Sunday, June 30, 2013

Catholic Priest beheaded in Syria

My heart stops.  I won't be watching the video.  It would be etched in my mind forever.

But those who can should watch it.  Read the article, at least.

Catholic Priest Beheaded in Syria by Al Qaeda Linked Rebels as Men and Children Cheer on and Take Pictures

May the martyrs' blood be the seed of the church.  I have begun fasting and praying for our brothers and sisters around the globe and all the poor people hurt by strife and warfare.

Also, this news story, in German, about the 100 000 Christians in Mosul and Iraq, which are no more.  The ones who are left worry daily about being sold to terrorists at any checkpoint that they have to pass.

My friend made this prayer on Facebook.  We shall add our Amen:

Eternal rest, grant unto him, O Lord
and let perpetual light shine upon him. May our brothers and sisters be strengthened in their faith and protected from all assaults of our enemies, and may your light, through them, reach into the darkest corners of mankind.

Friday, June 28, 2013

Edmonton, Churchill Square

Had errands downtown Edmonton, yesterday.

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Bono Interview with Focus on the Family

Very good. Gave me a lot.

Smart and Wrong / Courageous and Wrong

Not only is it possible to be very smart and very wrong, it is also possible to be very "courageous" and very wrong.  Someone wrote this recently at the death of our national hero, Henry Morgenthaler.

Here we have the same issue.  People do not want babies killed in utero after 20 weeks.  "Pro-choice" considers this, likely, a breach in the wall.  Why 20 weeks?  Soon, we will go further back and ask for more restrictions.  -- Well, we may or we may not.  In any case, killing babies at 20 weeks seems barbaric to practically all people. Even Henry Morgenthaler didn't do it.

"Die Philosoffen" by the Wise Guys / A little satire about the philosophers

Half way through the Nagel.  It is all so painfully obvious, one can fly through it.  I hope that Richard Dawkins read it.  No doubt he has.  We haven't heard so much from him lately, and Hitchens is dead.  They are/were both so smart, it's amazing how wrong they can be. It seems the smarter you are the wronger you can be. There is an aphorism by me.  I believe that I just invented it.  Only problem: it is so painfully obvious.

On Facebook, the other day, a pastor from Germany shared this song about the philosophers.  See the video and the German text below.  I have inserted my English translation between each verse.   Good fun.  

In checking now, I see that he has removed this piece from his newsfeed.  He must have felt is a little out of place after several days.

The group is called "Wise Guys".  Their lyrics are all quite witty, but in German language.  Their texts can be found here.

Just the title of this song "Die Philosoffen" is a word play on "philosophers" and "being drunk" ("besoffen").  But I will endeavor to translate this one for the general hilarity of it.  See below.

or here:

Der Mann Aristoteles
war blöd, doch ich erzähl es:
Er spielte Philosoph
und fragte wie Klein Doof:
"Warum ist etwas da,
das da vorher noch nicht war?
Hmm...das hat bestimmt 'nen Grund!"
Vielen Dank für diesen Fund.

The man Aristotle,
was a bit silly, but I will tell the story,
he liked to play philosopher,
and simply asked plain stupid,
"Why is something here,
that was not here before?
That must have a cause!"
--thank you very much for this great discovery!

Ein Mann, genannt Diogenes,
der tat was Ungezogenes:
Er hat, wie alle wissen,
sich selber weggeschmissen.
So lebte er mit Wonne
in einer dicken Tonne,
und das war ein echter Renner -
heute macht des jeder Penner.

There was a man, called Diogenes,
he did something pretty unheardof.
He threw himself away into a big
barrel and lived in there,
--this was truly a big hit,
--nowadays every tramp does the same.

Die Philosoffen waren alle besoffen!
Das ist kein Witz und auch kein Neid:
Die waren breit, die ganze Zeit.
Die Philosoffen waren alle besoffen!
Liest man nur kurz in ihren Texten,
merkt man, dass sie Wodka exten.
Wahrheit ist zu später Stund'
eben ein Fass ohne Grund.
Doch mal ganz offen:
Das lässt mich hoffen,
dass man's im Leben zu was bringt,
wenn man trinkt.

The philosophers,
were all drunk.
We are not saying this as a joke or from envy.
They were broad (drunk?), the the whole time.
If you read only a little in their writings,
you can see that they were oozing vodka.
But truth, at a late hour,
is simply a barrel without a bottom.
But let us say this,
it gives me hope,
that one can get somewhere in life,
by being drunk.

Ein Mann, der Schopenhauer,
der macht mich wirklich sauer:
Der hatte einen Willen,
den konnt er aber nicht stillen.
Er fand, es sei Beschiss,
dass die Welt ist, wie sie is'.
Nun, das ist uns allen klar -
Schopi machte das zum Star.

There was a man, the Schopenhauer,
he makes me really quite sour.
He had a "will", 
which he could not fullfill.
He found that the word is crap,
the way it is.
Now, that's something we all knew,
but this recognition made Schopi a star.

Ein Mann mit Namen Hegel,
das war ein rechter Flegel:
der konnte etwas meinen
und es gleichzeitig verneinen.
Er widersprach sich ständig.
Das fand man wohl sehr wendig,
und man nannte diese Hektik
hochtrabend 'Dialektik'.

There was a man, named Hegel,
he was a real troublemaker,
he could mean something and deny it at the same time.
He contradicted himself constantly,
and people thought that was flexible,
and this type of hectic,
one proudly called a dialectic.

Die Philosoffen waren alle besoffen!
Sie sah'n der Wahrheit ins Gesicht
und waren hackestrunzendicht.
Die Philosoffen waren alle besoffen!
Liest man nur kurz in ihren Werken,
merkt man, wie sich Denker stärken:
Mit 'nem tiefen Blick ins Glas -
in vino veritas!
Doch mal ganz offen:
Das lässt mich hoffen,
dass es im Leben besser läuft,
wenn man säuft!

The philosophers were all drunk!
The looked the truth right in they eye,
and remained as dumbstruck as before.
The philosophers were all drunk!
If you briefly read in their works,
you can see quickly, how a 
thinkers strengthens himself:
with a deep look into the glass,
in vino veritas!
But let me say this,
all this gives me hope,
that life goes better,
when you drink.

Ein Mann - das war der Platon -
da erzähl' ich euch noch grad von,
der wollt' was von Sokrates,
doch Sokrates, der verbat es.
Drum erfand der Platon Liebe,
die auskommt ohne Triebe -
na, wie soll denn das jetzt gehn?!
Im Suff hat man Ideen!

There was a man, his name was Plato,
I will quickly tell you about him.
He wanted something from Socrates,
but Socrates forbade it.
Therefore, Plato invented love,
which gets away without urges.
Well, how is that supposed to work?
When drunk one has some strange ideas.

Die Philosoffen waren alle besoffen!
Sie waren voll bis unter'n Rand,
das nennt sich nüchterner Verstand.
Die Philosoffen waren sowas von besoffen!
Liest man nur kurz in ihren Schriften,
merkt man, dass sie wohl auch kifften:
Erst 'ne große Tüte bau'n
und dann die Wahrheit schaun'!
Doch mal ganz offen:
Das lässt nicht hoffen!
Ich bin betroffen
und könnt mich zoffen,
denn mir wird auf einmal klar,
was der Grund des Übels war -
drum ist alles schief gelaufen
und sie fingen an zu saufen,
waren sie auch noch so schlau:
Ihnen fehlte was.
Na, was war denn das?
Na, was wohl? Ja, genau: Eine...

The philosophers were all drunk!
They were rather plastered,
and now we call it sober reason.
The philosophers were drunk,
if you briefly read their writings
suddenly it becomes clear to me
what the real problem was,
this is why everything went wrong,
and why they started to drink,
because even though they were smart,
something was missing.
Well, what was it?
Well, what?  Yes, certainly...
a .....

(Frau:  woman)

...Frau findet man schwerlich
in der Philosophie, doch mal ehrlich,
es wäre auch verlogen,
zu sagen: Frauen nehmen keine Drogen.
Und doch ist etwas anders
als beim Mann. Ja, Mann, was kann das
denn nur sein? Ich denk und denk...
Jetzt brauch ich erst mal ein Getränk!

... a "woman" is hard to find in philosophy,
let's be honest.
And it would be a lie to say,
that women don't take drugs,
but still it is something different than with a man.
With a man it is, 
what is it,
I think and think...
I think I need a drink!

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Mind and Cosmos / Nagel

"Mind and Cosmos" by Thomas Nagel came in the mail, yesterday, from Amazon.  It's not just used Reader's Digest Music Books I've bought, lately.  (The music books come but I am amazed how few of the songs I know.  We are not talking Bach, Schubert, hymns or hiking songs.  When my children were little I first learned of "Hickory Dickory Dock" and such treasures. Then at Christmas, in playschool, they sang:  "Santa Claus is coming to town."  I was outraged at the terrible theology.  How quaint. But this lies some decades back now.  At present I need to learn the songs from the 20's, 30's and 40's.  Yup.)

So, with the songs books not resonating right of the bat, or not at all, I have already thrown myself onto the "Mind and Cosmos", overnight.  How beautifully Nagel turns the phrases and injects good sense into the discussion.  How refreshing.

Also see this post and link to National Post article on the reaction to Thomas Nagel.

Let's give a little from Chapter 1: Introduction.

"Scientists are well aware of how much they don't know, but this is a different kind of problem--not just of acknowledging the limits of what is actually understood but of trying to recognize what can and cannot in principle be understood by certain existing methods."

"The starting point for the argument is the failure of psychophysical reductionism, a position in the philosophy of mind that is largely motivated by the hope of showing how the physical sciences could in principle provide a theory of everything.  If that hope is unrealizable, the question arises whether any other more or less unified understanding could take in the entire cosmos as we know it...What I would like to do is to explore the possibilities that are compatible with what we know--in particular what we know about how mind and everything connected with it depends on the appearance and development of living organisms, as a result of the universe's physical, chemical, and then biological evolution.  I will contend that these processes must be reconceived in light of what they have produced, if psychophysical reductionism is false.  

The argument from the failure of psychophysical reductionism is a philosophical one, but I believe there are independent empirical reasons to be skeptical about the truth of reductionism in biology.  Physico-chemical reductionism in biology is the orthodox view, and any resistance to it is regarded as not only scienifically but politically incorrect.  But for a long time I have found the materialist account of how we and our fellow organisms came to exist hard to believe, including the standard version of how the evolutionary process works.  The more details we learn about the chemical basis of life and the intricacy of the genetic code, the more unbelievable the standard historical account becomes.  (Footnote:  See Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker:  Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, for a canonical exposition, which seems to convince practically everyone.)  [Snort.  Hahahaha.]  This is just the opinion of a layman who reads widely in the literature that explains contemporary science to the nonspecialist.  Perhaps that literature presents the situation with a simplicity and confidence that does not reflect the most sophisticated scientific thought in these areas.  but it seems to me that, as it is usually presented, the current orthodoxy about the cosmic order is the product of governing assumptions that are unsupported, and that it flies in the face of common sense. 

I would like to defend the untutored reaction of incredulity to the reductionist neo-Darwinian account of the origin and evolution of life.  It is prima facie highly implausible that life as we know it is the result of a sequence of physical accidents together with the mechanism of natural selection.  We are expected to abandon this naive response, not in favor of a fully worked out physical/chemical explanation but in favor of an alternative that is really a schema for explanation, supported by some examples.  What is lacking, to my knowledge, is a credible argument that the story has a nonneglibible probability of being true.  There are two questions.  First, given what we known about the chemical basis of biology and genetics, what is the likelihood that self-reproducing life forms should have come into existence spontaneously on the early earth, solely through the operation of the laws of physics and chemistry?  The second question is about the sources of variation in the evolutionary process that was set in motion once life began:  In the available geological time since the first life forms appeared on earth, what is the likelihood that, as a result of physical accident, a sequence of viable genetic mutations should have occurred that was sufficient to permit natural selection to produce the organisms that actually exist? 

[No wonder people hate him.]

... The world is an astonishing place, and the idea that we have in our possession the basic tools needed to understand it is no more credible now that it was in Aristotle's day.  That is has produced you, and me, and the rest of us is the most astonishing though about it.  If contemporary research in molecular biology leaves open the possibility of legitimate doubts about a fully mechanistic account of the origin and evolution of life, dependent only on the laws of chemistry and physics, this can combine with the failure of psychophysical reductionism to suggest that principles of a different kind are also at work int he history of nature, principles of the growth of order that are in their logical form teleological rather than mechanistic.  I realize that such doubts will strike many people as outrageous,but that is because almost everyone in our secular culture has been browbeaten into regarding the reductive research program as sacrosanct, on the ground that anything else would not be science."


He concludes the introduction, a few more pages down the road with this disclaimer: he is not into "intelligent design", but...

"...I confess to an ungrounded assumption of my own, in not finding it possible to regard the design alternative as a real option.  I lack the  sensus divinitatis that enables--indeed compels--so many people to see in the world the expression of divine purpose as naturally as they see in a smiling face the expression of human feeling.  So my speculations about an alternative to physics as a theory of everything do not invoke a transcendent being but tend toward complications to the immanent character of the natural order.  [What?]  That would also be a more unifying explanation than the design hypothesis.  I disagree with the defenders of intelligent design in their assumption, one which they share with their opponents, that the only naturalistic alternative is a reductionist theory based on physical laws of the type with which we are familiar.  Nevertheless, I believe the defenders of intelligent design deserve our gratitude for challenging a scientific world view that owes some of the passion displayed by its adherents precisely to the fact that it is thought to liberate us from religion." 

Say, Richard Dawkins, he means of course.

How delightful, all of this, except for the "complications to the immanent character of the natural order", which don't make any sense, at this point.

So much for now.  I shouldn't copy too much.  It is a new book and people should buy it.  I should also say that it is a short book and, as you see, not that hard to read and quite good, so I think people would find it enjoyable.

Regarding the "immanent character of the natural order", we can see on this picture (all rights reserved) , that Thamas Nagel sits with Juergen Habermas.  I did read a bood by Juergen Habermas from the Concordia library, not too long ago, and remember basically not understanding it.  There are not many books I feel I don't understand.  That one was one of them, the other one was the one about post-modernist thought on religion. Same kind of topic maybe.  It seems to me, or I am afraid, it will only be the most esoteric of us all, who will be able to me make sense out of the "immanent" and its "complications".

In the end I will be chucking Thomas Nagel, since I basically know all that he is saying already, and Readers Digest, also, and just go back to my hymnbook.

Monday, June 24, 2013

Progressive Education vs. Christian Education?

Hitchens debunked by Curtis White

Stinging and smart review of Hitchens' work, by Curtis White, perhaps this man here. (?)  In my view Hitchens was likable and a great orator, but unfortunately often very wrong and poorly informed, as is pointed out by White, author of the Science Delusion.  Most interesting I find the comments about conscience and natural law and relation to neuroscience.

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Singing is Good / 2

Interesting article in Christianity Today by Steven Guthrie:

Love the Lord with All Your Voice.

We sing to express ourselves.  But we also sing to impress ourselves:  "the truth is deeply drawn into the depths of our being."

I think this is very helpful to point out.  When we have a devotional time, when we hear a sermon, when we sing a hymn together, when we worship, we do express ourselves, but we also are refreshing ourselves in what we know already.  I need to draw these truths deeper into myself.  I need to hear it again.  I need to sing it again.  I need to read, mark and inwardly digest...

Friday, June 21, 2013

Study, pastor's children in East and West Germany

Three hundred individuals were involved in a study of the lives of pastor's children during the repressive East German regime times and those in the West.  It is in German language.  (Don't say that Germans are not thorough--300!)

What sticks out to me are two things-- 1) the desire to be normal and fit in, as they always presented an exception and outsider of sorts. --2) understanding the special role the preacher played and developing a desire to copy the status of being someone celebrated by becoming entertainers, artist, and finding a place of prominence, even as pianists and such, themselves. In the end, it's not so bad to stick out.

Canmore under emergency

My sister's family had to evacuate their home along Cougar Creek in Canmore, today.

The raging flood has come up to the house with a 5 meter distance.

This was a 5:00 o'clock, today. Who knows what it looks like in the morning.

Thursday, June 20, 2013

Music purchases

The seniors' community choir I have begun leading has been great  fun so far.  I am needing to learn many songs that it seems everyone knows but that I have never heard before--never, never, ever.  One of them is, for example:  "Tenderly he watches over me."

Where have these songs been all of my life? -- Anyhow.  I also ordered all the Reader's Digest collections, used from sellers at Amazon, such as this one.  The Reader's Digest books are quite recommendable on several fronts:  the arrangements are very good and relatively easy without losing art, the books are sturdy and large with spiral binding.  I am happy to expand my library with this collection of, I think, eight books. They are cheap to buy used but the shipping costs.

I also bought some other collections such as one of Disney songs, and it has brought joy already, too.  Someone was visiting my house, someone who does not go to church and whom I have never heard sing before (except for the national anthem) and we sang the Disney songs, and it turns out the voice and the performance were stellar!  It is kind of nice to see that one can sing together with people who don't sing hymns and you thought who don't sing at all.  It's a good start.  From there one can branch into different directions.

Then, I splurged some more and bought warm-up discs from Susan Anders.  I LOVE them.  All the warm ups are done with songs such as "The Lion sleeps tonight"  and "Wade in the Water." There is great singing method combined with fun songs.  Very motivating and enjoyable.  (Thank you, Susan Anders!)

While I am confessing, I should say, I also sent away for book A of Concordia's new Hymn Prelude Book series.  It will take 5 years to complete the new series.  There will be 12 books at $50.00, each.  That makes $600.00 by the time we are done, if we live this long.  Ouch!

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Post-Christian Apologists

Driving home, yesterday, I listened to an interview with an ex-Pentecostal preacher from the American religious south.  He said about 60% of the people there are Pentecostal and 30% of the people are Baptist, and the remaining 10% are everything else.  He was from the backwoods of Louisiana, where towns and cities are called "parishes", to this day.  I forget his name and his book's title.   Jeff was the first name.

Well, if I had grown up Pentecostal, I don't quite know what I'd have to say today.  I have heard Pentecostal preachers and have not believed a word they said. They have always struck me as charlatans.  The man said that he got a high out of preaching and moving the people and himself into a sort of frenzy or emotional experience.  This is the very thing which my denomination is not trying to do, dubbing itself the "frozen chosen", in self-reproach.  But in fact, there is a deep and meaningful emotional experience that is not frenzy- like or brain dead, which some people don't seem to get. But, be that as it may.  Our ex-preacher, now is somehow connected to a clergy project, which who knows what that is or is aiming for exactly, seems to need to "out" all those disaffected with their churches, and making great, big announcement and splashes about their fall from faith, and then make more splashes about those who may be angered by what they do and say.

So in the end, they may say and critique whatever they like but no one can critique them, because that is unfair.  I have observed this a few times now.  And though I've never read Ann Coulter, I have come across this snippet of hers:  "A liberal is someone who has one set of rules for himself and another set of rules for everyone else."  This seems to be the corollary to the consciousness raising they need to effect in other people.  In the name of love, and mental development and all sorts of worthy causes, they may now be unloving, anti-intellectual, rude, accusing, etc.  In the name of getting rid of other people's biases and idiocy, they may use any means (while decrying theirs).

Anyhow, ex-preacher is now on book and speaking tour, getting interviews on our beloved CBC, and so on.  All the while this, as the world is burning and millions are persecuted for their faith all around the world.  While the Middle-East is loosing its ancient, indigenous remaining Christian population.  While churches are bombed and bull-dozed and worshipers attacked.   While all that, we need to hear about in-your-face-ex-Pentecostal's emotional woes.  I am not saying that we don't need to hear his point of view, but it seems that there is a concerted effort to unleash a horde of these kinds of critics.  It's whoever the media makes out to be the victim.


While driving around this morning, this story came up again with some letters of feedback read.
Here is a link to the interview.  We see that commenting is closed.  The interview was with Jerry DeWitt on CBC with  Jian Ghomeshi.  As some people said:  why is this story on my public broadcaster?  

Sunday, June 16, 2013

Roman Catholic Apologists

I am not sure why everybody needs to be an "apologist" these days.  Someone last week called me a Lutheran apologist "of sorts", and thankfully "articulate", and that from a more or less hostile source.  But I never aim to be an "apologist", I only aim to be a "confessor".

Here, I got involved in an argument re:  RC apologists last week.  What got me going really, only, was the bit about Luther "dissembling", where he quotes someone who claims to have his support, on rebaptism.  Anyhow, the writer of the post, the illustrious and diligent James Swan, aims to show that Roman Catholic apologists cannot be called Christian brothers.

Across my computer, today, came this article:  "Descendant of Charles Darwin becomes Catholic Apologist".   If it were so!  If she were a catholic apologist--but no doubt she is a Roman Catholic apologist. --But I don't want to say anything not having read a thing she has said, or barely anything.

The other thing that came across last week was an interview with the famous Bono.  He confesses and states quite clearly his faith in Christ and the sacrifice of Calvary.  Here we have, at least, as small "c", catholic confession of Jesus Christ, never mind RC apologetics.

Ironically, this post is titled "no apologizing".

On the other hand, in terms of Reformed and Baptist "bretheren"  we have often put downs coming our way regarding baptism. It's happened to me a few times and I have also had my "salvation" questioned, my soul being in peril.  A missionary friend has this on FB today:

Compliment of the day, Brazilian pastor tells me, "I just can't agree with you because you believe baptism saves. I hope you are ready to stand by that on Judgment Day!" Thank you, I am ready because God said so, see Titus 3:4-6.

As Luther taught us to say:  "baptizatus sum".  "I am baptized".  When all fails and hell breaks loose.  "I am baptized." It will hold. The mercy of God, pure and simple. 

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Singing is good

I inherited a choir to direct--30 singers.  Second practice next week in spit of summer.  Why would one stop singing in the summer?

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Justus Weiner, Jewish lawyer protecting Christians in Palestinian Territories

Last night, the CBC had a flashy program on the all the crises in the Middle East, Afghanistan and now Turkey.  They had assembled an interesting panel of commentators, which included people who originated in those areas.  Janice Stein was on the panel also, and in the end summarized the whole thing as "post revolution turmoil" that will end some day, maybe in 20 years.  They did briefly mention the influx of Saudi style theology and money but there was no mention of the suffering of Christians in the region and the atrocities committed against them all over the place, nor was there any commentary on Islam and specifics of Saudi style Islam or any other.  Religion was pretty much bypassed in the analysis.

We have to hand it to the National Post and thank it for making a real effort of bringing some of the biases and omissions to light.

Luther's collected works / German language,%20Weimarer%20Ausgabe%20-%20WA.htm

Thursday, June 6, 2013

The stuff you learn on TV / Three kinds of rocks

Yesterday evening, BBC news carried an item on a fossil image published by the some Chinese scientists.  It supposedly is the fossil of a monkey, or maybe a pre-monkey (?) which is so and so many million years old.  This image of a fossil apparently illustrates one of our direct ancestors.  The TV announcer even stood up to explain on a screenwide display how this fits directly and unequivocally into the branching of the evolutionary tree.  It was all so plain and simple.  Here are a few bones, here is your ancestor.

A week ago or so a huge asteroid with a moon passed the earth at a million kilometers away or so.  Now, I trust this news a little bit more. You would think they can measure, calculate and photograph this. What struck me as very strange was the way this news was delivered.  The newscaster and the science reporter giggled and laughed themselves through this news report, as if they were reporting some comical event rather than a cosmic event.  It makes me think that this was a much more dangerous situation than they were making this out to be, even though it was a million kilometers away.  (What is a million kilometers if Vancouver is 1300 km way?) -- Not long ago we had a large meteor hit in Russia with spectacular and damaging results.  Somewhere I've heard we are headed into a veritable shower of these kinds of rocks.  Why laugh?

The other thing I've been wondering, if the descent of man was so slow and long and into the millions, or whatever, years, why did cuneiform tablets only arise with the Sumerians about several thousand years ago?  What happened in the millions of years in between?  Nobody came up with cuneiform clay tablets?

So much.


Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Paul Gerhardt--Hymnwriter / Music Symposium at CUCA, Edmonton/ James Abbington

We had a Music Symposium Mini, yesterday evening.  These mini's are monthly evenings with a speaker to talk about singing, choirs and hymn-writers, conducting, etc.  These events lead up to the larger Music Symposium in the summer.  I will provide links further down.

Last night's mini event featured the Rev. Dr. President Krispin of Concordia University College of Alberta, speaking on Paul Gerhardt.  We also sang several hymns together.  It was a great pleasure and very uplifting.   One of the participants sent me a link this morning to the collected English translations of Paul Gerhardt's songs.  They were translated by John Kelly and the entire item is a free download from Google.

The song I translated the other day:  "Go forth my heart..."  "Geh' aus mein Herz und suche Freud" is also found there, on page 289.  I have sung  through it with its own particular melody and I have to say that it mostly works. Hats off to Mr. John Kelly!  No easy feat, I can see, to make all that work out.

Our Concordia Music Symposium will be held Aug. 2nd and 3rd.  We have invited Dr. James Abbington to be our main presenter.  The pages that relate to further information are here and here.

Please, consider coming!  Everyone is welcome.  We have a great time with fun, food, fellowship, singing and learning.  If anyone needs further information or assistance, they can also speak to me. Please, do.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Read the Large Catechism

Interesting spring so far.  I've put my back out pulling up carpet but managed to get my garden in.  With all the rain, it is beginning to look lovely and promising.  Then we caught the flu and are languishing with this.  I was in bed feeling miserable and in that condition I reached for Luther's large catechism which lies nearby and read 45 pages of about 150  in between sleeping.  It does not matter how sick I am I can still read Lutheran doctrinal material.  It just goes in like water into a dry sponge.  Refreshing, simple, deep, sensible, solid, honest, renewing, hopeful...

I have to say that I just really admire the large catechism.  It is a brilliant piece from all  perspectives.  I have no idea why people find this sort of thing divisive or boring.  They must not be reading it.  I think I will read it several times through.

Close this window