Saturday, December 25, 2010

Mighty God, Mary's Son

I've revised the song I wrote for this Christmas.  I felt like it needed another verse.  In writing the third verse I ended up changing the whole thing a bit. 

Mighty God, Mary’s Son,
Babe all heaven worships!
Humbly born, Christmas morn
Here on earth to bless us,
Die for us, rise for us, set us free.
Starting small, conquer all.
Jesus, born to save us.

Mighty God, Mary’s Son,
King of glorious angels!
Reign in us; mortal dust
Claim for lasting splendor.
Full of grace, full of truth, fill us, too.
Starting small, conquer all.
Jesus, born to save us.

Mighty God, Mary’s Son
Master of creation!
Ancient Word, infant Lord,
Sent to save all nations,
Stay with us, live in us, make us new!
Starting small, conquer all.
Jesus, born to save us.

© W/M Arden C. Autry, 2010

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Mighty God, Mary's Son

For Christmas, here are the lyrics to a song I recently composed:


Mighty God, Mary’s Son,
Babe all heaven worships!
Ancient Word, infant Lord,
Come in flesh to bless us,
Die for us, live in us,
Make us new.
Starting small, conquer all.
Jesus, born to save us!

Mighty God, Mary’s Son,
King of glorious angels,
Reign in us; mortal dust
Claim for lasting splendor.
Full of grace, full of truth,
Fill us, too.
Starting small, conquer all.
Jesus, born to save us!

© W/M 2010, Arden C. Autry

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Immaculate Conception and Virgin Birth

Immaculate Conception and Virgin Birth

The Plumb Line

Straight Answers to Honest Questions


Question:  Sometimes I hear the term “Immaculate Conception.”  Is that the same as the Virgin Birth?

Answer: They are two different things, but they are related to one another in the understanding of Roman Catholic believers. Properly speaking the conception of Jesus in Mary’s womb should be called the virginal conception, but we commonly refer to it as the Virgin Birth.  In contrast, the “Immaculate Conception” is a Roman Catholic teaching about the conception of Mary in her mother’s womb.

Catholics and Protestants agree on the biblical teaching that Jesus was conceived without the involvement of a human father.  The Holy Spirit caused a unique miracle to take place in Mary’s womb, so that Jesus is the “Son of God” (Luke 1:35).  Protestants who are unfamiliar with Catholic doctrine sometimes erroneously use the term, “Immaculate Conception,” to refer to this miracle.  The “Immaculate Conception,” however, is something different.

According to Roman Catholic teaching (made official in 1854), Mary was kept free from “the stain of original sin,” beginning with the moment her soul was infused into the developing fetus in her mother’s womb.  This is celebrated annually on December 8 as “the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.”  This is not based on direct Scriptural statements (although reference is made to Gen. 3:15 and Luke 1:28).  It is based, rather, on a certain line of logic and traditions developed over many centuries, especially in the Middle Ages.  Simply put, Mary’s sinlessness is defended as necessary for her role as Jesus’ mother.  According to Catholic understanding, Mary must have been kept “immaculate,” completely pure and unstained by the “original sin” that infected every other descendant of Adam and Eve.  Somewhat in contrast, Eastern Orthodox traditions teach that Mary was immaculate in actual purity (i.e., avoiding sinful acts), but they do not endorse the Immaculate Conception as held by Roman Catholics.

Evangelical Protestants believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus and in his sinlessness, as clearly stated in Scripture (see Hebrews 4:15).  Since Mary’s freedom from sin is not stated (or denied) in Scripture, Protestants see no need to believe in it.  To the Protestant way of thinking, Mary’s sinlessness seems irrelevant to our confidence in Christ’s work of salvation.  From within the Catholic frame of reference, however, the “Immaculate Conception” makes sense.  Given our different ways of thinking about Mary, we simply have to admit we disagree on this doctrine.  We should not, however, allow legitimate differences about Mary to overshadow the fact that we hold the same view about her son, Jesus—that he is the sinless Son of God who saves us from our sins by his death and resurrection.  That’s the unifying center of our faith, for all Christians everywhere. 

Monday, December 6, 2010

Is cremation a Christian choice?

Question: Is cremation a proper alternative to Christian burial?

Answer:  For this question, we need to reflect on the Christian witness overtly connected to our responses to death.  We also need to respect our human feelings (and those of others) and acknowledge the importance of a healthy process in dealing with loss.

The Bible teaches us that the human body is God’s creation, and that God’s will for our eternal existence includes a redeemed, glorified body like that of the risen Jesus (Phil. 3:21).  When death occurs, the human spirit is separated from the body (James 2:26).  For a Christian, this absence from the body means to be personally present with the Lord, more than ever before (2 Cor. 5:6-8).  Yet the fullness of redemption will not be accomplished apart from a body (Rom. 8:23).  Theologians and Bible students disagree over whether the new body is received immediately after death or later, at the time of Christ’s second coming (compare 2 Cor. 5:1 and 1 Cor. 15:52; 1 Thess. 4:16-17).  The most important point is that there will be a new body.

In light of the Christian expectation of bodily resurrection and the fact that our present bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 3:19-20), many Christians historically have felt that cremation was not appropriate, since it reduces the body to “ashes.”  That, of course, in no way hinders God’s power to provide us with new bodies which are immortal. Cremation would not hinder resurrection any more than would a person’s death in an explosion.  Furthermore, countless millions have died so long ago that their bodies have disintegrated and scattered to the extent that only God could possibly gather them together again. 

Because of advances in understanding the nature of the human body, we can recognize that God does not have to use the same molecules that are in your present, mortal body when he gives you a new, immortal body.  Those molecules are being periodically replaced with new ones during earthly life anyway.  Realization of this (and consideration of other factors such as cost and land use) has brought cremation into more frequent use among Christians over the last century.  Churches which at one time forbade it (such as the Roman Catholic) no longer do so.

So burial is not essential for one’s participation in the resurrection.  Some, indeed, will be alive when Jesus comes and will be changed into immortal bodies without actually dying (1 Cor. 15:51).  That does not mean, however, that we should be careless or disrespectful in what we do with the remains of one who has died.  Because bodily existence is God’s plan, and because that person’s presence with us was embodied, and our interaction with that person was in the body, we will want to treat the body with respect and dignity.  Reverence for life should apply for burial, cremation, organ donation, and other issues.

All such matters should properly be the decisions of responsible persons close to the deceased (usually carrying out the wishes of that person).  In my view, it is just as Christian to choose cremation as burial.  Whether burial or cremation is chosen, there needs also to be appropriate recognition of the fact of death and the reality of our loss and grief, and the reaffirmation of our trust and hope in God’s provision for our future.


[Note: I have had more requests for copies of this Plumb Line article than all the rest of the articles put together.]