Eusebius — May 30

Asia, Forerunners (33-1226)
6th century Syriac portrait of St. Eusebius of Caesarea from the Rabbula Gospels

Bible connection

The Rock, his work is perfect,
and all his ways are just.
A faithful God, without deceit,
just and upright is he;
yet his degenerate children have dealt falsely with him,
a perverse and crooked generation.
Do you thus repay the Lord,
O foolish and senseless people?
Is not he your father who created you,
who made you and established you?
Remember the days of old;
consider the years long past;
ask your father, and he will inform you,
your elders, and they will tell you. — Deuteronomy 32:4-7

I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness.

Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not become idolaters as some of them did, as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink, and they rose up to play.” — 1 Corinthians 10:1-6

All about Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260/265-339)

No collection of the great figures in the history of the church would be complete without including the premier historian of the church, Eusebius of Caesarea. He lived during a very formative period for the Church and his writings reflect every aspect of it. There was once a biography of Eusebius, written by his successor as Caesarea’s bishop, but like so many of his own writings, it is lost. So we know nothing for certain about his early life. He was probably born in Palestine, certainly baptized at Caesarea and ordained a presbyter (elder) there under his teacher and friend, Pamphilus — so closely did he follow this Origen devotee that he called himself Eusebius Pamphili (son of Pamphilus) after he died.

In 303 the co-emperors Diocletian and Galerius ordered the “great persecution,” and Pamphilus was martyred within seven years. Eusebius too, was imprisoned but managed to avoid his mentor’s fate. The persecutions turned the historian’s attention to the martyrs of his own time and the past. He writes:

“We saw with our own eyes the houses of prayer thrown down to the very foundations, and the divine and sacred Scriptures committed to the flames in the market-places, and the shepherds of the churches basely hidden here and there, and some of them captured ignominiously, and mocked by their enemies” (Church History 8.2.1).

Collecting those personal histories led him to the history of the whole Church and finally to the history of the world, which, to him, was only a preparation for Church history.

Imagine writing a comprehensive history of the Church’s last three centuries — that means you start in 1725. Now imagine no one has ever written such a history before, so there’s no single collection of key documents, no books profiling key figures, no chronology of major events, no Google, not even a fixed system of dating the past. When Eusebius undertook such an effort, he felt trepidation. In his introduction to the The Church History  (or Ecclesiastical History) [Internet Archive] he writes:

“I feel inadequate to do it justice as the first to venture on such an undertaking, a traveler on a lonely and untrodden path. But I pray that God may guide me and the power of the Lord assist me, for I have not found even the footprints of any predecessors on this path, only traces in which some have left various accounts of the times in which they lived.”

Around 313, about the time of Constantine’s Edict of Milan, Eusebius became bishop of the Palestinian city of Caesarea. There he continued work on his church history, which he began during the persecutions. He also wrote a 15-volume refutation of paganism called Preparation, and Demonstration of the Gospel [Internet Archive], demonstrating Christ’s fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. He also completed his Chronicle of world history.

Just as Eusebius was writing about Christianity’s defeat of paganism, one the greatest threats to the Church was developing within it. Arius, a presbyter from Libya, was gaining followers around the empire, teaching, “There was a time when the Son was not.” Egyptian bishop Alexander and his chief deacon, Athanasius, fumed at the teaching. The argument spread throughout the empire, promising to rip the church in two. Constantine, God’s chosen instrument, as Eusebius saw him, called the Council of Nicaea to close the fissure.

Since his earliest days with Pamphilus, Eusebius had been enthralled with the teachings of Origen, who has been criticized for 1,800 years for believing the Trinity is a hierarchy, not an equality. This led Eusebius to be less concerned with Arius’ heresy than the threat of disunity in the Church. When Arius was censured, Eusebius, who thought the entire debate brought Christianity the “most shameful ridicule,” was among the first to ask he be reinstated.

At the Council of Nicaea, Eusebius (whose name means “faithful”) attempted to mediate between the Arians and the orthodox. But when the council was over and Arius was anathematized, Eusebius was reluctant to agree with its decision. He eventually signed the document the council produced, saying, “Peace is the object which we set before us.” But a few years later, when the tables flipped and Arianism became popular, Eusebius criticized Athanasius, hero of the council. He even sat on the council that deposed him. Eusebius wasn’t himself an Arian—he rejected the idea that “there was a time when the Son was not” and that Christ was created out of nothing. He simply opposed anti-Arianism.

As the Arian controversy continued to rage, Eusebius stayed in Caesarea, declining a promotion to become bishop of Antioch, and wrote. Among his most famous writings of this final period was another history: a praise-filled Life of Constantine, his adored political leader.

Eusebius wrote many other things, including an important treatise on the location of biblical place names and the distances between them. He also created a system to  number passages of the Gospels and made a table so readers could find the parallels between Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. This numbering exists in almost all the Greek manuscripts we have. It became a central idea behind how people read the Bible.

Holy History

His famous Church History shares a missionary purpose with Eusebius’s more explicitly apologetic writings. The opening words state his six interests:

  • It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles;. …
  • to relate the many important events that are said to have occurred in the history of the church;
  • to mention those who have governed and presided over the church in the most prominent parishes and those who in each generation have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing;. …
  • to give the names. … of those who through love of innovation have run into the greatest errors;. …
  • to recount the misfortunes that immediately came upon the whole Jewish nation in consequence of their plots against our Savior;
  • and to record the ways and the times in which the divine word has been attacked by the nations and to describe the character of those who at various periods have contended for it in the face of blood and tortures, as well as the confessions that have been made in our own days, and finally the gracious and kindly succor that our Savior has afforded them all.

Eusebius later added a seventh interest: the canon of New Testament Scripture. Athanasius’ definitive list of books stems from Eusebius.

He begins his Church History by describing the divine nature of the pre-existent Christ and the “scattering of the seeds of true religion” among human beings from the beginning of time. Many people throughout history rejected this divine teaching, but it was always available. This point was crucial to Eusebius because it answered a significant question from pagans: If Christianity is the only true religion, why was it so late in coming to the world?

Furthermore, the affirmation that Christianity began at Creation was central to Eusebius’s theology of history. To bolster his claim that God’s plan reached its climax in Christ, he had to trace that plan back through all time. On this basis, he could show how God continued to work through the church as well.

Eusebius wrote the History for ordinary Christians and interested non-Christians. This broad audience was not interested in doctrinal questions, so Eusebius gives such questions little attention. Instead, he concentrates on what would have popular, and enduring, appeal: sensational tales of martyrdom, juicy tidbits about famous leaders, lively quotations, and personal reflections.

Eusebius’ history has, in retrospect, many defects, both in style and method. For instance, he assumes, inaccurately, that the early church looked just like the church he knew. He displayed no sense of doctrinal or institutional development, especially in the Latin West, a region about which he knew little.

Eusebius can also be accused of whitewashing what he did know. As he introduced accounts of persecution in his day, he stated that he was including only what would be profitable:

We shall not mention those who were shaken by the persecution nor those who in everything pertaining to salvation were shipwrecked. … But we shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity (Church History 8.2.3).

Other complaints about Eusebius include his inattention to coherent narrative, his occasionally careless use of sources, and of course his belief that Christianity and the Roman state belonged together. But this negative picture can be exaggerated, and modern readers should be grateful that Eusebius collected material that would otherwise be lost.

Whatever may be said about Eusebius’s inability to organize his materials, he nonetheless had keen insight into themes that would have abiding interest for future generations. Who can forget the scenes recorded by Eusebius?

  • The apostle John fleeing the bathhouse upon finding Cerinthus, “the enemy of the truth,” there.
  • Justin Martyr in a philosopher’s cloak preaching the Word of God.
  • Polycarp confessing his faith before the governor: “Eighty-six years I have served Christ, and he has done me no wrong; how can I blaspheme my king who saved me?”
  • Blandina, the slave girl, hanging on a stake as if on a cross, but inspiring her fellow martyrs, “who saw the One who was crucified in the form of their sister.”
  • Origen’s father admiring his sleeping boy as one in whom the divine Spirit was enshrined.

Eusebius did not perfect the discipline of church history, but he took the crucial first step of considering world events from a Christian perspective. It is a tribute to his accomplishment that scholars continued his pursuit—though none attempted to rewrite what he had written for centuries.

More

The Wikipedia page is extensive [link]

Catholic criticisms and congratulations regarding Church History [link]

Podcast: Eusebius: History from the Wrong Side of History | Way of the Fathers with Mike Aquilina:

What do we do with this?

Many people know Eusebius as the “Father of Church History.” But did he write history? Because of his style of weaving short entries into a broader scheme he has been called one of the fathers of  journalism. Others call him a propagandist – he did call Emperor Constantine “most beloved by God,” and described the fourth-century church as being brought to “a state of uniform harmony.” However we evaluate his achievements, his works remain foundational for our knowledge of the church in its first three centuries. And this foundation stands firm despite noticeable cracks.

Have you ever written your own personal history of faith in your day? It would be interesting to see who and what influenced you, what heresies you faced, what nonsense in the church you had to endure, even your persecutions! Give it a try and see how God blesses it.

Ascension Day — May 29, 2025

Holy Days

Bible connection

Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.” Acts 1:9-11

All about Ascension Day

Ascension Day is traditionally celebrated on a Thursday, the fortieth day of Easter (or of Eastertide, the season after Easter). Some groups have moved the observance to the following Sunday.

N.T. Wright thinks Ascension Day is important and he suspects you don’t. His theological point of view is so seldom-considered that it might be important for us to study the following section of his book Surprised by Hope. Consider what Luke says happens to Jesus after he rises from the dead and see if it changes how you see the world.

Many people insist—and I dare say that this is the theology many of my readers have been taught—that the language of Jesus’ “disappearance” is just a way of saying that after his death he became, as it were, spiritually present everywhere, especially with his own followers. This is then often correlated with a nonliteral reading of the resurrection, that is, a denial of its bodily nature: Jesus simply “went to heaven when he died” in a rather special sense that makes him now close to each of us wherever we are. According to this view, Jesus has, as it were, disappeared without remainder. His “spiritual presence” with us is his only identity. In that case, of course, to speak of his second coming is then only a metaphor for his presence, in the same sense, eventually permeating all things.

What happens when people think like this? To answer this, we might ask a further question: why has the ascension been such a difficult and unpopular doctrine in the modern Western church? The answer is not just that rationalist skepticism mocks it (a possibility that the church has sometimes invited with those glass windows that show Jesus’s feet sticking downward out of a cloud). It is that the ascension demands that we think differently about how the whole cosmos is, so to speak, put together and that we also think differently about the church and about salvation. Both literalism and skepticism operate with what is called a receptacle view of space; theologians who take the ascension seriously insist that it demands what some have called a relational view. Basically, heaven and earth in biblical cosmology are not two different locations within the same continuum of space or matter. They are two different dimensions of God’s good creation. And the point about heaven is twofold. First, heaven relates to earth tangentially so that the one who is in heaven can be simultaneously anywhere and everywhere on earth; the ascension therefore means that Jesus is available, accessible, without people having to travel to a particular spot on earth to find him. Second, heaven is, as it were, the control room for earth; it is the CEO’s office, the place from which instructions are given. “All authority is given to me,” said Jesus at the end of Matthew’s gospel, “in heaven and on earth.”

The idea of the human Jesus now being in heaven, in his thoroughly embodied, risen state, comes as a shock to many people, including many Christians. Sometimes this is because many people think that Jesus, having been divine, stopped being divine and became human, and then, having been human for a while, stopped being human and went back to being divine (at least, that’s what many people think Christians are supposed to believe). More often it’s because our culture is so used to the Platonic idea that heaven is, by definition, a place of “spiritual,” nonmaterial reality so that the idea of a solid body being not only present but also thoroughly at home there seems like a category mistake. The ascension invites us to rethink all this; and, after all, why did we suppose we knew what heaven was? Only because our culture has suggested things to us. Part of Christian belief is to find out what’s true about Jesus and let that challenge our culture.

This applies in particular to the idea of Jesus being in charge not only in heaven but also on earth, not only in some ultimate future but also in the present. Many will snort the obvious objection: it certainly doesn’t look as though he’s in charge, or if he is, he’s making a proper mess of it. But that misses the point. The early Christians knew the world was still a mess. But they announced, like messengers going off on behalf of a global company, that a new CEO had taken charge. They discovered through their own various callings how his new way of running things was to be worked out. It wasn’t a matter (as some people anxiously suppose to this day) of Christians simply taking over and giving orders in a kind of theocracy where the church could simply tell everyone what to do. That has some times been tried, of course, and it’s always led to disaster. But neither is it a matter of the church backing off, letting the world go on its sweet way, and worshiping Jesus in a kind of private sphere.

Somehow there is a third option…We can glimpse it in the book of Acts: the method of the kingdom will match the message of the kingdom. The kingdom will come as the church, energized by the Spirit, goes out into the world vulnerable, suffering, praising, praying, misunderstood, misjudged, vindicated, celebrating: always—as Paul puts it in one of his letters—bearing in the body the dying of Jesus so that the life of Jesus may also be displayed.

What happens when you downplay or ignore the ascension? The answer is that the church expands to fill the vacuum. If Jesus is more or less identical with the church—if, that is, talk about Jesus can be reduced to talk about his presence within his people rather than his standing over against them and addressing them from elsewhere as their Lord, then we have created a high road to the worst kind of triumphalism. This indeed is what twentieth-century English liber­alism always tended toward: by compromising with rationalism and trying to maintain that talk of the ascension is really talk about Je­sus being with us everywhere, the church effectively presented itself (with its structures and hierarchy, its customs and quirks) instead of presenting Jesus as its Lord and itself as the world’s servant, as Paul puts it. And the other side of triumphalism is of course despair. If you put all your eggs into the church-equals-Jesus basket, what are you left with when, as Paul says in the same passage, we ourselves are found to be cracked earthenware vessels?

If the church identifies its structures, its leadership, its liturgy, its buildings, or anything else with its Lord—and that’s what happens if you ignore the ascension or turn it into another way of talking about the Spirit—what do you get? You get, on the one hand, what Shakespeare called “the insolence of office” and, on the other hand, the despair of late middle age, as people realize it doesn’t work. (I see this all too frequently among those who bought heavily into the soggy rationalism of the 1950s and 1960s.) Only when we grasp firmly that the church is not Jesus and Jesus is not the church­ when we grasp, in other words, the truth of the ascension, that the one who is indeed present with us by the Spirit is also the Lord who is strangely absent, strangely other, strangely different from us and over against us, the one who tells Mary Magdalene not to cling to him— only then are we rescued from both hollow triumphalism and shallow despair.

Conversely, only when we grasp and celebrate the fact that Je­sus has gone on ahead of us into God’s space, God’s new world, and is both already ruling the rebellious present world as its rightful Lord and also interceding for us at the Father’s right hand—when we grasp and celebrate, in other words, what the ascension tells us about Jesus’s continuing human work in the present—are we rescued from a wrong view of world history and equipped for the task of justice in the present…We are also, significantly, rescued from the attempts that have been made to create alternative mediators, and in particular an alternative mediatrix, in his place. Get the ascension right, and your view of the church, of the sacraments, and of the mother of Jesus can get back into focus.

You could sum all this up by saying that the doctrine of the trinity, which is making quite a come back in current theology, is essential if we are to tell the truth not only about God, and more particularly about Jesus, but also about ourselves. The Trinity is precisely a way of recognizing and celebrating the fact of the human being Jesus of Nazareth as distinct from while still identified with God the Father, on the one hand (he didn’t just “go back to being God again” after his earthy life), and the Spirit, on the other hand (the Jesus who is near us and with us by the Spirit remains the Jesus who is other than us). This places a full stop on all human arrogance, including Christian arrogance. And now we see at last why the Enlightenment world was determined to make the ascension appear ridiculous, using the weapons of rationalism and skepticism to do so: if the ascension is true, then the whole project of human self-aggrandizement represented by eighteenth century European and American thought is rebuked and brought to heel. To embrace the ascension is to heave a sigh of relief, to give up the struggle to be God (and with it the inevitable despair at our constant failure), and to enjoy our status as creatures: image-bearing creatures, but creatures nonetheless.

The ascension thus speaks of the Jesus who remains truly human and hence in an important sense absent from us while in another equally important sense present to us in a new way. At this point the Holy Spirit and the sacraments become enormously important since they are precisely the means by which Jesus is present. Often in the church we have been so keen to stress the presence of Jesus by these means that we have failed to indicate his simultaneous absence and have left people wondering whether this is, so to speak, “all there is to it.” The answer is: no, it isn’t. The lordship of Jesus; the fact that there is already a human at the helm of the world; his present intercession for us—all this is over and above his presence with us. It is even over and above our sense of that presence, which of course comes and goes with our own moods and circumstances.

Now it is of course one thing to say all this, to show how it fits together and sets us free from some of the nonsense we would oth­erwise get into. It’s quite another to be able to envisage or imag­ine it, to know what it is we’re really talking about when we speak of Jesus being still human, still in fact an embodied human—actually, a more solidly embodied human than we are—but absent from this present world. We need, in fact, a new and better cosmology, a new and better way of thinking about the world than the one our culture, not least post-Enlightenment culture, has bequeathed us. The early Christians, and their fellow first-century Jews, were not, as many moderns suppose, locked into thinking of a three-decker universe with heaven up in the sky and hell down beneath their feet. When they spoke of up and down like that they, like the Greeks in their different ways, were using metaphors that were so obvious they didn’t need spelling out. As some recent writers have pointed out, when a pupil at school moves “up” a grade, from (say) the tenth grade to the eleventh, it is unlikely that this means relocating to a classroom on the floor above. And though the move “up” from vice chairman of the board to chairman of the board may indeed mean that at last you get an office in the penthouse suite, it would be quite wrong to think that “moving up” in this context meant merely being a few feet farther away from terra firma.

The mystery of the ascension is of course just that, a mystery. It demands that we think what is, to many today, almost unthinkable: that when the Bible speaks of heaven and earth it is not talking about two localities related to each other within the same space-time continuum or about a nonphysical world contrasted with a physical one but about two different kinds of what we call space, two different kinds of what we call matter, and also quite possibly (though this does not necessarily follow from the other two) two different kinds of what we call time. We post-Enlightenment West­erners are such wretched flatlanders. Although New Age thinkers, and indeed quite a lot of contemporary novelists, are quite capable of taking us into other parallel worlds, spaces, and times, we retreat into our rationalistic closed-system universe as soon as we think about Jesus. C. S. Lewis of course did a great job in the Narnia sto­ries and elsewhere of imagining how two worlds could relate and interlock. But the generation that grew up knowing its way around Narnia does not usually know how to make the transition from a children’s story to the real world of grown-up Christian devotion and theology.

More

From Bishop Barron:

Charlotte Riggle lists some traditions of the day. [link]

Encouragement from the Vatican. [link]

Here is a nice, Evangelical summary of why the ascension of Jesus is important. [link]

What do we do with this?

What do you think? Can you do some theology with Tom Wright and Robert Barron?

Pray: Thank you for the living hope you give me—you have gone before me and I will go behind you, you intercede for me and remain present with me, you will come again.

For some of us, this theology is hard to understand. The teachers refer to all sorts of thinking we have not studied, past and present: Plato, the Enlightenment, scientific materialism and various breeds of Christian theology. Don’t give up! Try taking the time to slowly move through the material again and see what begins to come clear to you. If you talk to someone about it, you might understand even more. Let them help you make sense of today’s Bible reading.

Hold together the certainty of God-with-us and the mystery of Jesus-gone-before-us.

Mechthild of Magdeburg — May 28

Europe, The Modern Era (1227-1936)
Sculptor: Peter Paul Metz, 1896. Church of Gordian and Epimachus, Merazhofen, Germany

Bible connection

It is necessary to boast; nothing is to be gained by it, but I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord.  I know a person in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows.  And I know that such a person—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows —  was caught up into paradise and heard things that are not to be told, that no mortal is permitted to repeat.  On behalf of such a one I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except of my weaknesses. But if I wish to boast, I will not be a fool, for I will be speaking the truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me,  even considering the exceptional character of the revelations.  — 2 Corinthians 12:1-7

All about Mechthild of Magdeburg (c. 1208-c. 1282/94)

Mechthild is the author of The Flowing Light of the Godhead. She is one of the best-known  beguines. For most of her adulthood, she lived in a communal house in Magdeburg (now in Germany). Women became beguines because they had the same aspirations that contributed to the founding of the Franciscans and Dominicans in the same era: the desire to return to the ideals of early Christianity and imitate more closely the lives of the apostles, to be unworldly while living in the world. Beguines were usually under the direction of a parish priest, but because of their similarities  to the Franciscan and Dominican communities, they often associated with them. They were regularly criticized for being loosely overseen and, as mysticism arose among them, were accused of being unorthodox.

In composing her book, Mechthild felt constrained to answer two questions. What gives a woman with no formal education, no special training in theology, and no place in an approved religious order the right to speak to on theological matters and sharply criticize the clergy? What’s more, by whose authority did she write, or why should she expect to be taken seriously?

The few facts we have of Mechthild’s life come from her own works and subsequent introductions to them. Her familiarity  with the literature of the German court places her from a noble lineage at some low or medium level. She says at age twelve she was “greeted” by the Holy Spirit. An infilling continued daily for over three decades. About 1230, as a twentysomething, she left home for a beguinage in Magdeburg. About 1250, in her forties, she revealed to her spiritual director, Heinrich of Halle, the spiritual favors she had been granted. He commanded her to write her book “out of God’s heart and mouth.” For the next ten years she completed five books. During the next ten years, she decided she was not finished and completed two more.

She finished the seventh book at the Cistercian community at Helfta, under the guidance  of its second abbess, Gertrud of Hackeborn. She retreated there about 1270. She became feeble and blind and needed to dictate the final chapters.

A manuscript of Flowering Light was discovered in 1861 in which the Low German vernacular of Mechthild (“low” means northern Germany) had been translated into the High German of Bavaria. Until then the main versions of her work derived from Latin translations by Dominicans in Halle sometime before 1298. In comparing the texts, scholars discovered the Latin translators toned down her criticism of the clergy and some of her erotic imagery. The later manuscript clarified some of her language which was obscure to people who were not Low German speakers from the 13th century.

Mechthild’s work has no antecedents or descendants. Most “revelations” of her time just reported what happened to the mystic. Mechthild uses her revelations as starting points for reflection. She uses every form of writing available in her time to express what the greetings mean:

  • Religious forms: the vision, hymn, sermon, spiritual instruction and tract, prayer, liturgy, litany, and prophecy.
  • Courtly forms: love poetry, allegorical dialogue, dialogue between lovers, the messenger’s song, and the exchange (Wechsel).
  • Other forms: autobiography, drama, epigrammatic poetry and wisdom literature, anecdote, letter, parody, nursery rhyme and polemics.

Love is the force that compels Mechthild to write. She is not coming up with a system of theology.

Quotes:

Prayer is naught else but a yearning of soul … it draws down the great God into the little heart; it drives the hungry soul up to the plenitude of God; it brings together these two lovers, God and the soul, in a wondrous place where they speak much of love.

The soul is made of love and must ever strive to return to love. Therefore, it can never find rest nor happiness in other things. It must lose itself in love. By its very nature it must seek God, who is love.

The day of my spiritual awakening was the day I saw and knew I saw all things in God and God in all things.

Stupidity is sufficient unto itself. Wisdom can never learn enough.

From suffering I have learned this: that whoever is sore wounded by love will never be made whole unless she embraces the very same love which wounded her.

More

The Flowing Light of the Godhead online. This version also available in print. [Goodreads]

Poems collected by the Poetry Foundation [link]

A meditation on her sayings [YouTube]

YouTube purveyor of esoterica spends 30 minutes on Mechthild to good end:

What do we do with this?

Use her poem as your prayer:

I cannot dance, O Lord,

Unless You lead me.
If You wish me to leap joyfully,
Let me see You dance and sing—
Then I will leap into Love—
And from Love into Knowledge,
And from Knowledge into the Harvest,

The sweetest Fruit beyond human sense.

There I will stay with You, whirling.

Consider how brave Mechthild was to leave her family and join a radical community. Consider how she felt the need to keep her spiritual life a secret for so long. Consider how she followed the command of her confessor and applied herself to writing her book. Consider how she broke with tradition and found her own voice, even when her kindred spirits came under criticism. Especially if you are a woman, enjoy the story of someone who got through a thick glass ceiling.

Frances Perkins — May 14

North America, This century (1937-2025)

Bible connection

Perkins’ motto: “Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.” — 1 Cor 15:58 (ESV) 

Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker,
    but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. — Proverbs 14:31 (NIV)

All about Frances Perkins (1880-1965)

Frances Perkins was the first woman cabinet member in U. S. history. She was born Fannie Coralie Perkins in Boston, Massachusetts. She received her B.A. from Mount Holyoke College in 1902. While a student there, Perkins heard a speaker vividly describe the nation’s growing urban and industrial problems. She found her calling.

David Brooks writes of former days in the U.S.A. and Frances Perkins :

Much of American moral education drew on an ethos expressed by the headmaster of the Stowe School, in England, who wrote in 1930 that the purpose of his institution was to turn out young men who were “acceptable at a dance and invaluable in a shipwreck.” America’s National Institute for Moral Instruction was founded in 1911 and published a “Children’s Morality Code,” with 10 rules for right living. At the turn of the 20th century, Mount Holyoke College, an all-women’s institution, was an example of an intentionally thick moral community. When a young Frances Perkins was a student there, her Latin teacher detected a certain laziness in her. She forced Perkins to spend hours conjugating Latin verbs, to cultivate self-discipline. Perkins grew to appreciate this: “For the first time I became conscious of character.” The school also called upon women to follow morally ambitious paths. “Do what nobody else wants to do; go where nobody else wants to go,” the school’s founder implored. Holyoke launched women into lives of service in Africa, South Asia, and the Middle East. Perkins, who would become the first woman to serve in a presidential Cabinet (Franklin D. Roosevelt’s), was galvanized there.

When she was living in Lake Forest, Illinois, and working in Chicago, she was attracted to the Episcopal Church. Perkins was confirmed at the Church of the Holy Spirit, Lake Forest, on June 11, 1905. She remained a life-long Episcopalian.

While working at a Chicago settlement house, she determined to “do something about unnecessary hazards to life, unnecessary poverty” because “our Lord has directed all those who thought they were following in His path to visit the widows, the orphans, the fatherless, the prisoners and so forth.”

Perkins earned an M.A. at Columbia University in 1910. In 1911 she witnessed the Triangle Shirtwaist fire in New York in which 146 factory workers died. She took up industrial safety work for the City of New York. Perkins continued her work in industrial relations, serving at the state level with Al Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt during their respective terms as Governor of New York.

In 1933 President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed her Secretary of Labor. Before accepting the job, she consulted with her friend, Suffragan Bishop Charles K. Gilbert of New York. Receiving spiritual direction was one of her disciplines. She was an associate of the All Saints’ Sisters of the Poor, and she spent one day a month in silent retreat at their Catonsville, Maryland convent throughout her twelve years in the cabinet

Frances Perkins had a clear vision of her priorities—what God wanted came first. As secretary of Labor under Franklin Roosevelt, she developed programs that bettered the lives of the American people. These included Social Security, workplace safety regulations, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, minimum wage laws, and the forty hour work week. Throughout a life spent championing the rights of working people, the poor, children, and the disadvantaged, Perkins used her Christian faith as her guide. When friends asked why it was important for the fortunate to help the poor she told them, “that it was what Jesus would want them to do.”  [See Michelle Kew at the Francis Perkins Center]

As Secretary of Labor, she was instrumental in helping draft and implement Roosevelt’s New Deal legislation. Perkins resigned her post shortly after Roosevelt’s death in 1945.

In 1955 she joined the faculty of the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. She remained active in teaching and lecturing until her death in New York City.

Quotes

  • I came to Washington to work for God, FDR, and the millions of forgotten, plain common workingmen.
  • The door might not be opened to a woman again for a long, long time, and I had a kind of duty to other women to walk in and sit down on the chair that was offered, and so establish the right of others long hence and far distant in geography to sit in the high seats.
  • The accusation that I am a woman is incontrovertible.
  • It’s only when we’re relaxed that the thing way down deep in all of us – call it the subconscious mind, the spirit, what you will – has a chance to well up and tell us how we shall go.
  • You can always get sympathy by using the word small. With little industries you feel as you do about a little puppy.

Last December Joe Biden created a new National Monument dedicated to Perkins [link].

What do we do with this?

Frances Perkins was given a unique opportunity because she held on to her unique convictions. They were not unusual to Jesus, but she stood out in comparison to many people. Her faith and courage made her notable.

Capitalism wants to extract the most profit it can from its workforce. There is always a drift toward injustice and even slavery within it. Recently, the demands for a minimum wage and the rights of unions within the new giant corporations like Apple and Amazon have renewed the fight Perkins succeeded in so well. Human rights assumes people must be responsible for one another. The quest for the “freedom” of individualism is always an aggressive counterpoint to that responsibility. Where are your thoughts on that spectrum? Where is Jesus, as far as you can tell?

Georges Cuvier – May 13

Europe, The Modern Era (1227-1936)

Bible Connection

My child, if you accept my words
and treasure up my commandments within you,
making your ear attentive to wisdom
and inclining your heart to understanding,
if you indeed cry out for insight
and raise your voice for understanding,
if you seek it like silver
and search for it as for hidden treasures—
then you will understand the fear of the Lord
and find the knowledge of God.
For the Lord gives wisdom;
from his mouth come knowledge and understanding;
he stores up sound wisdom for the upright;
he is a shield to those who walk blamelessly,
guarding the paths of justice
and preserving the way of his faithful ones. — Proverbs 2:1-8

All about Georges Cuvier (1769-1832)

Georges Cuvier (Jean Léopold Nicolas Frédéric, Baron Cuvier) was a Christian who became one of the premier scientists of his time. He established comparative anatomy and paleontology as sciences. As most people of his time, he started with the assumption that God created the world and all creatures/species  bore the mark of his intention. Unlike most people of his time, he compared living animals with fossils and became the first to suggest certain animals had become extinct.

The bust of Georges Cuvier in the Gallery of Palaeontology and Comparative Anatomy of the National Museum of Natural History in Paris.

Cuvier is well-known for proposing “catastrophism,” the idea that Earth’s history has been shaped by sudden, catastrophic events. As a result of these events, he surmised, many species became extinct and new species emerged after each world-shaping event. He rejected the new idea of organic evolution, and continued to view species as fixed and unchanging, each one having a specific purpose and function. While Cuvier rejected evolution, his work on extinctions and comparative anatomy influenced later scientists, including Charles Darwin, who built upon his ideas. Darwin wrote to William Ogle in 1832, “Linnaeus and Cuvier have been my two gods, though in very different ways, but they were mere school-boys to old Aristotle.”

Georges Cuvier was born in Montbéliard, a French-speaking community in the Jura Mountains, near Switzerland, which was part of the Duchy of Württemberg at the time. During his lifetime, the Duchy was abolished. His parents were devout Lutherans and he remained one for his entire life. He attended the Karlsschule Academy in Stuttgart, Germany, where he learned to dissect animals and developed his interest in natural history. After graduation, he became a tutor for a noble family in Normandy, France. There he met the Abbot Teissier, an agronomist and member of the former Royal Academy of Science. Teissier shared with Cuvier his research on mollusks and, impressed by his encyclopedic knowledge, introduced him to his friends in Paris, where Cuvier settled in 1795 to embark on a brilliant career.

Cuvier was already well-known when, in 1812, he published his opus Recherches sur les Ossements Fossiles des Quadrupèdes (Researches on the Fossil Bones of Quadrupeds). He advanced a principle of “subordination of organs” (the organs of a living being affect each other and cooperate to bring about the same action through reciprocal reaction), and he established a new classification for vertebrates. These principles enabled him to reconstruct complete skeletons from bones and fossils, thus proving the existence of fauna so far unknown.

Cuvier invented the science of paleontology. He defended his theory of  cataclycisme (catastrophist scenario) in his Discours sur la Révolution du Globe (Discourse on the Revolutionary Upheaval on the Surface of the Earth) and opposed actualisme, a theory according to which the laws that determined past geological phenomena are identical to those that determine present phenomena.

British geologists made Cuvier an ally in connecting catastrophism to the Bible’s story of Noah and the flood. But there is little indication in Cuvier’s writings that this was part of his science.  Cuvier treated the Bible both as a book with divine authority and as a source of information about nature and history. In doing so, he distanced himself both from scholars finding natural laws in the Bible and from neologists making up theology to match the latest data. For Cuvier the Augustinian principle of “accommodation,” which pre-dates historical criticism, sufficed to keep scripture and geology relatively separate, as his interpretation of texts on the flood and on Old Testament chronology indicate. The accommodation principle suggests God adjusts revelation to fit human understanding and limitations. So theological, scientific or historical understanding are all provisional. God uses language for revelation but the revelation is beyond language and limited human capacity.

Cuvier distanced himself from a speculative geology based solely on Bible texts. For him, the Bible could be consulted for elements of natural history, such as the features of the earth, of organisms and of ancient civilizations. But any responsible use was limited by an awareness of the accommodated nature of the texts. He was working on stronger, empirical alternatives built on the standard belief that God’s work revealed in nature agrees with the revelation in scripture. Cuvier’s use of Bible texts, or of metaphysical ideas in general, is characterized by an insistence that any matter under consideration can stand on its own empirical feet. This means Cuvier is not a “scriptural geologist.” The general idea of geological catastrophes may have been inspired by the story of the Flood, and the definition of biological species by the story of Creation, but the hypotheses stand on their own merit.  (See “Georges Cuvier and the Use of Scripture in Geology” by Jitse M. van der Meer).

Georges Cuvier became a baron in 1818 and Chancellor of his university in 1820. He was President of the State Council and Director of Religious Affairs, and held many other positions and titles. He became one of the most powerful and decorated men of his era.

After he approached Napoleon for the organization of the Lutheran Church in Paris, it  was established in 1806 at the Oratoire des Billettes. In 1824, he was placed in charge of the Faculty of Protestant Theology and in 1828 was appointed director of non-Roman Catholic religions under King Charles X. He encouraged the creation of numerous pastoral positions, especially in the Montbéliard region. His daughter Clémentine devoted much of her time to Protestant charities.

Balzac’s quotation about the man he considered equal to Napoleon is well-known “Cuvier is married to the globe.”

Quotes

Why has not anyone seen that fossils alone gave birth to a theory about the formation of the earth, that without them, no one would have ever dreamed that there were successive epochs in the formation of the globe. — Discourse on the Revolutionary Upheavals on the Surface of the Earth

To spread healthy ideas among even the lowest classes of people, to remove men from the influence of prejudice and passion, to make reason the arbiter and supreme guide of public opinion; that is the essential goal of the sciences; that is how science will contribute to the advancement of civilization, and that is what deserves protection of governments who want to insure the stability of their power. — Historical Report on Advance in natural Sciences

Genius and science have burst the limits of space, and few observations, explained by just reasoning, have unveiled the mechanism of the universe. Would it not also be glorious for man to burst the limits of time, and, by a few observations, to ascertain the history of this world, and the series of events which preceded the birth of the human race? — Essay on the Theory of the Earth

More

Bio from the Virtual Museum of Protestantism.

Bio from the University of California Museum of Paleontology. [link]

This video shows the development of Cuvier’s assertions about extinction in  eight minutes. [link] 

November 30 is Remembrance Day for Lost Species due to human-caused catastrophe.

Noted paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould  (1941-2002) posited “punctuated equilibrium” as a more accurate view of species development. His views were reminiscent of Cuvier’s catastrophism. “Creationists” use Gould’s argument to make paleontological sense of Noah and the flood, and they have websites [link].

This video mentions Cuvier as part of a history of science lesson leading to Darwin. It is an interesting thirteen minutes! :

What do we do with this?

Would Georges Cuvier pass muster on a roll call of orthodox Evangelicals today? That remains to be seen. He was not an overt proponent for much more than his scientific discoveries. His faith was public, a given, but not something he intended to defend, scientifically. Faith influenced everything he thought and did, but he did not try to make everything fit under its Lordship, so to speak. Is he a lukewarm believer? Do you think he belongs in our historical examples of faith? Do you belong there?

Cuvier is less well known, these days, but in his own time he was very famous. He was involved in church, in politics, and was deeply involved in the scientific revolution impacting every area of thought. When he was 20 the French Revolution began. He was connected to Napoleon who became Emperor when he was 35. He rose to prominence during the Bourbon restoration, when he was made a baron. He died two years into the July Monarchy. His faith and his science survived all the turmoil. May your love and truth do the same.

Nikolaus Zinzendorf  — May 9

Europe, The Modern Era (1227-1936)

Bible connection

Read Isaiah 58

Free those who are wrongly imprisoned;
lighten the burden of those who work for you.
Let the oppressed go free,
and remove the chains that bind people.
 Share your food with the hungry,
and give shelter to the homeless.
Give clothes to those who need them,
and do not hide from relatives who need your help.

All about Nicolaus Zinzendorf (1700-1760)

Nicholas Ludwig, Count Zinzendorf, was born in Dresden in 1700. He was deeply involved in the Pietist movement in Germany, which emphasized personal devotion and the emotional component of life in Christ. This was in contrast to the state Lutheran Church of the day, which had grown to symbolize a largely intellectual faith centered on belief in specific doctrines. Zinzendorf believed in “heart religion,” a personal salvation built on an individual’s spiritual relationship with Christ.

In 2000, German Moravians created a trail of sculptures commemorating the 300th birthday of Zinzendorf. This one features the Count with children, whom he believed modeled the kind of faith we are to have. The gray figures behind represent the rigidness of those leading the old church. Photo taken in Großhennersdorf, Herrnhut, Germany.

Zinzendorf was born into one of the most noble families of Europe. His father died when he was an infant, and he was raised by his Pietist pioneer grandmother, Henrietta Catherina, Baroness von Gersdorff, at her castle Gros Hennersdorf. There are many stories about his deep childhood faith. As a young man he struggled with his desire to study for the ministry and the expectation that he would fulfill his hereditary role as a Count. As a teenager at Halle Academy, he and several other young nobles formed a secret society, The Order of the Grain of Mustard Seed. The stated purpose of this order was that the members would use their position and influence to spread the Gospel. As an adult, Zinzendorf later reactivated this adolescent society, and many influential leaders of Europe ended up joining it. Their number included the King of Denmark, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Archbishop of Paris.

Zinzendorf was one of the most controversial figures of the early eighteenth century. The crowned heads of Europe and religious leaders of both Europe and America all knew him or knew of him — and either loved him or hated him.

Although born to an aristocratic family, Zinzendorf decided to use his wealth to shelter a group of Christian radicals: the Unitas Fratrum (The Latinized form of the Czech jednota bratrská/society of brethren). This name was was assumed by the branch of the Hussites known as the Bohemian Brethren and their successors, the Moravian Brethren.  During his lifetime, Europe was a tumultuous place. It was unsafe to leave the established state churches. But many people took the risk and amazing things resulted. In 1722 a small band of Jesus-followers who chose not to be part of the state church crossed the border from Moravia to settle in a town they built on Zinzendorf’s estate. They called it  Herrnhut, or “the Lord’s Watch.”

During its first five years of existence the settlement showed few signs of spiritual power. By the beginning of 1727 the community of about three hundred people was wracked by dissension and bickering. So the village was an unlikely site for a revival! Zinzendorf and others, however, covenanted to prayer and labor for the Holy Spirit to move among them. Largely due to Zinzendorf’s leadership in daily Bible studies, the group came to formulate a unique document, known as the Brotherly Agreement, which set forth basic tenets of Christian behavior. Residents of Herrnhut were required to sign a pledge to abide by these Biblical principals. There followed an intense and powerful experience of renewal, often described as the “Moravian Pentecost.”

On May 12, 1727 during a communion service, the entire congregation felt a powerful presence of the Holy Spirit, and felt their previous differences swept away. This experience began the Moravian renewal which led to remarkable ministry. Christians were aglow with new life and power, dissension vanished and unbelievers were converted. Looking back to that day and the four amazing months that followed, Zinzendorf later recalled: “The whole place represented truly a visible habitation of God among men.”

A spirit of prayer was immediately evident in the fellowship and continued throughout that “golden summer of 1727,” as the Moravians came to designate the period. On August 27 of that year twenty-four men and twenty-four women covenanted to spend one hour each day in scheduled prayer. Some others enlisted in the “hourly intercession.” For over a hundred years members of the Moravian Church maintained this continual prayer. “At home and abroad, on land and sea, this prayer watch ascended unceasingly to the Lord,” stated historian A. J. Lewis.

In 1731, while attending the coronation of Christian VI in Copenhagen, the young Count met a converted slave from the West Indies, Anthony Ulrich. Anthony’s tale of his people’s plight moved Zinzendorf, who brought him back to Herrnhut. As a result, two young men, Leonard Dober and David Nitchmann, were sent to St. Thomas to live among the slaves and share the good news about Jesus. This was the first organized Protestant mission work, which quickly expanded to Africa, North America, Russia, and other parts of the world. By 1791, sixty-five years after starting their hourly intercession, the small Moravian community had placed 300 missionaries from Greenland to South Africa, literally from one end of the earth to the other.

Members of the Mo­ra­vi­an Church helped populate the Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania. They are known as an historic Peace Church, as are the Brethren in Christ and Mennonites.

More 

All sorts of goodness at Zinzendorf.com. You need to work at this old website to reveal its treasures.

Zinzendorf in America

Zinzendorf the hymn writer [people singing one at Herrnhut]

Christian History 1) bio, 2) Magazine: Zinzendorf and the Moravians

The early Moravians were accused of sexual impropriety. The criticism may have been appropriate, at times. Here’s an investigation: Wound Worship, “Enthusiasts” and “Sodomites”: A History of Radical Moravians (2019)

1982 movie:

What do we do with this?

Pray: May the Church truly be a visible habitation of God.

The Pietists wanted heart religion. They used Bible study, prayer and intentional community to grow it. They shared resources and went on mission to show it. What do you want? What yearning in your spirit meets the passion of God’s Spirit? Are you still open to a Herrnhut in your future?

Julian of Norwich — May 8

Europe, The Modern Era (1227-1936)
Statue of Julian of Norwich, Norwich Cathedral, by David Holgate FSDC (2010)

Bible connection

For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth takes its name. I pray that, according to the riches of his glory, he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love. I pray that you may have the power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. — Ephesians 3:14-19

All about Julian of Norwich (1342-c.1416)

Julian of Norwich is known to us almost exclusively through her book, Revelations of Divine Love, which is widely acknowledged as one of the great classics on the spiritual life in Christ. Many think she is the first woman to write a book in English which has survived.

We do not know Julian’s actual name. Her name is taken from St. Julian’s Church in Norwich where she lived as an anchoress for most of her life. We know from the medieval literary work, The Book of Margery Kempe, that Julian was known as a spiritual counselor. People would come to her cell in Norwich to seek advice. Considering that, at the time, the citizens of Norwich suffered from plague and poverty, as well as a famine, she must have counseled a lot of people in pain. Yet, her writings are suffused with hope and trust in God’s goodness.

Julian’s Revelations of Divine Love is based on a series of sixteen visions she received on May 8, 1373. Julian laid on what she thought was her deathbed and suddenly she saw Christ bleeding in front of her. She received insight into his sufferings and his love for us.

Julian’s message is one of hope and trust in God, whose compassionate love is always given to us. In this all-gracious God there is no element of wrath. The wrath —

all that is contrary to peace and love — is in us and not in God. God’s saving work in Jesus of Nazareth and in the gift of God’s Spirit, is to slake our wrath in the power of his merciful and compassionate love.

Julian did not perceive God as blaming or judging us, but as enfolding us in love. Famously, Julian used women’s experience of motherhood to explore how God loves us, referring to Jesus as our Mother.

Revelations of Divine Love comes to us in two versions; the first (the short text) was written shortly after the revelations were given to Julian; the second (the long text) was written twenty years later. The long text is greatly expanded to include her meditations on what she had been shown. Today, only seventeenth century copies of earlier manuscripts of the long text, and fragments from the fifteenth century survive.

Julian recounts she was thirty and a half years old when she received her visions and this is how we know she was born in 1342. (An editor to one of the surviving manuscripts speaks of her as a “devout woman, who is a recluse at Norwich, and still alive, A.D. 1413”). There is further evidence to be found in a contemporary will that she was alive in 1416, and that she had a maid who lived in a room next to the cell. Apart from that, we know nothing else about Julian’s life. However, reading Revelations of Divine Love, reveals an intelligent, sensitive and very down-to-earth woman who maintains her trust in God’s goodness while addressing doubt, fear and deep theological questions.

St Julian's Church, Norwich, 2009.jpg
The building where she lived

Interest in Julian’s writings has grown over recent decades More and more people have discovered the significance of her book. Her lyrical language and positive image of God speak to her present-day readers. Her work is well-respected by theologians, historians and literary scholars, and there are now dozens of translations of her Revelations, together with countless commentaries. Modern poets and writers as diverse as T.S. Eliot, Denise Levertov, and Iris Murdoch reference Julian in their writings.

Julian’s Shrine, off Rouen Rd. in Norwich (above), is visited by pilgrims from all over the world.

Quotes

If there is anywhere on earth a lover of God who is always kept safe, I know nothing of it, for it was not shown to me. But this was shown: that in falling and rising again we are always kept in that same precious love.

And all shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be exceeding well.

God, of thy goodness, give me Thyself;
for Thou art enough for me,
and I can ask for nothing less
that can be full honor to Thee.
And if I ask anything that is less,
ever Shall I be in want,
for only in Thee have I all.

Our Savior is our true Mother in whom we are endlessly born and out of whom we shall never come.

Truth sees God, and wisdom contemplates God, and from these two comes a third, a holy and wonderful delight in God, who is love.

More

Revelations of Divine Love [audio book]

The series of “praying with” books from the 80’s and 90’s are nice tools for getting in touch with spiritual guides from the past. Here is one for Julian [Goodreads].

Robert Fruehwirth’s book The Drawing of This Love puts Julian into action [Goodreads]. Here’s more teaching from this expert [lecture].

Julian was not alone. Other women of her time were writing down similar experiences. You might like to know her predecessors from among the beguines: Mechthild von Magdeburg (ca. 1207-ca. 1294) and Hadewijch of Antwerp (13th century). Her contemporary, John of Ruysbroeck (1293-1381) writes in and about the tradition Julian resembles.

What do we do with this?

Revelations like Julian’s are available to many people who is seeking. But not having visions do not make you a second-rate follower — besides, Julian offered her! It is possible we  all have some kind of pre-verbal experience with God that informs much of our lifelong walk with Jesus. Try the prayer of imagination.

Spend some time seeking. Let God clarify for you just what you should be hearing. If you really want to take Julian’s example, you will dare to write it all down and meditate on it another day.

Athanasius — May 2

Africa, Forerunners (33-1226)
Athanasius of Alexandria icon

Bible connection

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have come to fullness in him, who is the head of every ruler and authority. In him also you were circumcised with a spiritual circumcision, by putting off the body of the flesh in the circumcision of Christ; when you were buried with him in baptism, you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead. And when you were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive together with him, when he forgave us all our trespasses, erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands. He set this aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in it. — Colossians 2:8-15

All about Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296 – c. 373)

“Those who maintain ‘There was a time when the Son was not’
rob God of his Word, like plunderers.”

Athanasius of Alexandria became the 20th bishop of Alexandria. His on-again-off-again service in that role spanned 45 years. Seventeen of those years were served in exile, when four different Roman emperors ordered his replacement. Athanasius was a Christian theologian, a Church Father, the chief defender of Trinitarianism against Arianism, and a noted Egyptian leader of the fourth century.

Conflict with Arius and Arianism, as well as successive Roman emperors, shaped Athanasius’ career. At the age of 27, he took a leading role against the Arians as a deacon and assistant to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria during the First Council of Nicaea. Roman emperor Constantine the Great convened the council to address the Arian position that the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth, is of a distinct substance from the Father.

Three years after that council, Athanasius succeeded his mentor as archbishop of Alexandria. In addition to the conflict with the Arians, he struggled against the Emperors Constantine, Constantius II, Julian the Apostate and Valens. He was known by his admirers as Athanasius Contra Mundum (Latin for Athanasius Against the World). “Black Dwarf” was the tag his enemies gave him — and the short, dark-skinned, Egyptian bishop had plenty of enemies. In the end, his theological enemies were “exiled” from orthodoxy, and it is Athanasius’ writings that shaped the future of the church. Within a few years after his death, Gregory of Nazianzus called him the “Pillar of the Church.”

Most his enemies were earned by his stubborn insistence that Arianism, the reigning “orthodoxy” of the day, was in fact a heresy. The dispute began when Athanasius was the chief deacon in Alexandria. While his mentor, Alexander preached with philosophical exactitude on the Trinity, Arius, a presbyter from Libya announced, “If the Father begat the Son, then he who was begotten had a beginning in existence, and from this it follows there was a time when the Son was not.” The argument caught on, but Alexander and Athanasius fought against Arius, arguing that it denied the Trinity. Christ is not of a like substance to God, they argued, but of the same substance.

To Athanasius this was not splitting theological hairs. Salvation was at issue. Only one who was fully human could atone for human sin; only one who was fully divine could have the power to save us. To Athanasius, the logic of New Testament doctrine of salvation assumed the dual nature of Christ.  Alexander’s encyclical letter, signed by Athanasius (and possibly written by him), attacked the consequences of the Arian heresy. If it were true:

“The Son [then,] is a creature and a work; neither is he like in essence to the Father; neither is he the true and natural Word of the Father; neither is he his true wisdom; but he is one of the things made and created and is called the Word and Wisdom by an abuse of terms… Wherefore he is by nature subject to change and variation, as are all rational creatures.”

The controversy spread, and all over the empire, Christians could be heard singing a catchy tune that championed the Arian view: “There was a time when the Son was not,” which only deepened the conflict. Word of the dispute made it to the newly converted Emperor Constantine the Great, who was more concerned with seeing church unity than theological truth. To settle the matter, he called a council of bishops. “Division in the church is worse than war,” he told them.

Of the 1,800 bishops invited to Nicaea, about 300 came—and argued, fought, and eventually fleshed out an early version of the Nicene Creed. The council, led by Alexander, condemned Arius as a heretic, exiled him, and made it a capital offense to possess his writings. Constantine was pleased that peace had been restored to the church. Athanasius, whose treatise On the Incarnation laid the foundation for the orthodox party at Nicaea, was hailed as “the noble champion of Christ.”

But the Arian heresy did not die out. Within a few months, supporters of Arius talked Constantine into ending Arius’ exile. With a few private additions, Arius even signed the Nicene Creed, and the emperor ordered Athanasius, who had recently succeeded Alexander as bishop, to restore the heretic to fellowship. When Athanasius refused, his enemies spread false charges against him. He was accused of murder, illegal taxation, sorcery, and treason—the last of which led Constantine to exile him to Trier, now a German city near Luxembourg.

Constantine died two years later, and Athanasius returned to Alexandria. But in his absence, Arianism had gained the upper hand. Now church leaders were against him, and they banished him again. Athanasius fled to Pope Julius I in Rome. He returned in 346, but in the mercurial politics of the day, was banished three more times before he came home to stay in 366. By then he was about 70 years old.

While in exile, Athanasius spent most of his time writing, mostly to defend orthodoxy, but he took on pagan and Jewish opposition as well. One of his most lasting contributions is his Life of St. Ant[h]ony, which helped to shape the Christian ideal of monasticism. The book is filled with tales of Antony’s encounters with the devil, yet Athanasius wrote, “Do not be incredulous about what you hear of him… Consider, rather that from them only a few of his feats have been learned.” In fact, the bishop knew the monk personally, and his  biography is one of the most historically reliable. It became an early “bestseller” and made a deep impression on many people, even helping lead pagans to conversion — Augustine of Hippo is the most famous example.

During Athanasius’s first year permanently back in Alexandria, he sent his annual letter to the churches in his diocese, called a festal letter. Such letters were used to fix the dates of festivals such as Lent and Easter, and to discuss matters of general interest. In this letter, Athanasius listed what he believed were the books that should constitute the New Testament: “In these [27 writings] alone the teaching of godliness is proclaimed,” he wrote. “No one may add to them, and nothing may be taken away from them.” Though other such lists had been and would still be proposed, it is Athanasius’ list that the church eventually adopted, and the writings he listed make up the New Testament.

Quotes:

  • Christians, instead of arming themselves with swords, extend their hands in prayer.
  • The holy and inspired Scriptures are sufficient of themselves for the preaching of the truth.
  • Jesus became what we are that he might make us what he is.
  • You cannot put straight in others what is warped in yourself.
  • Similarly, anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds.
  • One cannot see all the waves with one’s eyes, for when one tries to do so those that are following on baffle one’s senses. Even so, when one wants to take in all the achievements of Christ in the body, one cannot do so, even by reckoning them up, for the things that transcend one’s thought are always more than those one thinks that one has grasped.
    As we cannot speak adequately about even a part of His work, therefore, it will be better for us not to speak about it as a whole. So we will mention but one thing more, and then leave the whole for you to marvel at. For, indeed, everything about it is marvelous, and wherever a man turns his gaze he sees the Godhead of the Word and is smitten with awe.
  • The presence and love of the Word had called them into being; inevitably, therefore when they lost the knowledge of God, they lost existence with it; for it is God alone Who exists, evil is non-being, the negation and antithesis of good.
  • For of what use is existence to the creature if it cannot know its Maker?
  • The Greek philosophers have compiled many works with persuasiveness and much skill in words; but what fruit have they to show for this such as has the cross of Christ? Their wise thoughts were persuasive enough until they died.
  • Even on the cross he did not hide himself from sight; rather, he made all creation witness to the presence of its Maker.

More

Development of New Testament canon

The Incarnation from the Coptics.

Roman Catholic biography 

His letter regarding the death of Arius. [link]

Controversy about “deification”

What do we do with this?

Athanasius is also known as the “father of orthodoxy.” He helped refine doctrines that set the baseline for true faith and set the final parameters on the New Testament. He was fighting for the church’s life in a time when the government wanted to exploit it and society was absorbing it according to its own image. Nothing is new under the sun.

What do you think the Lord would like you to fight for in this era? What truth is threatened? What necessity is being watered down or lost? If we want to leave a coherent faith for the next generation, what  should we do?

Constantine thought Arius should be reinstated after he “signed” the Nicene Creed. But Athanasius was not ready to love his enemy if the enemy was trying to wiggle his way back into orthodoxy with a few caveats. Even though Athanasius holds the line, Arianism does not die out. It becomes the main basis for the Christianity of the “East.”  Some form of it is what Persians, Mongols and Chinese adopt. (And it is a central belief for Jehovah’s Witnesses). From the 4th century on, protecting the metaphysics of God is an occupation that divides the church and changes the character of Christian faith, now organized under political goals and power struggles. You probably have an idea of what is “true” in general and what is true about Jesus. Can you summarize it? Dare you investigate it?

Cesar Chavez — April 23

North America, This century (1937-2025)

Bible connection

Blessed are the poor in spirit,
    For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn,
    For they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek,
    For they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
    For they shall be filled. — Matthew 5:3-6

All about Cesar Chavez (1927-1993)

Cesar Estrada Chavez was born on March 31, 1927 near Yuma, Arizona. At 35 years old, he founded the National Farm Workers Association (later known as the United Farm Workers/ UFW).

Chavez employed nonviolent means to bring attention to the plight of farmworkers. As a labor leader, he led marches, called for boycotts and went on several hunger strikes. It is believed that Chavez’s hunger strikes contributed to his death on April 23, 1993, in San Luis, Arizona.

Chavez dedicated his life to improving the treatment, pay and working conditions for farm workers. He knew all too well the hardships farm workers faced. When he was young, Chavez and his family toiled in the fields as migrant workers.

After working as a community and labor organizer in the 1950s, Chavez founded the National Farm Workers Association in 1962. This union joined with the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee in its first strike against grape growers in California in 1965. A year later, the two unions merged, and the resulting union was renamed the United Farm Workers in 1972.

In early 1968, Chavez called for a national boycott of California table grape growers. Chavez’s battle with the grape growers for improved compensation and labor conditions would last for years. At the end, Chavez and his union won several victories for the workers when many growers signed contracts with the union. He faced more challenges through the years from other growers and the Teamsters Union. All the while, he continued to oversee the union and work to advance his cause. He also brought the national awareness to the dangers of pesticides to workers’ health. His dedication to his work earned him numerous friends and supporters, including Robert Kennedy and Jesse Jackson.

In a speech entitled Jesus’s Friendship Chavez asserts that

The love for justice that is in us is not only the best part of our being but it is also the most true to our nature….I have met many, many farm workers and friends who love justice and who are willing to sacrifice for what is right. They have a quality about them that reminds me of the beatitudes. They are living examples that Jesus’ promise is true: they have been hungry and thirsty for righteousness and they have been satisfied.

About his fasts Chavez wrote,

A fast is first and foremost personal. It is a fast for the purification of my own body, mind, and soul. The fast is also a heartfelt prayer for purification and strengthening for all those who work beside me in the farm worker movement. The fast is also an act of penance for those in positions of moral authority and for all men and women activists who know what is right and just, who know that they could and should do more. The fast is finally a declaration of non-cooperation with supermarkets who promote and sell and profit from California table grapes…I pray to God that this fast will be a preparation for a multitude of simple deeds for justice.

Chavez encourages us in the work of justice, saying

It is possible to become discouraged about the injustice we see everywhere. But God did not promise us that the world would be humane and just. He gives us the gift of life and allows us to choose the way we will use our limited time on earth. It is an awesome opportunity.

Cesar Chavez quotes:
  • What do we want the church to do? We ask for its presence with us, beside us, as Christ among us. We ask the church to sacrifice with the people for social change, for justice and for love of brother and sister. We don’t ask for words. We ask for deeds. We don’t ask for paternalism. We ask for servanthood.
  • We can choose to use our lives for others to bring about a better and more just world for our children. People who make that choice will know hardship and sacrifice. But if you give yourself totally to the non-violence struggle for peace and justice you also find that people give you their hearts and you will never go hungry and never be alone. And in giving of yourself you will discover a whole new life full of meaning and love.
  • Every time we sit at a table at night or in the morning to enjoy the fruits and grain and vegetables from our good earth, remember that they come from the work of men and women and children who have been exploited for generations…
  • When the man who feeds the world by toiling in the fields is himself deprived of the basic rights of feeding, sheltering and caring for his own family, the whole community of man is sick.
  • We shall strike. We shall organize boycotts. We shall demonstrate and have political campaigns. We shall pursue the revolution we have proposed. We are sons and daughters of the farm workers’ revolution, a revolution of the poor seeking bread and justice.
  • Non violence is not inaction. It is not discussion. It is not for the timid or weak…Nonviolence is hard work. It is the willingness to sacrifice. It is the patience to win.
  • We’re going to pray a lot and picket a lot.
  • Jesus’ life and words are a challenge at the same time that they are Good News. They are a challenge to those of us who are poor and oppressed. By His life He is calling us to give ourselves to other, to sacrifice for those who suffer, to share our lives with our brothers and sisters who are also oppressed. He is calling us to ‘hunger and thirst after justice’ in the same way that we hunger and thirst after food and water: that is, by putting our yearning into practice.
  • It is clearly evident that our path travels through a valley of tears well known to all farm workers, because in all valleys the way of the farm workers has been one of sacrifice for generations. Our sweat and our blood have fallen on this land to make other men rich. This pilgrimage is a witness to the suffering we have seen for generations.

More 

Biography on YouTube [link]

United Farm Workers page [link]

An article about his spiritual praxis [link]

What do we do with this?

Pray the Cesar Chavez prayer:

Free me to pray for others,
for You are present in every person.
Help me take responsibility for my life
so that I can be free at last.
Grant me courage to serve others
for in service there is true life.
Let the Spirit flourish and grow,
so that we will never tire of the struggle.
Help us love even those who hate us
so we can change the world. Amen.

Anselm — April 21

Europe, Forerunners (33-1226)

Bible connection

Read Psalm 14

The fool says in his heart,
    “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
    there is no one who does good.
The Lord looks down from heaven
    on all humankind
to see if there are any who understand,
    any who seek God.
All have turned away, all have become corrupt;
    there is no one who does good,
    not even one.
Do all these evildoers know nothing?
The illuminated beginning of an 11th-century manuscript of the Monologion.

All about Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)

Anselm was a Benedictine monk, Christian philosopher, and scholar who is recognized for many intellectual accomplishments, including his application of reason for exploring the mysteries of faith and for his definition of theology as “faith seeking understanding.”

The brilliance of Anselm’s thinking and writing about the nature of faith and of God has intrigued and influenced scholars since the Middle Ages. His highly respected work, Monologium, rationalizes a proof of God’s existence. His Proslogium, advances the idea that God exists according to the human notion of a perfect being in whom nothing is lacking. Since they were first written, both works have been studied and praised by many of the world’s greatest theologians and philosophers. In our set of explanations, we recognize Anselm’s contribution to the meaning of the atonement with his work Cur Deus Homo (Why the God-Man?). In it he conceptualizes the common telling of story of Christ’s death  and resurrection as a “satisfaction theory” in the new logic of his day (which he is instrumental in inventing). His work also reflects the feudal zeitgeist of his day, which is interesting in itself.  (Video explanation).

Anselmo was born near Aosta in Italy in 1033. He began his education under the tutelage of the monks of a local Benedictine monastery. After his mother died, Anselm observed a period of mourning and then traveled throughout Europe. At that time, the spiritual and intellectual reputation of the monk Lanfranc, who belonged to the monastery of Bec in Normandy, was widespread. Anselm was drawn to Lanfranc, and in 1060 he attached himself to Lanfranc’s abbey. The community soon recognized Anselm’s unique abilities and assigned him to teach in the abbey school. He was made prior of the monastery in 1063 when he was only 30 years old.

It was during his days at Bec that Anselm composed his innovative works on the existence and nature of God. It was really only out of a sense of obligation and submission to the will of the community that he undertook the duties and burdens of administration at all.

William the II demands Anselm take the Archbishop of Canterbury crozier from his sickbed. By James William Edmund Doyle (1864)

His election to the position of abbot of the community in 1078 speaks to the love and regard in which he was held by his community members. But Bec was not to be the end of his journey. In 1093 he was summoned to England to become the Archbishop of Canterbury, succeeding his master and spiritual director, Lanfranc. Anselm’s years at Canterbury were rife with political controversy. He showed great courage in disputing with William II and Henry I in regard to ecclesiastical abuses visited upon the church by those kings. Twice he was banished while making appeals in Rome. Twice he returned to Canterbury, riding his reputation, even fame, as an extraordinary theologian, negotiator, and statesman who added luster and authority to the cause of the Church and also gratified the monarchs who saw him as another jewel in their crown, if also a pesky opponent.

Throughout his years, Anselm maintained a strong allegiance to his monastic lifestyle and to his intellectual pursuits. He composed his philosophical and theological treatises, as well as a series of beautiful prayers and meditations. People saved the letters they got from him and they are also inspirational.

Anselm held the position of archbishop until his death in 1109. A biography by his contemporary Eadmer provides many insights into the life of this remarkably saintly and scholarly man.

Anselm quotes:

From the Preface to the Proslogion:

I have written the little work that follows… in the role of one who strives to raise his mind to the contemplation of God and one who seeks to understand what he believes. [More from Rod on this]

I acknowledge, Lord, and I give thanks that you have created your image in me, so that I may remember you, think of you, love you. But this image is so obliterated and worn away by wickedness, it is so obscured by the smoke of sins, that it cannot do what it was created to do, unless you renew and reform it. I am not attempting, O Lord, to penetrate your loftiness, for I cannot begin to match my understanding with it, but I desire in some measure to understand your truth, which my heart believes and loves. For I do not seek to understand in order that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this too I believe, that “unless I believe, I shall not understand.” (Isa. 7:9)

A prayer of Anselm

My God,
I pray that I may so know you and love you
that I may rejoice in you.
And if I may not do so fully in this life
let me go steadily on
to the day when I come to that fullness …
Let me receive
That which you promised through your truth,
that my joy may be full.

A song of Anselm

Jesus, as a mother you gather your people to you:
You are gentle with us as a mother with her children;
Often you weep over our sins and our pride:
tenderly you draw us from hatred and judgement.
You comfort us in sorrow and bind up our wounds:
in sickness you nurse us, and with pure milk you feed us.
Jesus, by your dying we are born to new life:
by your anguish and labor we come forth in joy.
Despair turns to hope through your sweet goodness:
through your gentleness we find comfort in fear.
Your warmth gives life to the dead:
your touch makes sinners righteous.
Lord Jesus, in your mercy heal us:
in your love and tenderness remake us.
In your compassion bring grace and forgiveness:
for the beauty of heaven may your love prepare us.

More

Here is another more detailed bio. [link]

A lecture that tells you everything [link]

You can read the Monologium and Proslogium online. [link]

Here is a nice translation of Cur Deus Homo online. [link]

What do we do with this?

Anselm did administrative work because he was asked to do it. He would have preferred meditating, studying, writing and mentoring to having conflicts with the kings of England. Doing what he did not prefer did not diminish his influence, however. Living with an attitude of obedience grates on most people we know. We don’t always know what we want, but it is often not what we are supposed to be doing! How are you working that out?

New ways of thinking and organizing society were maturing in Anselm’s day, he moved the ball along like a first-round draft pick. The English king recruited him for his premier church. You may not appreciate all he did, but you have to admire how he was always “in the game.” Things are moving new directions in our era too. How should we influence them? Are you still in the action?

Rest in the Lord for a moment and settle down. What is the best thing you can do today despite distracting or detracting circumstances? For now, you can pray and worship, that is something good we can do no matter who is trying to get us to do something  else.