A Profile in Courage

Zondervan has recently released a book with the title: How I Changed my Mind about Women in Leadership: Compelling Stories from Prominent Evangelicals. One oddity about the book, which I haven't read, is that it seems all the authors changed their minds in the same direction.

This made me recall a conversation I had about 15 years ago with a young woman who was about to graduate from Princeton Theological Seminary. A graduate of Davidson college, she spoke of how she had fully embraced modern secular feminism in her late teens that was fully supported by her professors and peers in these convictions throughout her college years. Her family sacrificed financially to help her attend Princeton Theological Seminary in order that she could be trained to serve as a Minister of Word and Sacrament. Yet, as she studied Scripture she came to the conclusion that Christ had restricted the ordained offices in his Church to men only.

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place: What could she possibly do in such a situation? At the time we spoke, this woman was in the process of transferring her membership from the PCUSA to the PCA precisely over this issue. This young lady personified courage. Men are sometimes branded as bigots or neanderthals for opposing the ordination of women, but this young lady was essentially seen as betraying the cause. She had to live with fact that she had received generous financial support to prepare for a vocation that she no longer believed she was free to pursue. And, she had to figure out how to graciously navigate her personal life in an environment where many of her closest friends were women who were about to be ordained to calling that she was explicitly saying no woman should enter into.

Where does a person get the courage to take this sort of stand? When I asked her how she was managing she replied: "I simply ask anyone who questions me to show me from the Bible that God's word authorizes women pastors." That is a profound answer for all of us. Courage is not something that she nor we need to seek. If we seek to cling to Jesus and to His word, courage is merely the byproduct of putting Christ first. That is why Luther taught us to sing: "Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also; the body they may kill: God's truth abideth still; His kingdom is forever."

Making the Cut

Of the making of New Testament commentaries there appears to be no end. With the launch of the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary series the field has become even more crowded. My working theory is that a pastor only needs three solid commentaries on any particular book of the Bible. If a pastor is reading more than three commentaries he is probably spending too much time following the judgments of other men and insufficient time digging through the Greek or Hebrew text for himself. That's the rub. There are more commentaries on the New Testament competing for the pastor's time than he can productively use. To name just the major series which are up to date in terms of scholarship, we have:

1. The Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
2. The New International Greek Testament Commentary
3. The New International Commentary on the New Testament
4. The Pillar New Testament Commentary
5. The Word Biblical Commentary
6. And now, the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary

This list doesn't even consider the less academically demanding series such as The New American Commentary nor the many outstanding commentaries on individual books.

This leaves us with an obvious question regarding any new commentary: Can it make the cut and move into the top three available choices? This challenge is particularly daunting for Paul's letter to the Ephesians which is well served by outstanding commentaries by Peter O'Brien (PNTC) and Harold W. Hoehner as well as highly regarded commentaries by Andrew T. Lincoln (Word), Ernest Best (ICC), along with a less than fully satisfactory commentary by F.F. Bruce (NICNT). Additionally, Frank Thielman has just released his commentary on Ephesians (BECNT) which I haven't read. Where does this leave Clint Arnold's ambitious commentary?

Professor Arnold's commentary on Ephesians makes the cut by simply offering a superior commentary. Strengths of the commentary include:

1. Professor Arnold is a mature scholar who has been working with Ephesians for a quarter of a century. With Arnold the student has a sure footed guide who has been down this path many times before. He knows how to keep the student aligned with Paul's thought including where further explanation is helpful.
2. The commentary is exceptionally well written and edited. It is simply a delight to read.
3. The Introduction is excellent. Arnold addresses the common belief that Ephesians wasn't written to deal with concrete concerns and concludes that "Paul therefore speaks in a pastoral and apostolic manner to a variety of real needs of which he had become aware through Tychicus and others." By the nature of the case, Arnold's arguments cannot be fully compelling. Nevertheless, this alerts the reader at the outset that although Arnold has a mastery of the secondary material he is actually writing a commentary on Ephesians and not a commentary on the other commentaries.
4. The format of this commentary (and presumably the entire series) is the best that I have ever seen. The large clear fonts and attractive layout are a joy to my middle-aged eyes. The inclusion of the author's discourse analysis is so helpful that I wonder why no other commentary series has done this before.
5. Close attention is paid to the Greek text of the letter throughout the commentary. One concern I had in first looking at the commentary is that it printed the English translation before the Greek text. I was concerned that this pointed to the commentary being essentially a commentary on the English text with bits of Greek thrown in. This concern was entirely unfounded.
6. Professor Arnold makes excellent use of excursuses throughout the commentary to help pastors and students bridge the gap between the original text and application to the modern world. For example, on pages 407-410 he offers an extensive excursus: "In Depth: Why It Is Legitimate to Apply the Teaching of This Passage to Marriages Today." Later, he offers two shorter excursuses on "The Distinctive Features of Roman-Era Slavery" and "Was Paul an Advocate of Slavery?" In the later he concludes: "It is therefore inappropriate to compare the institution of slavery to the male leadership in the home and label both as unjust social institutions. Such a conclusion fails to take into account the essential difference between the two social structures and the fact that one is theologically grounded and the other is not." This is precisely the type of answer that pastors must be able to clearly explain when dealing with the questions our culture raises regarding this passage.
7. There is a nice 22 page "Theology of Ephesians" at the back of the commentary. It would be helpful for pastors to read this section before they preach through the epistle rather than discovering it at the very end.

Normally reviewers try to point out a few problems with the book under review to show that they are careful critics. In this case, I simply have nothing worth pointing out. This commentary does exactly what it set out to do and it achieves this in a manner that is simply a delight for the reader to work with. I could not recommend this commentary more highly.

You can find this commentary here.

Specialists in the Bible

"One outstanding difficulty in theological education today is that the students persist in regarding themselves not as specialists, but as laymen. Critical questions about the Bible they regard as the property of men who are training themselves for the theological professorships or the like, while the ordinary minister, in their judgment, may content himself with the most superficial layman's acquaintance with the problems involved. The minister is no longer a specialist in the Bible, but has become merely a sort of general manager of the affairs of a congregation.

... If, on the other hand, the minister is a specialist - if the one thing that he owes his congregation about all others is a thorough acquaintance, scientific as well as experimental, with the Bible - then the importance of Greek requires no elaborate argument." - J. Gresham Machen (February 7, 1918)

He Shall Reign Forever and Ever

Kristin and I had a wonderful time at the U-Mass Lowell Messiah sing-a-long. Kristin and our daughter Rachel sang with the sopranos and I sang with the mute section (but I was singing joyfully on the inside). What a wonderful piece of music!

Steven Runge

If you love studying the New Testament in Greek, you owe it to yourself to check out Steven Runge's outstanding blog.

A Liberating Truth

"Who are you to judge another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand." - Romans 14:4 NKJV

I would be happier receiving critical feedback from Tim Keller, Doug Wilson, and N.T. Wright than in spending my life trying to point out where they are going wrong. Yes, we must protect our churches from error. Yes, we need to critique each other in order to "contend earnestly for the faith which has once and for all been delivered to the saints." Nevertheless, most Reformed bloggers would benefit from pondering Romans 14:4 before sending their latest critiques of more famous men off into cyberspace.

It is a liberating truth to know that God hasn't called me to be Tim Keller. He has called me to follow Him. Christ has set us free from the burden of being another pastor's nanny to the joyous task of proclaiming His victory over Satan, sin, and death on behalf of His people.

Please Read Before 10 November 2010

For our last week of the semester we will be looking at Gutenberg and the Pre-Reformation saints.

John Wycliffe 1328?-1384

Wycliffe was educated at Oxford where he also became a professor. Wycliffe was highly regarded for his learning and was asked to comment on the most pressing issues of his day. Of particular concern were the political conflicts for supremacy between popes and kings. Wycliffe eventually argued that popes were not superior to kings. He also denied the medieval doctrine of Transubstantiation (i.e. that the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper literally and miraculously become the body of and blood of Jesus). Although those loyal to the pope vigorously sought to persecute Wycliffe and his followers (called Lollards), they were never entirely successful and the Lollards helped to pave the way for the Protestant Reformation in England.

Johannes Gutenberg

Christians have long been known as "people of the Book". But what if most Christians could never own a book of their own let alone their own personal copy of the Bible. The reason for this was simple: Books were tremendously expensive. One full handwritten copy of the Bible would cost more than a typical person made in a year. Even a university library in the Middle Ages might have only a couple hundred volumes in it. That all changed when Johannes Gutenberg developed an efficient method of using movable type in the middle of the fifteenth century. The Reformers latched on to this new technology to distribute their own theological treatises as well as for the printing of Scripture. The printing press allowed Luther's and Calvin's teachings to spread around Europe at a rate that would have been unimaginable just a century earlier.

Jan Hus 1369?-1415

Jan Hus was a Bohemian reformer. Many of his teachings anticipated those of Martin Luther. Hus attacked the Church's practice of selling indulgences to pay for the Crusades. Hus was familiar with the writings of John Wycliffe and his most famous work, On the Church, borrows heavily from Wycliffe's teaching. He was burned at the stake for the charge of heresy. During one debate, Luther's opponent tried to back him into a corner by claiming that Luther was teaching the same views that Jan Hus had been condemned for. Luther, not being familiar with Hus' writings asked to have the opportunity to read them. Luther then returned and proclaimed: "We are all Hussite's!"

Please Read by 3 November 2010

This week we will be looking at the reshaping of Medieval Europe. In particular, we will be discussing Scholasticism, the Black Death, the Hundred Years War, and the impact of the fall of the Byzantine Empire on the West.

HUNDRED YEARS WAR

It would be helpful for you to read a bit about the 100 Years War prior to class. A short and very simple outline of the 100 Years War can be found here. A slightly more academic account of the war can be found here.

SCHOLASTICISM

Scholasticism was a method of learning, teaching, and thinking that came to dominance in Europe during the late Middle Ages. As the name implies, a great deal of emphasis was placed on the rigorous sort of thought that took place in schools. There was a sustained attempt to combine Aristotelian philosophy with the theological insights of the Latin Church Fathers.

1. What relationship should Christian thought and Biblical interpretation have with pagan (remember that Aristotle was a pagan) philosophy?
2. What benefits would such a detailed and rigorous approach to theology have for the Church in general and individual Christians in particular? What harm might such an approach cause in the life of the Church?
3. Were peasants, serfs, and craftsmen equipped to engage in scholastic reasoning? If not, how would this impact who theology was actually being done for?

It is important to understand both the attractions and pitfalls of scholasticism because this way of thinking under-girded the theology of the Medieval Church that scholars like Erasmus and Reformers like Luther and Calvin were protesting against.

Please Read by October 27th

This week we are going to step away from our focus on Western Europe in order to look at the Mongols, Marco Polo, and the Far East.

It would be helpful if you familiarized yourself with the following names and facts before you come to class:

THE MONGOLS

1. The term Mongol refers to anyone who spoke a Mongolic language. In the modern world we tend to identify people by the nation sate that they live in, but it was common to use language in the ancient world as the primary marker of group identity (so Greeks were the people who spoke Greek). This is not universally the case. For example, many first century Romans and Jews spoke Greek rather than Latin or Aramaic/Hebrew.
2. Geographically, the Mongols seem to have come from China and Mongolia. Most of the Mongolians alive today live in China, Mongolia, and Russia.
3. The two Mongols that we will be talking about in class are Genghis Khan 1162-1227 and his grandson Kublai Khan 1215-1294.
4. The khans, especially Genghis Khan, are often portrayed as brutal and ruthless barbarians. This one dimensional portrait is terribly misleading. Why would such a misleading portrait be repeated so frequently? Try to find something positive to say about Genghis or Kublai Khan.
5. The term khan is a title for a ruler of the Mongols. It is difficult to translate it accurately as terms like king, prince, general, or dictator all carry connotations of what those terms mean in the context of European history.

MARCO POLO 1254-1324

1. Marco Polo was a Christian trader from Venice, Italy. He traveled widely and wrote (actually dictated) about his travels.
2. After 24 years of traveling in the Far East, Marco Polo returned to Venice to find that it was at war with Genoa. Marco was imprisoned and dictated his stories to his cell mate.
3. People were fascinated with the accounts of exotic lands that Marco provided. The assessment of the historical accuracy of his writings has ranged from deeming them highly reliable to suggesting that he basically made it all up. Would knowing that Marco Polo dictated his stories to his cell mate lead you to question some of their historical integrity?
4. What Marco Polo did accomplish was to broaden the horizon of Europeans to realize that there were vast civilization that they knew virtually nothing about.

Please Read Before October 20th

This week we will be looking at the period known as the High Middle Ages. In particularly, we will be focusing on the Crusades, the Magna Carta, and Corruption in the Church.

Time: 1000 to 1300 AD in Europe

In preparation for this class it would be helpful if you could come to a preliminary understanding of what an Indulgence is in Roman Catholic Theology. Controversies around the granting (also the buying and selling) of indulgences profoundly colors European history from 1000 AD right through the Reformation era. Furthermore, the Roman Catholic doctrine of Indulgences is largely the same today as it was in the Middle Ages.

The fundamental question is this: What are Christians supposed to do to recover a right relationship with God after they have sinned against Him?

According to the Medieval Church (and modern Roman Catholicism), the Sacrament of Penance (often called the Sacrament of Reconciliation today) was a necessary bridge to recovering a right relationship with God. It consists of three parts:

1. Contrition. According to the Council of Trent, Contrition is “sorrow of the soul and detestation for the sin committed, together with the resolution not to sin again (Roman Catechism II, V, 21).”
   
2. Confession. “Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of Penance (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1456).
   
3. Satisfaction. “Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused. Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more t make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1473).

What is an indulgence?

“An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church, which as the minister of the redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.”

Questions:

1. What impact would this teaching have on the authority of the Church?
2. What impact does this teaching have on how people perceive God?
3. How did the Medieval Church use this teaching to raise vast sums of money?

Read by 13 October 2010

This week we will look at Medieval Life with a focus on Feudalism.

If someone asked you what it is like to live in the United States, you would immediately recognize that there is a great deal of individual variation. It is very different to live in a high rise apartment in New York City, a farm in Nebraska, an affluent suburb outside of Los Angeles, or in northern Alaska. Yet all of these places are part of the United States of America. It is important for us to remember these local variations when we look back in history. We are easily tempted to say something really silly like, "Ancient Jews believed", or to act as though there was a system of feudalism that everyone in Europe lived under in the 10th century. That simply isn't true. Remember that there was a LOT of local variation.

Where are we and what has happened?

Within a generation of Charlemagne's death, the Carolingian "Empire" was breaking up. We will be looking at the period from 900-1100 A.D. While the culture in the Frankish territories continued to reflect the imprint of Charlemagne's lengthy reign - there was a temporary disintegration of central power in favor of local control. A few questions to think about before class:

1. What difference would the loss of centralized power have meant for farmers? What difference would it have made for business traders?
2. Can you define feudalism? If not, look up the definition prior to class.
3. Did anyone benefit from this loss of a very strong centralized civil government?
4. How was feudalism similar to the governments of Charlemagne and Henry the Fowler that we looked at last week?

Please note that the discussion of feudalism relates to lands outside of modern Germany and Italy. In 962, the pope crowned Otto as the Holy Roman Emperor. The reality on the ground led to this saying that the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy nor Roman nor an Empire.

Were there any aspects of life for the common people under feudalism that seem particularly attractive to you?

CORRECTION

In this morning's class I inadvertently said that the "Battle of Tours" took place in 322 AD when I meant 732 AD. You were all justified in looking confused.

Read by 6 October 2010

This week we will be looking at Great Men of the Early Middle Ages with a focus upon Charlemagne and the rise of Papal power.

CHARLEMAGNE

1. Charlemagne = Charles the Great
2. Note that like other important leaders we have discussed, Charlemagne had an unusually long reign.
3. Charlemagne was not known as a brilliant military tactician but he is one of the greatest organizational geniuses in political history.
4. Charlemagne was absolutely committed to Christianity and to Christian learning. His reign is sometimes referred to as the Carolingian Renaissance (Carolingian is the name of his family).

THE RISE OF PAPAL POWER

1. It is important to realize that Italy was in state of decline during this period and the prestige and power of the Bishop of Rome was in considerable decline until the Bishops of Rome undertook a series of politically astute moves to build their power.
2. While the Bishop of Constantinople was generally seen as the senior Bishop of the Universal ("catholic" = universal) Christian Church, the Bishop of Rome embarked on a daring power grab by crowing Western European Kings and ultimately the "Holy Roman Emperor".
3. What advantage did politicians gain by being crowned by the "Pope"?
4. What advantage did the papacy gain by becoming the instrument for crowing civil magistrates?

It would be helpful if you could read this article on Gregory the Great prior to class.

Read by 29 September 2010

The "Dark" Ages

This week we are scheduled to look at the Dark Ages, the Vikings, and Monasticism. Obviously we are not going to do that in detail over the course of an hour and fifteen minutes.

What I would like you to think about prior to class is what does it mean for the "Dark" Ages to be dark. How dark were they anyway?

Some things to consider:

1. The people living in what we now call the Dark Ages didn't seem to realize that they were living in a particularly dark or difficult time. Why not?
2. The first time that the term Dark Ages seems to have been used is in 1602. How is that significant?
3. False Comparison #1. The period called the Dark Ages is often called dark in contrast to the periods that came before (particularly classical Rome) and the period of the Renaissance. But things are not so simple. Normally people romanticize aspects of the past that they are fond of. When such people (including us) look back on classical Rome we tend to think about its magnificent buildings and roads. We imagine ourselves near Caesar's palace or in a Senator's villa. But what was life like for the average Roman? Actually, there was so much violence in ancient Rome that wealthy individuals wouldn't not go out at night without body guards. Many people lived in tenement apartments that were fire traps. Outbreaks of disease were common and as many as 30% of the Roman Empire was made up of slaves. Keeping these conditions in mind will help you put the Dark Ages into a more historically accurate context.
4. False Comparison #2. When people speak of the Dark Ages they are often comparing Medieval Germany and France with classical Greece and Rome at their zenith. A better comparison would be to compare Medieval Germany and France to the Germanic tribes who roamed the woods of Europe wearing war paint in the first century A.D. Against this backdrop, Medieval Europe doesn't look so dark after all.

One of the most famous quotations from the Middle Ages may help us put this issue in context. Around 1130 A.D., Bernard of Chartes said: "We are like dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants, and so are able to see more and to see farther than the ancients." This has often been quoted to show that people in the Middle Ages thought of themselves as dwarfs compared to the ancients. There is a bit of truth in this, when the comparison is to the very best of ancient culture. Nevertheless, it is important to balance this out by noting that Bernard also claimed that his generation was "able to see more and farther than the ancients". This is not the saying of someone who is despairing about the collapse of his own culture.

Read Before 22 September 2010

This week we will be looking at the Rise of Islam

Nine years ago a group of Islamic terrorists hijacked jumbo-jets and crashed them into the World Trade center killing thousands of people. After this wicked deed was done, many people wanted to point out that it was the action of a small number of men and that Islam is a "religion of peace". But is it? How can you know? It is important for Christians to ask the related question, "Is Christianity a religion of peace?" A knowledge of the history and beliefs of Islam are important for anyone living in the modern world.

Islam beings with Muhammad whom Muslims believe is Allah's last and most exalted prophet. In 622 AD, Muhammad fled from Mecca to Medina. This flight is reckoned as the first year of Islam. Muslims date their calendar from this year.

It will be most helpful if you familiarize yourself with the following definitions and concepts prior to class:

DEFINITIONS

1. Muslim is an Arabic word that means one who submits to Allah.
2. Allah is Arabic for God.
3. Koran is an Arabic word for recitations. This is because Muslims do not believe that Muhammad wrote the Koran. He simply received it directly from God. The Koran, according to Muslims, consists of Muhammad reciting verbatim the words that Allah gave to him.
4. A Mosque is a Muslim house of prayer.
5. Caliph. Originally Caliphs were senior political leaders but, over time, they became religious and political leaders.

CONCEPTS

1. What is God like? Muslims view Allah (God) as being absolutely sovereign. Furthermore, Muslims view Allah as being perfectly just. Allah is often described as being "wholly other". That is, Allah is so holy and exalted that no human language can speak meaningfully of him.
2. There are Five Pillars of Islam: (1) Profession of the unity of Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet; (2) Prayer; (3) Alms giving; (4) Fasting; and (5) Pilgrimage.
3. Islam is a works based religion. Life on earth is viewed as a period of testing. A persons good and bad deeds will be weighed in the balance on the day of judgment. The good will go to heaven and the bad will be sent to hell.

QUESTIONS

1. What is attractive about Islam? That is, why would anyone want to become a Muslim?
2. How did early Islam spread? Is this significant?
3. What does one have to do to become a Muslim?
4. Is Islam compatible with Christianity?

Read Before 15 September 2010

Due to the teacher being a bit windy last week - we will be finishing last week's class this week focusing on two topics: (1) Justinian; and (2) Eastern Orthodoxy.

• JUSTINIAN (Reigned 527-565)

1. Justinian is also commonly called Justinian the Great. He is remembered for his massive project of rebuilding Constantinople and for collecting and systematizing Roman Law. Justinian is the last Emperor whose first language was Latin. Although Justinian worked hard to bring Western parts of the Empire back under his control, from the death of Justinian onward there is a growing separation between East and West.
2. The building project that Justinian is most famous for is the astonishing Church he had built called Hagia Sophia ("Holy Wisdom"). Please take a moment to look at some photographs here.

A question to think about: Since Justinian was a committed Christian, why was he so concerned to collect and refine Roman law which had developed almost exclusively among non-Christians?

• EASTERN ORTHODOXY

1. Orthodox means either "right thinking" or "right worship". Clearly both ideas are clearly related since all good theology should lead to doxology (praise of God).
2. There are about 300 million Orthodox Christians in the world.
3. Orthodoxy places great emphasis on preserving the faith once and for all delivered to the saints. Many Orthodox believe that their worship can be traced back to the Apostolic times. How likely do you think that this is? What other periods would likely have been very influential in shaping Orthodoxy and why?

In order to understand what is distinctive about other branches of Christianity we need to understand what is distinctive about our own churches. What 4 or 5 beliefs or practices do you think are most distinctive of the church that you belong to?

Read Before 8 September 2010: Byzantium

The Byzantine Empire lasted for more than 1,000 years. It kept classical culture alive and was critical to both the Renaissance and Reformation. Yet, the Byzantine Empire has largely been "Lost to the West" (but hopefully not to you!). How could this happen? We will look at this question in class because it helps us understand the difference between the history which has happened and history as the stories that we continue to tell one another. For some reason Americans have stopped telling those stories which trace their roots back into the Byzantine Empire. Reclaiming those stories will help us understand the flow of Western history, as well as the world we currently live inhabit, in a richer way.

1. We will be focusing our class time on (1) Constantine; (2) Justinian (3) the Eastern Orthodox Church; and (4) thinking about history.
2. Constantine: You looked at Constantine last year so this will (at least for some of you) be a review. Constantine is a particularly important figure for two reasons: (1) In 330 A.D., Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to the Eastern part of the Roman Empire and named it after himself; and (2) Constantine provided official support for Christianity as Christianity grew to become the most prominent religion within the Empire. As we will discuss in class, this had a profound impact on the Church and it continues to impact the Church right up until the present day.
3. Justinian: Justinian enjoyed an unusually long reign as emperor from 527 to 565 A.D. This is an easy point to overlook, but achieving great significance as a ruler usually involves reigning for a long period of time. King David and King Solomon each ruled for 40 years. Augustus Caesar ruled for 41 years. Even the exceptions, such as Alexander the Great, tend to prove this rule. While Alexander reshaped the ancient world with astonishing speed - his early death left no structures or institutions in place to carry on his vision. What did Justinian do with his extensive time in power? He built the Byzantine Empire to the greatest position of glory that it would ever have. Not only did Justinian sponsor an astonishingly lavish set of building projects in Constantinople, he brought the symbolically important city of Rome back into the Empire, and had Roman laws compiled into a code known as the Body of Civil Law. This body of law, often known as the "Justinian Code" has had a massive influence on the legal systems of both Eastern and Western Europe.
4. The Eastern Orthodox Church: The Orthodox Church is the second largest Christian body in the world after the Roman Catholic Church. In fact there are more than twice as many Orthodox in the United States than there are Presbyterians. Yet, most Protestants know very little about Orthodoxy. We are going to look at the roots of Eastern Orthodoxy focusing on how the Eastern and Western Churches split and at some of the distinctive features of Orthodoxy down to our own day.

Welcome

Dear Fellow Students,

I am very excited that we will be looking at Western Civilization together this coming year. The subject matter that we will be studying is a great deal of fun. It is also important. Understanding how Western Civilization has developed will help you understand the world around you and may even help you discover your place in God's plan.

Here are a few important details about the class:

1. You are expected to have at least started studying the material for a given week's class prior to our meeting on Wednesday morning. The better prepared you are for the class the more you will learn (and the more you will contribute to your fellow students). Write down your questions and see if we can answer them together.
2. This class is not merely about memorizing a bunch of new facts. We are going to work on thinking clearly, critically, and christianly about history.
3. I will post a list of items that I want you to look at or think about prior to our class. These posts will be on this blog at least 6 days prior to class. These will be very brief and should not take more than about 15 minutes of your time. The purpose of these posts is to give you a heads-up about where we are going. Our minds work more effectively when we have some idea in advance what we are going to be learning. Remembering to do this step will actually save you time in the long run.
4. There will be no quizzes or tests during our time together. Whether or not your parents wish to give you quizzes is entirely up to them.
5. Let's all relax and enjoy this class together. There will be a fair amount of discussion in the class and there is no need to be nervous about not knowing an answer or about making mistakes. Even if you go on to earn a doctorate in history - you will still only know a small amount of what is worth knowing. Being relaxed actually improves academic performance - plus it makes learning a lot more fun.
6. Your parents have the option of having you write a short paper for me to review. Although I will not grade the paper I will provide you with constructive feedback on your writing. If you turn the paper in to me by October 13th, I will grade your paper twice. That is, I will return an annotated copy of your first draft to you by November 3rd. You can then re-write the paper and e-mail the final version to me which I will grade a second time. For some of you this may not be worth the effort. For those of you who are juniors or seniors I would strongly urge you to consider doing this. I will spell out the details of this writing project for you more fully in a future post.
7. I am here to help you. Please e-mail me with any questions that you may have (even ones that seem way off topic.

In case you were wondering. I would prefer that you address me either as Dr. Booth or as Pastor Booth.