diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'website/src/content/blog/2026')
| -rw-r--r-- | website/src/content/blog/2026/02/16/short_reformation_stories.md | 188 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | website/src/content/blog/2026/03/04/agnostic.md | 29 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | website/src/content/blog/2026/03/21/genesis.gmi | 45 |
3 files changed, 0 insertions, 262 deletions
diff --git a/website/src/content/blog/2026/02/16/short_reformation_stories.md b/website/src/content/blog/2026/02/16/short_reformation_stories.md deleted file mode 100644 index b1ff97c..0000000 --- a/website/src/content/blog/2026/02/16/short_reformation_stories.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,188 +0,0 @@ ---- -title: 10 very short stories about the Reformation -description: >- - I'm summarising a few of the big stories about the Reformation I've been - studying recently. -pubDate: 2026-02-16 -updatedDate: 2026-02-27 ---- - -1. Moral corruption in public office - -Since the major reforms of Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073-1085) and his successors, -the Roman Church had gone through several cycles of moral panic, attempting to -crack down on the 'abuses' of the clergy. The main abuses that got folk worked -up were simony (i.e. bribery), nepotism, holding multiple benefices, keeping -mistresses and having illegitimate children with them, and getting entangled in -secular power politics. The Reformation occurred just at a particularly severe -instance of one of these moral panics. Both Protestants and Catholics responded -with unprecedented reforms, in many ways similar: the clergy was transformed -from a comfortable club for elites into a smaller band of well-educated and -committed professionals. In the new Latin church, increasingly, nobility was -neither necessary nor sufficient, but education and moral virtue were. Amongst -Catholics, the priest became the spiritual equivalent of a Personal Trainer. -They became experts at hearing confessions and guiding the highly personal -development of their flock. Amongst Protestants, priests and ministers focused -much more on shared community life, leading communal Psalm-singing and teaching -their congregations with sermons. Amongst both Catholics and Protestants, clergy -were expected to be resident in their parish or diocese, preach the Gospel, -catechise, and administer sacraments. - -2. The Eucharist - -In the 14th and 15th centuries, people in Latin Christendom became increasingly -devoted to celebrating the Eucharist. However, ordinary people became -increasingly estranged from it. The Eucharist was only distributed to the laity -under one kind, and then perhaps as infrequently as once a year at Easter, the -legal minimum. The liturgy became a spectacle, but not something ordinary people -could participate in or even understand. This had led to major protests, -including the Hussite and Lollard revolts, in the fifteenth century. These -revolts had been repressed by the Church. However, in the sixteenth century, the -Church failed to hold back the tide. Protestants reformed the liturgy, turning -the priest to face the congregation, translating the liturgy into the -vernacular, and distributing the elements in both kinds. Catholics, while not -abolishing the Mass altogether as the Protestants did, mandated frequent -attendance at Mass and encouraged priests to explain to the laity what was -happening in their own language as the liturgy went on. Christians in the Latin -tradition now receive communion in a variety of ways, much of that diversity -explicable in sixteenth-century terms, but almost all receive communion -frequently, receive both species, and can interpret what they are doing -theologically: these are all Reformation legacies. The fractious politics of the -sixteenth century meant that these different developments of the Eucharist -hardened into explicitly irreconcilable doctrines. Christians in the Latin -tradition still do not all offer one another communion as a result of this -ongoing schism. - -3. Monastic reform - -In the fifteenth century, there was a well-established monastic system in Latin -Christendom. It functioned as a legitimate alternative career to marriage for -elite men and women. They had a useful social role: they were paid by other -elites to pray for the souls of themselves and their loved ones, thereby, they -believed, reducing the duration of their stay in Purgatory. However, in the -sixteenth century, this system broke down. Theologians challenged the doctrine -of Purgatory, undermining the usefulness of the system. The growing -middle-classes resented a system which entrenched the power of the aristocracy. -The poor resented the accumulation of wealth in many monasteries, which -typically required exorbitant entry fees, or were limited to people of noble -birth, or both. In many places, monasteries were overhauled, ending the practice -of praying for the souls of benefactors and opening up membership to those of -humbler origins, and going out into the world to preach the Gospel and do works -of charity. In many other places, the monastic system was abolished altogether. - -4. Justification - -How can I be right with God? In the medieval Roman Church, there were several -doctrinal positions available, and none was authorised as the official 'correct' -answer. One thing everyone agreed on, even revolutionaries like Jan Hus, was -that you had to _do something_ to be right with God. Being justified was a -matter of God working in you to transform you from something wretched to -something holy. So, if there was no holiness, there was no justification. -Profoundly unsatisfied with this, Martin Luther presented a radical alternative: -justification is a free, gracious gift of God, won by Christ's work, not ours. -Becoming holy isn't completely irrelevant, but for Luther, becoming holy, or -'sanctification', comes second, and is not the condition of justification. This -idea drove a wedge through the Church. Is this doctrine simply presenting the -gospel truth of freedom in Christ, or is it an excuse for being lax on sin? - -5. The authority of Scripture versus tradition - -In the sixteenth century, various schismatics who we now know broadly as -Protestants intoned with one voice, that venerating saints is idol-worship. -Christians have venerated saints since at least the 3rd century, if not before, -and is a tradition affirmed across the Christian world, in Rome, Constantinople, -Alexandria and Antioch. How could the Protestants come up with such a novel -idea? Their answer: they got it from Scripture. They argued that Scripture -consistently condemns worshipping anything other than God, and nowhere promotes -exceptions for a special kind of worship for a special kind of non-God. When it -was pointed out to them that the cult of saints was an ancient and universal -Christian practice, and affirmed by councils and the Pope, they answered that -Scripture is a superior authority to the Church. - -6. Confessionalisation - -In the sixteenth century, there was a sudden profusion of confessions and -catechisms. While Christians have used confessions, or creeds, since ancient -times to rule on their disputes, the Reformation confessions took on different -functions. For the Lutherans, the confessions sought to unify the Lutheran -churches in distinction to the Catholic, making no attempt to reconcile their -differences, but in contrast, to spell out and emphasise those differences. For -the Reformed churches, that went even further, with each national church -producing their own confessions in distinction with each other. The Reformed -confessions didn't even function to unite the Reformed churches internationally: -they had a local, and perhaps even temporal, character. Confessions became -longer and ever more precise as time went on, becoming 'lawyer-like' in contrast -to the sparse, poetic quality of the ancient creeds. The Catholics were by all -means at it too, spelling out exactly what distinguished them from the -Protestants in the Tridentine Profession of Faith and in numerous catechisms. -All this was doubtless only possible because of the recent introduction of the -printing press to Europe from China. For the first time, Christians were using -confessional texts at scale not to unite Christians but to divide them. - -7. Kings and clerics - -Pope Gregory VII was famous for fighting the Holy Roman Emperor for the right to -decide who gets to invest priests. This issue and others continued to grind at -the relationship between the Pope and Europe's princes. From the 12th century, -popes claimed to have ultimate authority on both spiritual and temporal matters, -and attempted to exercise this alleged authority with mixed success. Kings -fought back. The kings of France and Spain did particularly well at exacting -papal concessions, and by the sixteenth century ended up pretty much in charge -of Catholicism in their respective realms. In Germany, Switzerland, Scandinavia, -England and Scotland, monarchs were more under the papal thumb, sometimes much -more. Ulrich Zwingli, the great Swiss reformer, complained that the Swiss had to -accept whatever Roman carriage-driver the Pope decided to send as their priest -or bishop. In 1538, Henry VIII declared himself the Supreme Head of the Church -of England. This move was little distinguished from the actions of his French -and Spanish counterparts (apart from its brazenness). But in the context of the -time, he was compelled to make entreaties with the German Protestants. After a -period of ambiguity, under his grand-daughter Elizabeth, England ended up firmly -in the Protestant camp. - -NB. It has since been pointed out to me that Elizabeth is famously Henry VIII's -daughter, not his grand-daughter. I leave this error in situ, so as not to give -the false impression that these short stories are in any way to be admired or -trusted. - -8. Mysticism - -In the late Middle Ages, a movement known as _devotio moderna_ or 'the modern -devotion' swept Europe. It challenged the old rituals of public, communal, vocal -prayer, and emphasised private meditation and mental prayer. For adherents, the -goal was to transform your soul and re-orient it towards God. Along the way, -you'd be likely to use methods from books written by Christendom's top gurus, -but there was doubtless plenty of unregulated mysticism happening, too. In the -Reformation, mystical experiences became ambiguous on both sides of the fence, -for different reasons. Protestants emphasised shared over private spirituality, -and suspected mystics of practicing needless and idolatrous false religion. But -Protestants also emphasised the work of the Spirit in each believer by faith, -and often continued practicing private spirituality. Meanwhile, Catholics -celebrated private spirituality and were perfectly happy emphasising that it -took hard work to approach a direct encounter with God's presence, but were -unsettled by the thought that if you could have a such an encounter by praying -and meditating, you wouldn't need the mediation of the Church to bring you God's -presence through the sacraments. - -9. Conciliarism - -The medieval Latin church had a thing for councils. Councils functioned as a way -to solve disagreements in a fair way, thus generating robust consensus: in -theory, at least. Idealists, called 'conciliarists,' wanted to prioritise -councils over every other authority, even the Pope: though that meant that -ecumenical councils were deeply distrusted by exactly the one person who had the -sole authority to call them. These conflicts still lay unresolved when Martin -Luther led a revolt against Rome in 1517. For some decades, leaders on both -sides of the divide held out hope that an ecumenical council might heal the -schism. However, power politics got in the way, and by the end of the Council of -Trent, it was abundantly clear that councils had become solidly subservient to -papal authority, and were only ever going to exacerbate the split. Conciliarism -was finally dead. - -10. Persecution - -In 1520, Martin Luther was declared an heretic in a papal bull issued by Pope -Leo X. In response, Martin Luther burned the bull in public and announced that -Leo X was the Antichrist. Various players in various quarters tried various -strategies for resolving the schism, and it seems that few were willing to give -up on violent coercion. In both Catholic and Protestant domains, magistrates -burned books and burned people in an attempt to quell heresy. diff --git a/website/src/content/blog/2026/03/04/agnostic.md b/website/src/content/blog/2026/03/04/agnostic.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7e8a532..0000000 --- a/website/src/content/blog/2026/03/04/agnostic.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,29 +0,0 @@ ---- -title: What is an agnostic? -description: >- -pubDate: 2026-03-04 ---- - -I learned today that the first agnostic was 'Darwin's Bulldog', Thomas Henry -Huxley. He attended the Metaphysical Society, an extremely broad selection of -England's foremost thinkers who gathered in London nine times a year throughout -the 1870s to discuss the ultimate questions. He tried all the usual -appellations: atheist, theist, pantheist, materialist, idealist, Christian. He -found all of them wanting. All the various '-ists', he felt, 'were quite sure -they had attained a certain "gnosis,"-had, more or less successfully, solved the -problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong -conviction that the problem was insolube.' Thus, negating the term 'gnostic', he -coined 'agnostic'. - -Thus for Huxley, as with all the first agnostics, the term did not intend the -metaphysical neutrality it's often taken to mean today. For Huxley, it's a -positive epistemological assertion: sure, I don't know, but neither do you: the -matter is in principle unknowable. 'Agnostic' is not a way for Huxley to -diplomatically sidestep metaphysical debates without having to take a side, it's -a confrontational view which contradicts the theist, the atheist, and all the -rest. - -I wonder what people in my life think of this, who have described themselves as -'agnostic'. Did they mean what Huxley meant, or did they mean something more -irenic? Does Huxley's approach challenge them? Is neutrality really an adequate -stance? diff --git a/website/src/content/blog/2026/03/21/genesis.gmi b/website/src/content/blog/2026/03/21/genesis.gmi deleted file mode 100644 index edada7d..0000000 --- a/website/src/content/blog/2026/03/21/genesis.gmi +++ /dev/null @@ -1,45 +0,0 @@ ---- -title: The structure of Genesis -pubDate: 2026-03-21 -description: I've been reading the Book of Genesis recently. ---- - -Last night, I tried a favourite exercise of mine. It's very simple. I wrote down a list, in order, of all the 'episodes' in Genesis. That is, I wrote down a list that went: - -* Creation -* Adam and Eve -* Cain and Abel -* Genealogy of Noah -* Noah and the Flood -* … - -…and so on, all the way to Joseph. - -Once I'd finished this, I was surprised at the result. I realised that, without consciously thinking it, I had been expecting to find a single, clear structure, and in particular, one that went: patriarch, genealogy, patriarch, genealogy, and so on. I didn't find that at all. - -For sure, patriarchs and genealogies are major structures in Genesis, and you'll get a long way thinking about Genesis as a story of six patriarchs and so many genealogies (though the genealogies are rather more difficult to count). Indeed, you *can*, if you really want, slice up Genesis into six neat patriarch cycles and glue them back together again with genealogies: Adam (1-5), Noah (5-11), Abram (11-25), Isaac (25-27), Jacob (27-36), Joseph (36-50). But this way of thinking cannot comprehensively account for the whole book. - -For one thing, there are a good few pieces in Genesis which are difficult to fit into a patriarch jigsaw. Why is there so much material about Cain, Hagar, Ishmael, Esau, and Dinah, including genealogies? Why is the Tower of Babel in there? If Genesis is all about the patriarchs, these are all lengthy side-alleys. (May I say pends? Closes?) - -For two things, this neat six-part series is more messy than it might at first appear. On this model, the genealogies function to glue together the patriarch narratives. Sometimes, this model works well: the genealogy in chapter 5 does a good job of connecting Adam to Noah, and the one in chapter 10 gets us from Noah to Abram. But from Abram to Jacob to Joseph, there's no need for genealogies to stitch things together, because we're only taking one step on the genealogical ladder at a time, from father to son to grandson. - -So, in chapter 25, instead of a 'genealogy' from Abram to his son Isaac, we get genealogies of Keturah and Esau: genealogical 'dead ends' from a patriarchal point of view. In chapter 36, where we're 'supposed' to be linking Jacob to his son Joseph, we get another genealogy of Esau. And in chapter 27, at the join between the supposed 'Isaac cycle' and the supposed 'Jacob cycle,' there's no genealogy at all. - -I'm not for a moment trying to tell you that this model is *useless* for understanding Genesis. Far from it! I don't think you can understand Genesis as a coherent whole without considering it as a story of six patriarchs. I'm just saying this model is *inadequate*. It seems that to account for the Book of Genesis, we're going to have to structure it in multiple ways. To me, that's wonderfully exciting. - -In particular, I'm considering all these to be worthwhile ways to look at Genesis as a whole: - -* Genealogies! (Without assuming they are centred on the six patriarchs!) -* 'These are the generations of…' (how many occurrences can you find?) -* Yahweh speaking to people! (Always one person alone: did you notice that?) -* Wives! (How many can you think of? Will you include Potiphar's wife in this analysis? What about Dinah?) -* Anti-patriarchs and foreigners! (Does Adam get as much column space as Abimelech, or Esau?) -* Wells! (Some of them appear twice, or even thrice…) -* Names and naming! (Do you remember why Jacob is called 'Jacob'?) -* Deaths and burials! (How did Abraham end up buried in that cave?) - -None of these structural lenses is adequate for seeing the whole thing in focus. But each one adds a new dimension. They all pile on top of one another. It's difficult to think of a physical analogy, because in my experience, things don't tend to occupy the same physical space at the same time, and I don't want to resort to the 'kaleidoscope' cliché. I guess it's a bit like quantum super-position, but instead of something being both 'up' and 'down' at the same time, it's multiple Persian rugs. Each one has its own colour scheme, its own patterns, its own delicately balanced symmetries. And yet, just as each rug is intricately harmonious within itself, it is no less intricately arranged into complex symphony with every other rug. And yet, somehow, all the rugs are simultaneously woven out of the same yarn. Picture that! - -Of course, you can also read Genesis without attempting to comprehend the entire thing at once. You can also study a single episode, like the Tower of Babel, without trying to squeeze it into a grand narrative of the whole of Genesis. I suspect lots, if not all, of the stories in Genesis were originally told orally and independently of each other, and I think it's perfectly valid to read them independently once again. - -Nevertheless, the author or authors of Genesis, and, more importantly, the Holy Ghost who moved them, once decided that it would be a good idea to put these stories and genealogies in an orderly sequence in the same scroll, and deliberately and explicitly relate them to one another. By considering structural lenses, we're joining the human authors, and generations of readers, in the faith that these stories mean something to each other, that they have something to tell us not only independently but also together. |