrey joined my table. I don't know why it's only my professors that are social. I hardly see any professors outside of class that I don't have for a class. Anyway, Dr. Gagnon is Presbyterian and Dr. Humphrey is Anglican with a Salvation Army background. They began easily enough showing interest in topics of conversation around the table: classes, seminary experience, and the validity of lyrics to popular praise and worship songs. But when the conversation steered toward baptism things got a bit more interesting. It's refreshing really, there was no squabble about sprinkling or dunking; it's well accepted that dunking is biblical but sprinkling isn't a problem. The issue is when it should be done, if it can be done multiple times, and how it relates to faith and the other sacraments. Well, there is really only one other sacrament of note. So do you have to be baptized to take communion? Do you have to be confirmed? Well when should confirmation be confirmed? Really it should be done about age 17 according to our ability to truly articulate a statement of faith. But if we deny communion to those under 17 are we not withholding from them a key spiritually formative event? If a two year old can say "I love Jesus" is that enough to offer him communion? Now what about the mentally challenged? Is that person's IQ sufficient to understand the gospel message? What happens when a person participates in communion? Is God angry?
Toward the end of the hour the two scholars were so deeply focused on their own point counter point that they didn't seem to notice the rest of us were leaving. "Alright, we're just going to go determine the precise nature and substance of Q" someone said, but it fell on deaf ears. Coming away from an experience like that is challenging to me because of my total impotence at joining a conversation on that level. I don't feel terrible about that, I mean, these are PhD's who spend more time studying scripture than I do sleeping, but it's interesting to hear them speak somewhat like normal people in a conversation using words that I'd heard before. I'm sure they are frustrated by mortals like us students who are trying to participate in the debate along side them and just aren't quite as articulate or well informed.
Here are a few highlights from my notes from spiritual formation:
We are all stardust.
Jesus didn't exist before the incarnation.
Hate is good. Or it is neither good or bad.
In Christ, all things die.
The difference between a southern belle and a southern sweetheart is her daddy's wallet.
God is my enemy.
You might think I'm out of context there but not really. She says things like that with a long pause before and after each sentence. Then when about 15 hands shoot up to ask a question during her pause, she ignores them and moves on. A few of the more stalwart hands stay up, not allowing her to get away with the statement that no part of Jesus was around 2010 years ago, but she continues to ignore them. Maybe 15 mins later she calls on one and acts surprised when the student's question is about a topic she's already moved past. From my vantage point in the last row I look around the room I see lots of laptop screens that are black or covered with green and stacks of alternating red and black cards. A few folks who prop their notepads up on thier knees betray the impressive three-dimensional doodle they are working on. Some day in mid-November I have to take that lecture and others and turn it into an 8-10 page paper.
Dr. Sunquist preached in Chapel this morning (again, my professors are the only visible ones). He admonished all the future pastors in the room to delete or burn all the resources we have on sermon illustration. You don't need peripheral illustrations when you have a solid foundation in church history. I don't know about the rest of you but I wonder if that's a little vain. Sure, he has a great foundation in church history, but how much will a reference to the early church or middle ages help exemplify the gospel to folks who only know about selling insurance or nursing?
Prov 4:7
Incidentally, if you were curious about one of the comments Dr. Humphrey made about praise songs I like this one: "As The Deer" is flawed because the singer hardly yields his/her spirit only to Him. You are constantly yielding to your spouse, your boss, your doctor... Later in the conversation when she asked my opinion on the topic of discussion I was glad to be able to humorously say "I yield my spirit to your comments."
<><
At lunch just now Drs. Gagnon and Humphrey joined my table. I don't know why it's only my professors that are social. I hardly see any professors outside of class that I don't have for a class. Anyway, Dr. Gagnon is Presbyterian and Dr. Humphrey is Anglican with a Salvation Army background. They began easily enough showing interest in topics of conversation around the table: classes, seminary experience, and the validity of lyrics to popular praise and worship songs. But when the conversation steered toward baptism things got a bit more interesting. It's refreshing really, there was no squabble about sprinkling or dunking; it's well accepted that dunking is biblical but sprinkling isn't a problem. The issue is when it should be done, if it can be done multiple times, and how it relates to faith and the other sacraments. Well, there is really only one other sacrament of note. So do you have to be baptized to take communion? Do you have to be confirmed? Well when should confirmation be confirmed? Really it should be done about age 17 according to our ability to truly articulate a statement of faith. But if we deny communion to those under 17 are we not withholding from them a key spiritually formative event? If a two year old can say "I love Jesus" is that enough to offer him communion? Now what about the mentally challenged? Is that person's IQ sufficient to understand the gospel message? What happens when a person participates in communion? Is God angry?
Toward the end of the hour the two scholars were so deeply focused on their own point counter point that they didn't seem to notice the rest of us were leaving. "Alright, we're just going to go determine the precise nature and substance of Q" someone said, but it fell on deaf ears. Coming away from an experience like that is challenging to me because of my total impotence at joining a conversation on that level. I don't feel terrible about that, I mean, these are PhD's who spend more time studying scripture than I do sleeping, but it's interesting to hear them speak somewhat like normal people in a conversation using words that I'd heard before. I'm sure they are frustrated by mortals like us students who are trying to participate in the debate along side them and just aren't quite as articulate or well informed.
Here are a few highlights from my notes from spiritual formation:
We are all stardust.
Jesus didn't exist before the incarnation.
Hate is good. Or it is neither good or bad.
In Christ, all things die.
The difference between a southern belle and a southern sweetheart is her daddy's wallet.
God is my enemy.
You might think I'm out of context there but not really. She says things like that with a long pause before and after each sentence. Then when about 15 hands shoot up to ask a question during her pause, she ignores them and moves on. A few of the more stalwart hands stay up, not allowing her to get away with the statement that no part of Jesus was around 2010 years ago, but she continues to ignore them. Maybe 15 mins later she calls on one and acts surprised when the student's question is about a topic she's already moved past. From my vantage point in the last row I look around the room I see lots of laptop screens that are black or covered with green and stacks of alternating red and black cards. A few folks who prop their notepads up on thier knees betray the impressive three-dimensional doodle they are working on. Some day in mid-November I have to take that lecture and others and turn it into an 8-10 page paper.
Dr. Sunquist preached in Chapel this morning (again, my professors are the only visible ones). He admonished all the future pastors in the room to delete or burn all the resources we have on sermon illustration. You don't need peripheral illustrations when you have a solid foundation in church history. I don't know about the rest of you but I wonder if that's a little vain. Sure, he has a great foundation in church history, but how much will a reference to the early church or middle ages help exemplify the gospel to folks who only know about selling insurance or nursing?
Prov 4:7
Incidentally, if you were curious about one of the comments Dr. Humphrey made about praise songs I like this one: "As The Deer" is flawed because the singer hardly yields his/her spirit only to Him. You are constantly yielding to your spouse, your boss, your doctor... Later in the conversation when she asked my opinion on the topic of discussion I was glad to be able to humorously say "I yield my spirit to your comments."
<><
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home