Caspar Hedio

This reformer is truly forgotten. Finding discussions on Hedio are like finding diamonds in your back yard. A rare thing indeed. In fact, even his Wikipedia entry is only one sentence long, but it is long enough to tell us he died in 1552. It mentions he was a reformer and a historian who was located in Strassborg. That is all we get from the Encyclopedia. Although the German version of Wiki has a much more detailed entry.

Yet, there is much more to Hedio. He was a reformer, and an early one at that. Hedio studied under Capito at the University of Freiburg and then again at the University of Basel. He followed Capito to Bradenburg where he became the court preacher to the Archbishop after Capito was promoted to a counselor of Albert of Brandenburg. Albert, in case we have forgotten, was one who originally hired Tetzel to sell indulgences in his area. Albert never quite went over to the Reformation, but while Hedio and Capito were there he was quite unwilling to do anything against it. Hedio got a job preaching in Strasborg, which briefly hurt his friendship with Capito who also wanted the job, but the two reconciled. Thus Hedio aided Matthew Zell (who is our next reformer) reforming Strasbourg, and in a few months was joined by Capito (who got a different job in the city). That city boasted three powerfrul exponents of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hedio having preached before in both Basel and Bradenburg was quite a powerful preacher according to all accounts. Not only could he preach, but also he was active in the debates for the Reformation. The Marburg Colloquy had Caspar Hedio in attendance. He was on the side of Zwingli in opposition to the Lutherans. Thus, it is an interesting and rare moment to find a description of Hedio from someone who was opposed to him. Justus Jonas, a Lutheran present at the Colloquy stated that Hedio had “as much liberality as kindness” (pg. 501 D’Aubigne History of the Reformation). This was a compliment just in case anyone was inclined to read it otherwise. Thus, Hedio dealt graciously with those with whom he disagreed.

Hedio was widely regarded and appreciated for his gifts of ministry and preaching. Apparently other cities would often write to Hedio to get his opinion. Baden and even the Palatinate wrote to Hedio for advice, which he freely gave, and at one point Zurich tried to hire him, but Hedio had just accepted the job in Strasbourg and turned them down. Hedio also showed his scholarly side as he made translations into German of important works and wrote history chronicles. Some sources indicate that a work on tithing might also have been published. Hedio’s work is almost all lost to us now. Yet, it can be seen in letters and in his presence that people must have thought very highly of Caspar Hedio. A forgotten Reformer, Hedio was early on the field and obviously important in the establishment of the gospel.

New Calvinism versus Old Calvinism

I want to briefly comment on Marc Driscoll’s blog post about the New Calvinism. Apparently Time Magazine has called the New Calvinsim is the third most powerful engine changing the world. That is exciting news. I am not really writing to pick on the New Calvinism. I just feel I have to pick on Marc Driscoll’s definition of Old Calvinism. I think it shows a real lack of historical understanding, and probably a real lack of self-reflection as well.

He has four points of difference between the New Calvinism and the Old Calvinism. He touts his first difference as Old Calvinism withdrawing from culture while New Calvinism transforms it and is missional. Again, a made up word used to define this new movement does not speak well of transforming the culture or “Culturalizing” (since we are making stuff up). It also hard to believe that the Reformation did not transform the culture. I am not sure what history books Driscoll reads, but they are not the right ones. The Reformation and Old Calvinism changed the world. New Calvinism on the other hand likes to use Twitter during worship services and cuss like sailors and use provocative language to titillate the listener. Hardly transforming, in my opinion.

His second definition has Old Calvinism as fleeing from the cities and New Calvinism flocking to them. I will just give him this one as how “old” Old Calvinism is he attacking? This probably has a little merit to it, so we will give him this one.

His third definition has Old Calvinism as favoring cessationistic with regards to the Holy Spirits miraculous gifts while New Calvinism embraces Continuationism. This is dead on and one major difference. I will not debate how wrong New Calvinism is here, but this is a very major difference.

His fourth point has Old Calvinism as fearful and suspicious while the New Calvinism is loving and open to others. While this is clearly a slanted view, I think he underestimates the value of fear. Bridge building is one thing, but unwilling to denounce is quite another. I also think that this point undercuts his first point. They are not transforming culture, but building bridges to it. If you have not read the book Young Restless and Reformed you probably ought to. That is a good tour of New Calvinism. But in that book we see people trying to minister the gospel in the milieu of the culture. Rap songs speaking Calvinism. Driscoll would no doubt point out that it is bridge building and reaching the young, but is it compromising? New Calvinism is not really dealing with these tough questions just as they ducked them in the book. Fear sometimes protects. Suspicion is often founded on solid ground.

I am not saying New Calvinism is dumb or wrong. I am all for people holding to New Calvinsim, but it is not Reformed. I will not be wearing a Jonathon Edwards is My Homeboy T-Shirts, but I would rather someone wear that than a Che T-Shirt. Still, I believe the main difference is that Old Calvinism is Time tested and allows Biblical Truth to sink to every area of life. New Calvinism is enamoured with the truth of Predestination and Sovereignty, but they have not yet had time to work out the kinks. When they do, they will either be a fad passed away or they will become Old Calvinists too.

Forgotten Reformer: Wolfgang Capito

This reformer is forgotten by most. However, his work was quite influential and the reasons he has been looked over are beyond me. Perhaps it is because his beginning is not quite as praise worthy as Luther’s or Zwingli’s. Not everyone in the Reformation immediately understood the need to publicly break with the Roman Church. Capito was one of those who thought a stealth campaign from within the church might be more effective. Luther regularly denounced him for this, but eventually Capito comes out in the open about his beliefs and becomes a great reformer.

Capito’s birth is unknown, but it is probably in the 1480’s. He attended the University of Ingolstadt in 1501, Heidelberg in 1504, and got his degree from Freiburg as well as a Master of Arts in 1506. He would have known then the Dean of Freiburg, Johann Eck, the famed Roman apologist. Capito himself went on to serve as dean in 1511 showing a great intellect. He did earn a doctorate in 1515. By 1516 Capito is friendly with Erasmus showing that perhaps Capito was brought into the Reformation through the Renaissance. He preached in Basel from around 1515 to 1520, which would have given him ample opportunity to meet and learn from Erasmus. The two became good friends. In Basel we see Capito begin to correspond with Luther. In 1520, Capito went to Brandenburg to serve the Archbishop of Mainz as a court preacher. Here Capito tried to influence Archbishop Albert to favor the Reformation. He succeeded only in getting Albert to take a neutral stance. He brought with him several people including Caspar Hedio (who we will examine next) that were also Reformers although not openly. This shows that by 1520 Capito favors the Reformation, but is not yet willing to publicly break with Rome. In 1522, Capito won a suit in papal court that gave him the possession of the provostship of St. Thomas in Strasborg. It was given to him with the express eye to keep him in the church. It was awarded to him again after an appeal in 1523 that he should not follow the path of Luther now that he had been given this job. Yet, that year Luther published his letters with Capito in order to “out” him as a Reformer and the Papal court reversed its decision. Captio went to Strasborg anyway and took possession of the job and then the divided town council of Strasborg would not remove him from his job. Capito became a Reformer with Matthew Zell in Strasborg in 1523 leading that city down the path of the Reformation.

When Martin Bucer arrives, Bucer assumes a leading role in Strasborg, but Capito was always there. Capito is there at every major event and serving the people of Strasborg constantly with the Word of God. Bucer was the front man, and perhaps the better preacher, but Capito served using his scholarly gifts as well. In 1527, he wrote a catechism for use in the city’s churches. It is Capito who first among the Reformers champions the idea of Sunday, the Lord’s Day, as being the New Testament Sabbath. Capito made sure that Oecolampadius’s Commentaries were published in Strasborg, and made sure that he himself preached on OT books that had been mostly neglected and forgotten by the Roman Catholic Church like Hosea. While Capito worked with Bucer in Bucer’s attempts to unify the Lutherans and the Reformed, Capito held a more Zwinglian view on the Lord’s Supper and his works usually reflect that understanding. Preaching in St. Peter the Younger Church in Strasborg he probably imparted this understanding of the Lord’s Supper to his people.

Capito also advanced the Reformation in the way that we seldom think of: children. It is unclear how many Capito had, but he did have at least one. Capito married the widow of John Oecolampadius, and had a child with her who grew up to be a Reformed pastor himself. In fact, Wolfgang Meyer, the Basel delegate to the Synod of Dort, is the descendant of Wolfgang Capito. And yes, the first name Wolfgang was in honor of Wolfgang Capito. This shows that Capito not only imparted biblical truth from the pulpit, but in his home as well. Such things cannot be underestimated.

Capito was a biblical scholar, a legal scholar, a Reformer, and a good theologian. He is one who needs to be remembered when we think of the Reformers. May he be forgotten no more.

Children as Global Warming Agents

If you ever had any doubt about the culture wars, now is the time to pay attention and see for yourself.

Liberals are often talked about as loving the Culture of Death. They favor Euthenasia, abortion, and embryo stem cell research. Well, add to that now the Chinese one child policy all in the name of Global Warming. That is right, your children put off too much carbon dioxide. They are a danger to the planet. Population control: morally offensive liberal agenda item #387

Forgotten Reformer #3: Berthold Haller

Another forgotten Reformer who languishes in the shadow of John Calvin is the Reformer of Bern: Berthold Haller. Berthold Haller was born in 1492 in Wurttenburg. The man learned at the feet of a professor in Bern who taught the evangelical gospel. Later Haller went onto Pforzheim where he met Melanchthon. He came back from his studies a clear thinking Reformed believer and he taught those truths to his flock in Bern. He was already preaching the evangelical gospel before he ever met Zwingli, which was in 1521. Haller was a key figure in the Baden disputation of 1525, which was officially judged to be won by the Romanists by the Romanist city council of Baden, although the fact Baden declares for the Reformation less than five years later cries of a different winner. Haller also served as a leader at the Bern Disputation the following year in 1526. As the pastor of Bern, it was Haller who wrote the Ten Theses that were debated. Of course the Reformed City Council gave the victory to the Reformers, and then Oecolampadius and Zwingli subscribed to the Ten Theses making it the first consensus Reformed document. Haller should be remembered at least for that contribution.

However, we ought to remember him for even more. Let us not forget that Geneva was a small city state that would not exist without the protection of the Canton of Bern. It was always to the people at Bern that Calvin and Farel had to report. Bern was the authority over Geneva. Bern was in a unique position as the link between the French speaking Reformation and the German speaking Reformation. The majority of Bern spoke German, but the small district of Vaud spoke French. This made Bern a power player in the French side of the Reformed Reformation. Refugees from France poured into Vaud as well as Geneva, and Bern helped make sure that both places were stocked with good Reformed ministers. Now a lot of that happened after the death of Berthold Haller in 1536, but all of the ground work for it was laid by Berthold.

Berthold Haller also ought to be remembered as one of the men who held the Reformation together. For this he gets little to no credit today. The Reformation was not a smooth ride from Zwingli to Calvin as some text books might make you think. The year 1531 was a devastating year for the Reformed Reformation. That year the Romanists crushed the Protestant Swiss in a war and saw the death of Zwingli on the battlefield. An illness killed John Oecolampadius in that same year. The two leading lights of the Reformation were snuffed in one fell swoop not to mention the first military set back had occurred which of course produced a treaty favorable to the Romanists and made the advancement of the Reformation even more difficult. The Synod of Bern in 1532 may well have stemmed the tide of Romanism and reasserted the Reformed Reformation. Bern was characterized by massive strife, mostly over Bern’s unwillingess to aid Zurich in the war, which was lost, and council and church now stood at each others’ throats. The Romanists were using this to gain a foothold in Bern. The late treaty had made it very easy for the Romanists to send Roman evangelists into the area. Haller, with the help of Wolfgang Capito (who we will look at next), saved the church at Bern. Reunion took place and all 300 men in attendance wept at the beautiful sight of a church reunited and the power of forgiveness in Christ. After such a powerful display the Romanists did not stand a chance and soon left. Basel and Zurich were able to set up the successors to Oecolampadius and Zwingli. During that brief time of distress Haller stood forth and served as the leader of the Reformed faith. His display of the power of forgiveness and reconciliation is not often how we think of the Reformation progressing, but it is indeed a witness that cannot be stopped.

This forgotten Reformer is really one of the great heroes of the faith.

More March Cheating

As I pointed out a few years ago, the Sports announcers and the powers that be were upset when the Missouri Valley dominated the tournament and the Sweet Sixteen was one-fourth small conferences as was the Final Four. Last year we sat through ESPN complaining about the six small conference at large bids, historically a fairly low number, and arguing that small conferences should not even have Automatic Bids. Of course the NCAA continues to play up to the money and ESPN and lowered the number of At-Large Bids from 6 to 4. This is ridiculous. Just take a look.

The Big 10 sent 7 teams! 63% of this conference is in the tournament. Wisconsin is in without winning 20 games. You do not even have to finish in the top half of the Big 10 to make the tournament. The Pac-10 sent 6 proving the same thing in that league with 60% of the teams in. The Big East sent 7, but that means that just under half of the conference is in the tournament. Exactly half of the Big 12 is in the tournament. This includes Texas A&M who was 9-7 in their conference and lost to Tulsa (small conference) during the season. Texas lost even more than that and they still made the tournament. It is absolutely ridiculous.

The NCAA is also continuing their policy of eliminating these teams by making them play each other as I told you last year. Gonzaga vs. Akron is unnecessary. So is Xavier vs. Portland State. I could fix this without switching seeding. Let Gonzaga play Mississippi St. and Akron play Washington. Then if I can switch one seed, just let Portland St. play Florida State and then drop Wisconsin to play Xavier. Problem solved. But that is not what they want.

Let us also remember the insanity of their reasoning. They think that Small Conference schools cannot compete against the Big Boys, so let more Big Conference teams play. But just examine the results. Last year Memphis was in the Final Game (only bid from their league Conference USA), and Davidson made the Elite Eight (only bid from the Southern Conference). The year before that I believe Memphis made the Elite Eight and Butler (Horizon), UNLV (Mountain West), and Southern Illinois (Missouri Valley) made the 25% of the Sweet Sixteen small schools. 2006 was the year where 31% of the Sweet Sixteen were small conference schools 25% of the Elite Eight and George Mason (one of two schools from the Colonial that year) made the Final Four to make 25% of the Final Four. While 2005 was an off year with only UW-Milwaukee and Utah making the Sweet Sixteen, 2004 had St. Joseph’s(Atlantic 10) in the Elite Eight and UAB (C-USA) to reach the Sweet Sixteen along with Nevada and Xavier (Atlantic 10). Another 25% of the Sweet Sixteen. In 2003, Marquette reached the Final Four after defeating number one ranked Kentucky. Remember at that time Marquette was in Conference USA, a small conference (25% of the Final Four for the math challenged). 2002 small conference schools made up 13% of the Sweet Sixteen (Southern Illinois and Kent St.). 2001 had Temple in the Elite Eight and Gonzaga joining them in the Sweet Sixteen with Cincinnati, which was a small conference school then. That is about 19% of the Sweet Sixteen.

So examining the facts it really appears as if the Small Schools get better and better and fewer and fewer bids. They routinely got at least 5 and sometimes up to seven. Logic would dictate that perhaps 25% of the At-Large bids ought to go to the Small Schools. Instead this year it is around 11%. Despite out performing every year, the small conferences continually get snubbed.

The biggest losers this year are St. Mary’s whose conference has gotten two bids in the past, and San Diego State. Clearly, they both should have gotten in. One day sanity will take over, but until then please join me in routing against every team from the Big Conferences.

Stewart vs. Cramer a comedy of hypocrisy

If you have not been following the John Stewart versus Jim Cramer, then you are a better man than I am. But if you are as sorry and pathetic as I am then you probably witnessed the incredibly hypocritical and mean spirited person interview with John Stewart I do not care so much about who was right on calling the financial crisis. I do not even like Jim Cramer. And I will say that John Stewart has some good points about CNBC needing to be better at reporting the fraud that does occur. However, Stewart said somethings that condemn him more than Jim Cramer. Stewart can pretend he is a comedy show, but he is doing the news for the young crowd and one can tell that he takes it seriously. Just watch the clip if you don’t think so.
Stewart said that the media should not take things at face value. Yet, he does not attack Barak Obama and the media today. Stewart things that the media ought to poke around and find out the truth. Yet, where was the media in such things as the Birth Certificate, or the stimulus bill debate, or Obama’s connection to Ayers or whatever. Stewart mocked those people who wanted Obama to produce a Birth Certificate, and instead to Obama’s word about it despite his own grandmother’s conflicting reports and massive resistance from the Obama camp. Stewart dedicated a long time to mock the people who wanted more time to debate a stimulus bill no one had read. Instead he took Pelosi’s word that it was needed and really stimulus. Stewart mocked the relationship with Ayers during the campaign and took the word of Obama about that relationship. Not just Stewart but the entire media is doing this, yet Cramer was singled out by Stewart. Why? Is it because Cramer was not reporting or is it now because Cramer is critical of the President’s plan? Stewart is little more than a shill for the Democratic Party and he knows it. The change in his program and his partner Stephen Colbert has been palpable. They are clearly out to be attack dogs and protect their President.
The fact that John Stewart can do that interview with the “righteous indignation” that he showed speaks volumes about his hypocrisy. There was a time when John Stewart went on CNN’s Crossfire and said that the constant bickering on that show was part of the problem. Well, now it is time to look in the mirror and realize that John Stewart is now part of the problem.

The Myth of Inclusivity

Several things have me thinking about “being inclusive”. The first is the ranting of Michael Steele, the New Chairman of the Republican National Committee. His desire to attract “one arm midgets” is a sign that he really has no business being the RNC chair. Just like all those who endorsed him such as Shawn Hannity, he does not understand the problem and thus cannot give the answer. The problem is not being inclusive of African-American, or women, or one arm midgets. The problem is not the need to include lots of different groups. The problem is that your message is not believed by enough people. Steele sees the RNC shrinking in Congress and thinks to himself we need to include more groups. When the answer is not to be inclusive but to bring people into your own group. Inclusive Big Tent parties have no union and fall apart to be worse than before. Teaching people the truth of your viewpoint unifies everyone and swells numbers.

But what really gets me is that this is the same mistake the "evangelical" church has been making for years. The problem with shrinking membership roles and declining levels of involvement of young people led many Evangelicals to try and be more inclusive. Some like the PCUSA and the United Methodist along with the United Churches of Christ tried to include women by letting them be elders and ministers and are now trying to include Homosexuals by letting them be members and soon will follow ordination. They could ask the Episcopal Church how that turned out, but they will do it anyway. Other churches that did not wish to compromise their doctrine turned to Seeker Sensitive worship services (pretending that did not change doctrine of course). They wanted to attract people through bands and ditching old hymns in favor of repetitive choruses among other things. They brought in people to the church in some cases, but did they make more Christians? Did they create a unified front with Christian Churches or did they simply sell the heritage of the church for a bowl of porridge. Take a look at the “Mega-Churches” out there today. Right their names down on a piece of paper and come back in ten years. Bill Hybels and the impressively large Willow Creek Church is already in decline, not to mention that a poll showed that something above 60% of their members felt they were not growing at church. Of course not. The church was built to attract people to church, not to actual be a church. People have seen enough and the fads of the culture have moved on. So the church will now decline unless it reinvents itself over and over and over. See the problem is that changing church and worship and doctrine to fit the culture to attract the culture, which is what inclusiveness is, you have one of two problems. One, you miss judged the culture and no one shows up. Or you get it right and you become a slave to the culture and their fads. Willow Creek is a thing of the past, their model for church is already outdated. Now it is the reign of Rick Warren and Saddleback or Joel Osteen in Houston. They are the new Mega-Churches. Ten years from now it will be someone else. Do you really think Saddleback will survive Rick Warren leaving? Or do you think it will still be popular when the Purpose Driven Logo has been put on everything? Does anyone still remember the Crystal Cathedral? That was the Mega-Church before Bill Hybels. It is now bankrupt and the father has fired his own son.

The problem of declining numbers is not to be answered by appealing to more people. The answer is to re-double efforts to convert people to your view. The RNC has a harder sell that Christianity, but the both have wandered off the path. The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging. This means go back to what the Bible teaches. Go back to faithful worship and doctrine. Take seriously the things of the bible like training up your children, telling others of Christ, and living a life in conformity to His standards. Trying to "hip-hop" the gospel is not the answer. Living and teaching the gospel. That is the answer.

Forgotten Reformer: John Oecolampadius

It is time to meet another under appreciated Reformer: John Oecolampadius. John Oecolampadius was actually born John Heussgen, but as was a common practice among the educated elite during the Reformation, he took a Greek last name, Oecolampadius meaning "Light of the House". Oecolampadius was a learned man. First he studied law at Heidelberg, but then switched to Theology. He was very knowledgable in Greek and Hebrew. When he arrived as the cathedralpreacher in Basel in 1515, he was known for his skill in the languages. He aided Erasmus with much of his work at the University of Basel and the two were actually good friends.

Yet, Oecolampadius would travel a very different path than Erasmus. He did become Reformed. Basel was Romanist town when he arrived although a few ministers leaned towards the new doctrines. One had gotten married and had been thrown out of his pulpit by the Senate. Oecolampadius centered his sermons on the Atonement, and he began to draw large crowds. He overcame the opposition through public disputations and through occassional lectures at the University. The Senate then began to hire other men who favored the Reformed Gospel and now Oecolampadius had the upper hand. His teaching and preaching had changed the hearts of a city. His refusal to participate in festivals he considered unbiblical and his unparralleled skill in debate proved too much for the Romanists. Basel was basically reformed by 1525, even the married minister was re-hired thanks to Oecolampadius, but the town council delayed hoping to avoid trouble. The city would not officially declare for the Reformation until 1529 although all hirings done by the Senate met with the approval of Oecolampadius and were all of men who favored the Reformation.

Oecolampadius moved quickly to set up a Classis of ministers in Basel. The city itself had at least four major pulpits and several country pulpits were under the jursidiction and protection of Basel. Oecolampadius made sure that they met every year together to discuss the problems, encourage one another, and make sure that all who were preachers were up to the task. They had exams for the new comers and this helped elevate the educational level of the preahcers in the city. Oecolampadius was placed on the faculty of the University of Basel, and from there he taught the next generation of pastors of that city and others. Oecolampadius went with Zwingli to the Colloquy at Marburg where he defended Zwingli's view of the Lord's Supper against the view of Luther.

Sadly, the life of Oecolampadius ended in 1531. Basel would never again have someone of the quality of Oecolampadius, but it also never left the Reformation. That is how solidly Oecolampadius glued the feet of the city to the Rock that is Christ.