Augustus Toplady: Rock of Ages

By -
Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee;
Let the water and the blood,
From Thy wounded side which flowed,
Be of sin the double cure;
Save me from its guilt and power.

Not the labor of my hands
Can fulfill Thy law’s demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone.

Nothing in my hand I bring,
Simply to the cross I cling;
Naked, come to Thee for dress;
Helpless look to Thee for grace;
Foul, I to the fountain fly;
Wash me, Savior, or I die.

While I draw this fleeting breath,
When mine eyes shall close in death,
When I soar to worlds unknown,
See Thee on Thy judgment throne,
Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee.
=========================

"[T]here are hymns that contain doctrinal insight to rival that of the best theology ever produced. The fact that they are falling out of the church's collective memory is something to be deeply regretted as it is one more facet of what at times seems to be a concerted effort to fail catechetically." - WTM

Comments

Andy said…
I asked this on a previous post... I guess I was too late. But I'm still curious: given that many of us have a sense of what catechetical failure looks like, what would constitute catechetical "success"? I ask this sincerely as a pastor, one who wants to catechize effectively and faithfully.
October 21, 2007 4:12 PM
W. Travis McMaken said…
Andy,

Sorry to have forgotten about your question. I remember receiving it and thinking that I should reply, but it slipped out of my mind. Again, my apologies.

What catechetical success would look like is terribly difficult to imagine, since we have lived without it for so long. Of course, it cannot refer to a spiritual reality, since we as mere human beings are not capable of bringing about such things. So, we must think of success in more empirical, testable terms.

So, I would consider catechetical success something like the better part of a congregation being enough aware with the language and content of the Bible and theology as to make use of intelligent use of them in their lives. The mastery of content is certainly something that can be tested.

Importantly, catechesis is a lifelong endeavor. Whatever is finally considered to be the basic level for which we will test, the study of Scripture and theology should continue throughout the Christian's life.

As a final parting shot, I wonder if the majority of seminarians are adequately catechized.
October 21, 2007 4:18 PM
David W. Congdon said…
Great hymn, Travis, and interesting question, Andy. Since I've never experienced "catechetical success," I have very little idea what it might look like. I feel like saying with Luther, after he witnessed the lack of catechesis among the parishioners, "Good God, what wretched I beheld ..." I'm a little wary about making "success" too empirical, because then each church would be forced to give some kind of exam to its parishioners in order to assess their level of catechetical instruction. But I'm not sure if I have a better answer.
October 22, 2007 8:22 AM
W. Travis McMaken said…
Precisely what such an 'exam' would look like will certainly vary. And I'm not advocating some sort of scantron system, by any means! But, certainly some form of 'testing' ought to be employed, even if only at the level of oral interview.
October 22, 2007 8:33 AM
Andy said…
Thanks for these comments. It certainly is complicated, which is why I asked about "success" (in scare quotes). I can think of people in my congregation who would almost certainly fail a catechesis "exam" of whatever sort, but yet still have deep and abiding orthodox faith. That is to say, they understand the faith even if they can't quite articulate it effectively. Conversely, I can think of people in my congregation who know all the correct answers, but whose lives bear few fruits of the Spirit. As in other areas of the life of faith, catechesis must encompass both mind and heart, or better, as George Hunsinger said, head, heart, and hand.

What a task for pastors like me, and teachers-to-be, like you!
October 22, 2007 1:07 PM
Post a Comment

Popular Posts

So, You Want To Read Karl Barth?

By -
Image
Every now and then I am asked for advice about studying Karl Barth. So, I thought that I would share some of my standard advice here. But, before I do that, let me just say that I am by no means a Barth expert as compared to the people whose books I will mention below. I would be thrilled to find myself in their league one day, but as of yet that remains a distant dream. Still, I have been reading Barth for long enough, and under the supervision of a number of the scholars that I will mention below, that I think I can provide a decent orientation. I have never read Karl Barth before. Which of his books should I read first? Barth’s most famous work is the monumental 13-volume Church Dogmatics . Reading the CD with understanding is not an easy thing, so you definitely do NOT want to start here. Luckily, there are two smaller works by Barth that serve as helpful introductions to his work. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction - Based on the lectures that Barth delivered duri
Keep reading

So You Want to Read….Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

By -
Image
"I fear that Christians who stand with only one leg upon earth also stand with only one leg in heaven." "The exclusion of the weak and insignificant, the seemingly useless people, from everyday Christian life in community…may actually mean the exclusion of Christ; for in the poor sister or brother, Christ is knocking at the door." "Since ethical thinking in terms of realms is overcome by faith in the revelation of the ultimate reality in Jesus Christ . . . there is no real Christian existence outside the reality of the world." "People who reject their bodies reject their existence before God the Creator." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer Prelude Andreas Steinhoff [Attribution], via Wikimedia Commons I envisioned having a lot of time for blogging this summer, but that simply has not been the case - the last month has been a crazy one, to say the least. For two weeks, I was working at a theology summer camp of sorts, the Duke Youth Academy, and s
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 1, Day 5

By -
“You Wonder Where the Spirit Went”: Jenson and Barth on the Hiddenness of God By Peter Kline I am entering into a conversation that Jenson has already begun with Barth. In a constructive essay on the hiddenness of God (Jenson 2000), Jenson considers Barth’s position on the matter only to find it lacking. I want to explore why Jenson has problems with Barth on this issue, as well think critically about his constructive alternative. I will suggest that Jenson is only partly right in his diagnosis of Barth; he in fact overlooks the heart of Barth’s teaching on divine hiddenness. The reason is that he looks in the wrong place for Barth’s pneumatology. Jenson can’t find the Spirit in Barth not because the Spirit isn’t there, but because the Spirit is hidden . These considerations will open out into a comparison of Barth and Jenson on the logic of revelation. By “logic” I mean: what is discourse about God’s revealedness and hiddenness supposed to accomplish? Part I Jenson focuses his a
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 3, Day 1

By -
On the Monstrosity of Christ : Karl Barth in Conversation with Slavoj Žižek & John Milbank By Paul Dafydd Jones For a while, I hoped to frame this conversation in terms of a dramatic interchange – something along the lines of “A Slovenian philosopher, a British theologian, and a Swiss dogmatician walk into a bar…” Alongside an eye-wateringly hip assemblage of cinematic references, literary allusions, and comedic scenes – my early favorites being when Barth imagines a young adult novel, entitled Are you there God? It’s me, Žižek , and when Milbank waxes poetic about the Twilight movies – I wanted to engage some topics that would likely receive attention, were the authors to meet for drinks. Primarily, I envisioned an intense discussion of the logos asarkos and the logos ensarkos , with Milbank talking up the former category, Barth emphasizing the latter, and Žižek asking whether recent debates are but symptoms of secret puzzle, embedded in the Church Dogmatics – a puzzle that
Keep reading

Karl Barth on Hell, the Devil, Demons, and Universalism – A Florilegium

By -
Image
You know, all the most interesting topics. Although Barth often confessed that he didn’t find these questions particularly interesting. At best they might draw sideways glances, as it were, as one travels the theological road. But I found a number of places in the records of Barth’s later conversations that I thought folks might find interesting, so I’ve collected them here. And if you aren’t familiar with the term “florilegium,” here you go ! All these texts are from the first volume of Barth in Conversation , with pages numbers given in parentheses along the way. As usual, italics are in the text and bold is mine. Hell “Now we come to hell. You shouldn’t laugh! There is nothing to laugh at! What does hell mean? I think hell means to be in the place where you are once fore all damned and lost without ceasing to exist, without losing the image of God, being what you are but being damned and lost, separated from God, whose creature you are, separated also from your neighbor, from
Keep reading