Justification by Faith Alone Part Two

''If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathama.''
-Council of Trent, Session 6, Canon 11. 

For those of you that have not read the first part of this post you can check out the link here:
https://themedievalist.blogspot.com/2020/06/justification-by-faith-alone-or.html

Today, I wish to continue my reasons for believing that faith alone justifies a man before God. In my previous post I used the authority of the Holy Scriptures, the Latin fathers, and the Medieval theologians as evidence for justification being by faith alone. I will continue that same argument here. First off, before I return to the topic of justification as it has been understood in church history, I would like to cover a few claims the Roman Catholics often claim about their views on justification against the Protestant understanding of the doctrine. Unless we have heard the arguments from both sides after all, we are not being fair to the issue at large. As Protestants our ultimate authority is God Himself, and God has given us commands and ordinances to keep and obey as mandated by Holy Writ.

Frequently Roman Catholics use the fact that Scripture does not use the word ''alone,'' when talking about justification in their argument for justification being by faith and works. This is a proof text against sola fide to their point of view. But this argument from the Papists falls short of success as the Scriptures don't have to use the word ''alone'' to imply faith being alone. The simple fact that Galatians 2-3 and Ephesians 2: 8-9 teach our justification to be by faith rather than both faith and works is enough enough evidence to imply that justification is through faith alone. When this argument falters, Roman Catholics will then point to James 2:24 as evidence of justification being through both faith and good works rather than faith alone. A closer reading however, shows that James was not contradicting Paul the Apostle. Whereas James is speaking of works as evidence of faith before other men, Paul is teaching that it is faith alone that justifies. To counter Romans 3-4 teaching justification by faith, other Roman Catholics then try to use Paul's discussion of David as support for their view of justification. However, Paul's use of David's fall to sin in Romans is much broader in its application than to that of one sinner. Further, there is debate on whether or not Psalms 32 is exclusively talking about David. Ultimately, while Protestants are able to explain James 2 as complimenting their own view of justification, Roman Catholics have a harder time reconciling Romans 3-4 with their own understanding of this subject. 

Some Roman Catholics try to use Ephesians 5, where Paul gives warning to believers for their own view of justification by faith and works. However, this passage says nothing about justification. Texts that directly deal with justification include Romans 3-4, Galatians 1-2, and James 2. Those that directly speak of justification should then be used as the primary authorities for such debates over sola fide. Ephesians 5 is another text used by Roman Catholics that gives no substantial support for their own view of justification. Until Roman Catholics recognize that Holy Scripture is a higher authority than their pope and bishops they will continue to read their own interpretations into scripture. 

Now that I have discussed the problems with a view of justification by faith and works in Holy Scripture, I'd like to again turn our discussion on this matter to that of justification as it developed throughout church history. Before we proceed though let me make one more mention of thought. While Roman Catholics will attempt to argue that our understanding of Scripture maybe fallible without the guidance of the magisterium, they can also say the same about any Roman Catholic or Protestant that disagrees with their interpretation of the church fathers. Roman Catholic reasoning is circular as everything Roman Catholics believe is simply because the current magisterium tells them to believe it. Of course, the Papist Apologist will always assume their church can never change her dogmas of faith and morals but can all be certain of this. Roman Catholic historians often conflict with Roman Catholic theologians over historical facts as the latter changes history for their own propaganda while the latter is faithful to historical facts whether or not they support any given view that they may have. There really is no way to argue or debate a Roman Catholic until you can prove to him that the modern papacy is the Antichrist from the book of Revelation. For until he sees this fact, he will continue to base all of his theology off off what the magisterium teaches him, no matter how much they override the authority of scripture, no matter how much they may seem to conflict with the teachings of the Roman Church from the time of the Council of Trent or before. The first step into becoming a protestant is not necessarily a belief in one doctrine or another, but a gradual understanding that Scripture is above any hierarchy whether it be kings or the pope. A Protestant must know his church history and why he believes what he does. Until a Roman Catholic sees this, all other point of discussion is meaningless. 

Now, onto the study of justification in church history. Of course, this second part is only the beginning of this discussion that I am working on.  

Mcgrath tells us that during the Caroligian era, baptism was understood as part of justification. However, sacraments such as penance were only understood as being part of justification later. According to theologian Gregg R. Allison, it was Thomas Aquinas that set down an understanding of justification concerning faith and works as would come to be strongly affiliated with mainline Roman Catholicism.  Aquinas indeed, had made a substantial departure from Saint Augustine of Hippo and the Augustinians in general before him. Contrary to many memes and historical claims by various Roman Catholics across the internet, justification by faith was the historic teaching of Christianity, in contrast to the more high medieval view of justification being of faith and works. At the same time, Aquinas's theology was still quite predestinarian, and in some respects, I would argue, closer to Augustine. I think most Roman Catholics today {though there certainly are exceptions}would be surprised how much less belief did Aquinas and many of the later Thomist theologians after him have in free will than is currently expressed by many of Rome's leading theologians. 

As time went on, a justification by faith and works became more popular in the second millennium of the church. Many saints continued to teach justification by faith alone though, as was discussed in the previous post. Indulgences can largely be understood as a dramatic change to the role of justification in the later Middle Ages. Indeed, indulgences had not even existed in the early days of the church. Further, the payment to gain remission of the punishment of sins was a later addition in the history of the church. Indulgences became a money-making machine for the Roman Church during the eleventh century, particularly aimed at those going on crusade. During the time of the First Crusade, it is said that there were fourteen heads of the twelve apostles found in Christendom.  By the fifteenth century, very serious abuses had manifested itself through the use of false relics.  The Protestant reformer John Calvin once said that there was enough wood of the various holy crosses to make an ark. So even if one did think that faith alone was anti-historical or anti-biblical, I find it a little obscure that Roman Catholics can think so of faith alone, and yet be accepting of indulgences. Actually, indulgences are simply not to be found in the Scriptures; indeed, they are quite contrary to It. The idea that salvation can be purchased is quite reprobate. In many ways, the abuse of indulgences during the Reformation era that heated the justification debate, adds fuel to the already-held differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants.

While justification is strongly tied in with subjects such as Baptism and repentance, what seems less common to mention is that predestination is in some ways at the heart of why one believes why they are justified before God. A conditional election view of the predestined, is very popular today with Roman Catholics and Evangelicals. After all, if God chooses men for salvation is it not because God foresaw that they would choose him? Unfortunately, I find many on the extreme free will side of the predestination debates, to generally not base most of their theology on Scripture but upon their own fallible reasoning. To many such people, God only chooses them because they would choose him. Really? Neither Augustine or Aquinas taught such man centered theology that is not only lacking in Scripture, but is also lacking from church history. I find conditional election run into many problems in with Holy Scripture and the absence of this teaching in the Bible is not the only one. Conditional Election runs quite contrary to salvation being by God's meritorious grace upon those that do not deserve Him { John 1: 17, Ephesians 2: 8-9, Romans 4: 4-5, Romans 6: 1-3, 2 Corinthians 6: 1, 2 Corinthians 5: 17,  Colossians 1: 21-23}.  If conditional election is true, it means that we partly deserve the salvation that God has bestows upon the predestined and I would argue that such a view runs quite contrary to Scripture. A further discussion on freewill and predestination will be saved for another time. 

I give traditionalist Roman Catholic John Salza some credit on the issue of Conditional election. He has written a whole book titled the Mystery of Predestination: According to Scripture, the Church and Saint Thomas Aquinas. While I feel that at times Salza misrepresents the beliefs of Calvinism, he does do a really good job at defending unconditional election and a Thomist understanding of predestination. It is unfortunate that the Roman Catholic world has not payed more attention to this theological treatise as it would enlighten millions of Roman Catholics that are so unbelievably ignorant of what many of their own saints that they revere taught on this issue. 

As one can see, sola fide was taught by the Holy Scriptures, the Latin fathers, and some later medieval theologians. Next, I will discuss the history of justification during the reformation era.   

Further Sources: Enchiridion: On Faith, Hope and Charity by Saint Augustine of Hippo, Trent:What Happened There by John O' Malley, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification by Alister Mcgrath, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott, Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine by Greg R. Allison, Systematic Theology in One Volume by Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine by Wayne Grudem, The Mystery of Predestination: According to Scripture, the Church, and St. Thomas Aquinas by John Salza, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent translated and Introduced by Rev. H. J. Schrouder. 

Justification by Faith Alone Part One

 "The very reason why the apostle Paul so often declares that righteousness is imputed to us not out of our works, but our faith, whereas faith rather works through love, is that no man should think that he arrives at faith itself through the merit of his own works; for it is faith, which is the beginning whence good works first proceed; since (as has already been stated) whatsoever comes not from faith is sin.''--- Saint Augustine of Hippo 1*

We have all heard this debate before. How is a man justified? Did Martin Luther invent the doctrine of sola fide? Did the Protestants break from the traditions of the early church fathers?

I obviously realize that this debate cannot be covered all in one blog post. Indeed, theologians on both sides of the justification argument have written massive books on this very topic defending their point of view. I will, then, only be scratching the surface on an issue that divided Christendom into what we now call Roman Catholics and Protestants. This post is just the first part into my discussion on this matter. 

The debate over justification by faith is intertwined with our understanding of how we are saved from God's wrath toward unbelievers. The Bible teaches concerning salvation, ''For by grace you are saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any should boast. ''*2


While Roman Catholics and Protestants agree that salvation is by God's grace, they differ on how we attain that grace before God. Traditionally, both affirm that free will cannot bring one to God before God has prevenient grace brought to them, by which they are drawn to the Creator. The principle difference then between Roman Catholics and Protestants is their understanding of what justifies. To simplify, Protestants believe man is accounted as righteous only by the work of Christ, paid for them at the cross---which is imputed to them by faith alone. As a result, Protestants are to have good works as obedience to God as sure signs of a legitimate faith.


 In addition, salvation is understood as a process by traditional Protestant theology (once saved always saved was a later Evangelical/Fundamentalist teaching). But ultimately, good works are not what saves a person from eternal damnation to traditional protestants; it is faith alone that justifies.


Roman Catholics on the other hand, have the understanding that one is justified by faith in the taking of the sacraments, deeming them free of mortal sin. Catholics also believe keeping the Ten Commandments are necessary for salvation. In essence, the Catholic understanding of justification is broader than a single man or woman being imputed faith by God. Within, a believer is gradually infused grace by continuing to take the sacraments and living free from mortal sin. The long-held debate over justification became a serious issue of contention during the sixteenth century. That a man is declared righteous by God by justification through faith alone in the redemptive work of Christ for sinners can be proven by the Holy Scriptures, the Latin Church fathers, and, to a lesser extent, some of the greatest Medieval theologians. What here will be demonstrated is the fact that Roman Catholicism added to the traditional understanding of justification rather than Protestantism, which kept a closer theological understanding to the saints and church fathers before them. 


The Holy Scriptures teach justification by faith. This is certainly the case for Galatians 2:16-17:


''Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law , but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.''


While Roman Catholics claim this passage is talking only about those Jews that thought they were justified by their ceremonial works, Paul seems to divert any attention from even the Ten Commandments justifying a man here. If true, this is quite problematic for the Roman Catholic position as the Council of Trent taught the keeping of the Ten Commandments is necessary for salvation. 


One of the most important Scriptural texts in support of sola fide is also from Paul the Apostle. In Romans 4: 1-5 Paul says,

''What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. ''

Here, Paul is pretty clear, Abraham had nothing to boast about. It was God that ultimately justified Abraham, not Abraham that justified himself. But what about James? Didn't James teach justification by works? 

 "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?  If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?  Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." --- James 2:14-26

As to the context however, James is a little more complicated. Roman Catholics often point to James 2 to disprove faith alone. Especially, because James is quite explicit here that Abraham was justified by works which may seem to contradict the Apostle Paul in Romans 4. Also James teaches that faith alone doesn't justify a man. 

If we look more deeply at the two texts of Romans 4 and James 2, however, we see that neither Paul nor James is contradicting the rest of the Holy Scripture. Paul is speaking of a man being declared righteous before God while James is speaking of a man's works being evidence of his faith in Christ before other men. Ultimately, then, James does not teach against faith alone---but rather against those who say they have faith, but have no works of repentance as evidence. 


Now that the Holy Scriptures have been discussed, let us turn to the Latin fathers of the church in the first few centuries after the Apostle Paul. After all, as some Roman Catholics would reason, these saints lived before us, and thus had a closer understanding to the theology of the Apostolic era. As we shall see, many of the church fathers of the Latin West, honored daily by many Roman Catholics, actually teach at minimal an early understanding of sola fide. 
  

Clement of Rome taught justification by faith. Regarded as the fourth pope of the Roman Catholic Church by Papist, it is interesting that his view makes no mention of good works justifying. Clement of Rome was not alone in spouting this doctrine, and justification by faith was taught by many Latin church fathers. 

The fourth century bishop, Ambrose of Milan, also taught justification by faith. Ambrose wrote, ''God chose that man should seek salvation by faith rather than by works, lest any should glory in his deeds and should thereby incur sin.'' 3* ---Repentance, by Ambrose of Milan

 Augustine of Hippo understood justification as attained through love according to some scholars, including Alister Mcgrath. This certainly shows definite contrast to that of the later Protestant reformers. However, Augustine did not reflect an identical view to that of the Council of Trent. At times, Augustine seemed to understand justification and sanctification as running parallel to each other as Roman Catholics believe; elsewhere, however, Augustine conveyed justification as a legal act which precedes sanctification. Some Evangelical scholars however, disagree with Mcgrath and claim Augustine understood justification by faith.  For more on the complexities of Augustine's view, see Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian doctrine of Justification by Alister Mcgrath and Long Before Luther: Tracing the Heart of the Gospel from Christ to the Reformation by Nathan Busenitz.


Prosper of Aquitaine was a student of Augustine of Hippo. Prosper also held to justification by faith rather than justification by faith and works.

 But if our Roman Catholic friends acknowledge some form of justification by faith in the early Latin fathers, surely by the later Middle Ages such a teaching of faith alone would have been condemned? Actually, no. Not only would sola fide not be condemned by the Roman Church until the sixteenth century, but actually before that several Medieval theologians taught a type of justification by faith. 


Fast forward now to the later Middle Ages. Justification by faith was particularly alluded to by Augustinian theologians such as Fulgentius of Ruspe, Julian of Toledo, and Bede the Venerable.  Bede the Venerable taught ''The apostle Paul preached that we are justified by faith without works.'' Anselm of Canterbury taught justification by faith. 

“Come, then, while life remains in you. In his death alone place your whole trust; in nothing else place any trust;….with this alone cover yourself wholly; and if the Lord your God wills to judge you, say: Lord, between your judgment and me I present the death of our Lord Jesus Christ; in no other way can I contend with you. And if he shall say that you are a sinner, say: Lord, I interpose the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between my sins and you. If he should say that you deserve condemnation, say: Lord, I set the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between my evil deserts and you, and his merits I offer for those which I ought to have and have not. If he says that he is angry with you, say: Lord, I oppose the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between your wrath and me. And when you have completed this, say again: Lord, I set the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and you.” 

So, long before the Reformation era, justification by faith had been taught. It was first affirmed in the Holy Scriptures, confirmed by the Latin fathers, and to a lesser extant, the later Medieval theologians. In the second part of this post, I will address the justification debate particularly as it evolved and contributed to both the Protestant Reformation and to the Counter Reformation of the sixteenth century. 

''No man can say that it is the merit of his own works, or by the merit of his own works, or by the merit of his own prayers, or by the merit of his own faith, that God's grace has been conferred on him; nor suppose that the doctrine is true which those heretics hold, that the grace of God is given us in proportion to our own merits.'' --- On the Spirit and the Letter by Saint Augustine of Hippo

"Sin abounded by the Law because through the Law came knowledge of sin and it became harmful for me to know what through my weakness I could not avoid. It is good to know beforehand what one is to avoid, but, if I cannot avoid something, it is harmful to have known about it. Thus was the Law changed to its opposite, yet it became useful to me by the very increase of sin, for I was humbled. And David therefore says: 'It is good for me that I have been humbled (Psalm 119:71).' By humbling myself I have broken the bonds of that ancient transgression by which Adam and Eve had bound the whole line of their succession. Hence, too, the Lord came as an obedient man to loose the knot of man’s disobedience and deception. And as through disobedience sin entered, so through obedience sin was remitted. Therefore, the Apostle says: 'For just as by the disobedience of one man the many were constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be constituted just (Romans 5:19).'"


Here is one reason that the Law was unnecessary and became necessary, unnecessary in that it would not have been needed if we had been able to keep the natural law; but, as we did not keep it, the Law of Moses became mandatory to teach men obedience, and to loosen that bond of Adam’s deception which had ensnared his whole posterity. Yes, guilt grew by the Law, but pride, the source of guilt, was loosed, and this was an advantage to me. Pride discovered the guilt and the guilt brought grace.


Consider another reason. The Law of Moses was not needful; hence, it entered secretly. Its entrance seems not of an ordinary kind, but like something clandestine because it entered secretly into the place of the natural law. Thus, if she had but kept her place, this written law would never have entered it, but, since deception had banished that law and nearly blotted it out of the human breast, pride reigned and disobedience was rampant. Therefore, that other took its place so that by its written expression it might challenge us and shut our mouth, in order to make the whole world subject to God. The world,  however, became subject to him through the Law, because all are brought to trial by the prescript of the Law, and no one is justified by the works of the Law; in other words, because the knowledge of sin comes from the Law, but guilt is not remitted, the Law, therefore, which has made all men sinners, seems to have caused harm.

But, when the Lord Jesus came he forgave all men the sin they could not escape, and canceled the decree against us by shedding his blood [Colossians 2:14]. This is what he says: “By the Law sin abounded, but grace abounded by Jesus” [Romans 5:20], since after the whole world became subject he took away the sins of the whole world, as John bears witness, saying: “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” [John 1:29] Let no one glory, then, in his own works, since no one is justified by his deeds, but one who is just has received a gift, being justified by Baptism. It is faith, therefore, which sets us free by the blood of Christ, for he is blessed whose sin is forgiven and to whom pardon is granted-Epistle 73 ---Ambrose of Milan

1*Long before Luther: Tracing The Heart of the Gospel from Christ to the Reformation by Nathan Busenitz pp. 124. 

2*Ephesians 2: 8-9

3*http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/lutherantheology.ambrose.html#note15

Further Sources: Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification Fourth Edition by Alister Mcgrath, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent translated by Rev. H. J. Schrouder. Trent: What Happened at the Council by John O' Malley, Long Before Luther: Tracing the Heart of the Gospel from Christ to the Reformation by Nathan Busenitz. 

Why I love The Chronicles of Narnia

 

Every moment the patches of green grew bigger and the patches of snow grew smaller. Every moment more and more of the trees shook off their robes of snow. Soon, wherever you looked, instead of white shapes you saw the dark green firs or the black prickly branches of bare oaks and beeches and elms. Then the mist turned from white to gold and presently cleared away altogether. Shafts of delicious sunlight struck down onto the forest floor and overhead you could see a blue sky between the tree tops. 

-The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe

The Narnia books were some of the first novels that I have ever read. I grew up watching the BBC television series based on the books as well as the films from Walden Media. The stories of Narnia, much like those of King Arthur and his knights, had a profound influence on me from an early age. I loved these stories written by C. S. Lewis from as early as they were read to me by my mother. 

The Narnia stories are full of exciting adventures and quests that you expect in a fantasy story but retain the innocence found in an old children's book that makes the story all the more heart warming. C. S. Lewis left beloved works for us after he was long gone. It is no surprise that the Narnia books have never been out of print. With a hundred million copies sold, the Narnia series has retained its popularity as it has been passed down from one generation unto the next. 

It maybe a surprise to us now that The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe met with mixed reception upon release, conidering that it is now one of the most popular books in Britain and the United States of America. Tolkien was originally not a fan of the Narnia books and feared that they would bring a bad name to C. S. Lewis. In years to come, Tolkien came to respect the novels however. 

Whether it be themes of sacrifice and renewal as we find in The Lion, the Witch, and Wardrobe, or themes of friendship found in Voyage if the Dawn Treader, there is something to be learned from all the Narnia books. In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Aslan the lion, is a figure of Christ that pays the penalty that Edmund deserved just as Jesus payed such a fine through His gracious and powerful atonement for us when we deserved eternal damnation. Like Christians finding unity in Christ, Reepicheep and Eustace make each other stronger as they work together in a long sea voyage unto the world's end in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.  

The Narnia books are fun and enjoyable reads. Lewis and Tolkien were masterminds of literature that made entirely different works of art. 

I love both The Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings. While I believe the latter is a greater work of literature, I will always love Narnia and feel a soft spot for C. S. Lewis. 

So why do I love The Chronicles of Narnia? Well, for many reasons! The biggest however, is simply that I think as long as we enjoy Narnia we know that there is still a young child in all of us-a child that still believes that there can be a passageway through a magical wardrobe into a far away land where birds and beasts talk, a land that is mythical, yet really exists. I believe C. S. Lewis always had such a child in him and that is why he could write such children stories so well as he did.  Walt Disney once said that his films were not for children but for the child in all of us. I doubt not that C. S. Lewis felt the same way. 

There are plenty of morales and implicit Christian theology to be found in the Nania novels. Ahead, I look forward to disscussing the Christian worldview and scholary achievements of C. S. Lewis. More specifically, we will also look deeper into Narnia.  

But when Jesus saw it, be was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 

-Mark 10:14

A Review of Caedmon's Hymn

''Se halga earl com mid landfyrde and draf hine ut.''

In case you didn't know, the above sentence is what Old English looks like. Many in the area of East Tennessee where I live, erroneously call The King James Bible or Shakespeare's Plays and Poems Old English. In reality, these latter works from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are considered Early Modern English. 

Now it is not my purpose here, to discuss the linguistic changes from Old English to modern English, but simply analyze and discuss one of my favorite Old English poems: Caedmon's Hymn. Some of you may know by now from past posts that I have made, that it has been my view that Anglo-Saxon Christianity was actually quite different from what would later be called Roman Catholicism. Whereas the former had strong connections to Celtic Christianity, the latter is largely tied ecclesiastically to the reforming papacy of the eleventh century that gradually saw the rise of the Bishop of Rome over over all bishops and kings in Europe. While the discussion of the theological and ecclesiastical beliefs of the Anglo-Saxons may not be entirely related to this post, the more we understand their worldview the more we can appreciate their Old English Literature. 

For the record, Anglo-Saxon Literature is the same as Old English Literature. As we look at Caedmon's Hymn, I may at times call it or other works by the Anglo-Saxons simply Anglo-Saxon Literature so as to not repeat saying ''Old English'' again and again. In essence, Old English and Anglo-Saxon language and literature are the same, though Anglo-Saxon may sound clearer to those ignorant of the true meaning of Old English Literature. 

Now before, I discuss Caedmon's Hymn, I would like to add very brief summaries on Anglo-Saxon history before and after this hymn was written. For historical information on the Saxons, you should check out my five previous posts on Orthodox Britain.    

In the previous post on Anglo-Saxon Literature, I discussed some about how the Saxons wrote in Old English, which strongly differed from present English. Old English, also known as Anglo-Saxon, was the language of many of the English and Scottish peoples before the High Middle Ages. The Anglo-Saxon language included many similarities to the German language and to a lesser extant, the Scandinavian Language. This language was spoken by the barbarian Germanic peoples. Old English is the earliest written vernacular literary tradition in Europe.  The language of English became gradually replaced by French in the courts and Latin in the Church after the Norman Conquest in the eleventh century. 

According to Bede the Venerable, the Angles, the Saxons, and Jutes invaded Celtic Britain around 449 A. D. . The Anglo-Saxon invasion of the British Isles led to the foundations for many political theories that would later help establish the cornerstones of American Republicanism, as will be discussed in future posts. Prior to the coming of Christianity to Britain in the sixth century, the Anglo-Saxons had worshiped multiple deities. The coming of Augustine of Canterbury to Kent saw the emergence of Roman Christianity in Britain {some argue that Celtic Christianity had been existing in Britain since the first or second century. } Over the next several decades, Christianity spread throughout Britain. Latin and Greek Classical Literature was taught in monastery schools. When Alfred the Great came to power, he made sure various classic works were translated into West Saxon. While Saxon Literature became less common after the Norman Conquest, it never entirely disappeared. In fact, the Normans tended to admire the literature of those that they had conquered in Britain. Literature written in the English language later became more common with the popularity of Chaucer's Middle English work, The Canterbury Tales. Much of what we know about the Anglo-Saxons is recorded in the work that originated probably in the ninth century:The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. 

Today many graduate students spend more time being lectured by their university  professors and faculty about Marxism, Feminism, and other leftist agendas than they do the classic English Literature of the past. Books written during the 1980s are more read in many English departments than is much of early English Literature. Until recently, the study of Beowulf was essential to English readers. Now, The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood or Things Fall Apart by Chinua Acheba are read more than many classics of English Literature even though neither of these writers were even English! English Literature has expanded to be far more than British Literature but as literature written in English from any country on earth. What happened to literature not about social justice or political motives? What happened to the Medieval Romances deeply influenced by Christian allegory reflecting the spiritual nature behind all things that exist? If Beowulf is avoided  from literary discussions, imagine the low status given to Caedmon's Hymn or Riddles and other Anglo-Saxon works. Many of the greatest English writers were the ones that read the great literature of the past and incorporated spiritual allegory into their own stories. J. R. R. Tolkien, professor of Anglo-Saxon, took largely from the legends of Anglo-Saxon mythology and incorporated ideas and inspirations from them into his own works. Whereas Tolkien preferred English Literature before Chaucer, C. S. Lewis tended to prefer English Literature after Chaucer. Just a few years ago, a recent publication was made of Tolkien's translation of Beowulf which I have not read yet though I plan to read it at some point. As much as I love Beowulf though, it is not the only Old English work ever written! I have just began to learn about Anglo-Saxon Literature in a college course I am taking for English Literature. I have read all the Anglo-Saxon Literature in The Nortan Anthology of the Middle Ages, though that is just a starter. Unfortunately, many books of English Literature seemed to only touch the surface of Anglo-Saxon Literature.

With all that said, we may now proceed to the beauty of Caedmon's Hymn. Caedmon's Hymn praises God for His Creation. This poem adopted the Germanic heroic poetic tradition with Christian themes, and by so doing, it set the pattern that most Old English poetry would follow. It is unfortunate that so many leftist not only in universities, but also trolls across the internet are threatened by the return of knowledge of the long held Christian literature of the west. Caedmon's Hymn is such an example. This poem is contained in the Ecclesiastical History of the English People by Bede the Venerable. 

Before Beowulf, The Seafarer and The Wife's Lament,  was Caedmon's Hymn. Several other works are attributed to its author including the Anglo-Saxon poems Genesis, Judith and Exodus which paraphrase the Biblical stories. While Caedmon's Hymn is sometimes called the oldest work of English Literature, Deor's Lament, a sixth century work, would be even older, which is contained in the tenth century, Exeter Book. Still, Caedmon's Hymn reflects the earliest of Anglo-Saxon Literature and the beginning of what we now call English Literature. 

Bede tells us in his His Ecclesiastical History of the English People that verse was composed by Caedmon, a remarkable uneducated herdsman. In this herdsman's village, a harp was sent around during evening meals and songs were composed. Caedmon at first did not take this opportunity, and would depart from the sight of the harp as he felt unable to play it. One night though, Caedmon was given a dream by which he felt God was telling him to use the harp and compose a poem about the creation. Like King David, this herdsman would find a use for the harp. Caedmon remembered the entire poem from his dream, and from this dream he contributed to English Literature much in the same way that John Bunyan did with Pilgrim's Progress.   

This simple herdsman was an elderly and untutored lay brother of the religious order at Whitby. He adopted the ars poetica of Horace and took it into vernacular English as the first person to use it for a Christian subject-matter.  Unfortunately, most of Caedmon's works no longer exist. 

The following is the poem in Old English then the translation of it into modern English from the Nortan Anthology of the Middle Ages edited by by Stephen Grenblatt. 

                                               Nu sculon herigean heoonrices Weard

                                               Meotodes meahte and his modgepanc

                                               weore Wuldor-Faeder swa vundra gehwaes

                                               ece Drihten or onstealde

                                               He aerest sceop ielda bearnum

                                               heofon to hrofe halig Scyppend

                                               oa middangeard moncynnes Weard

                                               ece Drihten aefter teode

                                               firum foldan frea aelmihtig

                                              Now we must praise heaven-kingdom's Guardian, 

                                              the Measure's Might and his mind-plans,

                                              the work of the Glory of the Glory-Father,
                                              when he of wonders every one,

                                              eternal Lord, the beginning established. 

                                              He first created for men's sons. 

                                              heaven as a roof, holy Creator;

                                              then middle earth's mankind's guardian,

                                              eternal Lord, afterwards made-

                                              for men earth, Master almighty. 

Caedmon call upon us to praise the Creator. Here, in this one paragraph, our simple herdsman gives few words yet plenty of thought. If we meditated on the glory of our God day and night I think we would find this world mean so much less to us than that of the Heavenly Kingdom. As humans, we are drawn, due to our sinful nature, to make anyone or anything in our life the idol to worship before we do God. Even good men, we often place higher in our admiration and frequent speech of than we do to the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. The longer I live, the more I see that the greatest works of arts in history were almost always made during eras of the past where God's beauty was dreamed of and thought of day by day. To us who realize that the Middle Ages was not ''The Dark Ages'' that it has often been falsely called, we love the beauty of Medieval art and literature that is intertwined with rich Christian allegory. What always made Western Civilization great was its deep rooted understandings of the world found in Holy Scripture and Christian tradition. 

Caedmon understands that all things began with the creation of God. Like Medieval people, he loved nature as we see here, he loved it deeply. However, he did not take it to the level of modern environmentalist that so often worship the creation rather than the Creator {Romans 1: 25.} He has a proper love of creation that points him to the great artist behind it, and concerning the handiwork of the Creator he is able to sing such beauty. Caedmon was fortunately devoid of the so many distractions of our present world, that turn people away from the love of nature. We can hardly imagine conservationism being an issue in his day as the Medieval men and woman spent much of their life in the outdoors instead of in front of their TV or computer all day. 

It is also interesting to mention that in line seven, Caedmon mentions the term ''middle earth.''  Here we see, a later foundation for The Lord of the Rings, that so many of us love. It is perhaps no surprise that Tolkien called The Lord of the Rings a Catholic work, as much like the Anglo-Saxon poems, we see it greatly influenced from the beauty of Christian tradition. Like Tolkien, we would be wise to learn the literature of our English ancestors, especially The King James Version of the Bible, which is the masterpiece of English Literature. 

Caedmon reflected truths and observations of holy creation already found in Holy Writ.  Psalm 19:1 says ''The Heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth His handywork.'' What beauty are we to enjoy in the creation of God as it reflects the even greater glory and majesty of our Creator. Yet despite our Creator's unfathomable knowledge and power, He loves us. He loves you and me. He loved us enough to send Christ Jesus, His only Begotten Son, to be the propitiation of our sins on the cross so that if we believe in Him, we will be saved {Acts 16: 31, Romans 10: 9-10.}That is the foundation of our worldview, that God in His rich mercy chose to save some from damnation by His predestination of those that persevere until the end {Matthew 24: 13, Ephesians 1: 3-6}. Men should stop asking why does God damn some to hell but rather ask why he chooses to have mercy on any at all! We all deserve hell my friends! The only perfect One that ever died was Christ Himself! Romans 3 is the summary of the gospel in that it speaks of that absolutely no one but God alone is good. Only through faith in the finished work of Christ for our sins, will men first encounter an end to their enmity with the Almighty Creator. Romans 1: 20 tells us that all men are without excuse. The principle difference between a lost man and a legitimate Christian, is the latter attempts to live by faith and repentance, as unworthy as he knows he is of God's love and mercy. 

How did we come about? So far, no atheist has come about with a legitimate answer to that question. Like Caedmon, we Christians and Jews know our origins for the Holy Scriptures have spoken clearly in Genesis 1:1 that ''In the Beginning God Created the Heaven and the Earth.'' While Christians know this truth, atheist deny God' existence with no solution of their own to how we came to exist. Statistics prove the sad reality that not only are most atheists men, but fatherless men. We as humans don't always understand the justice of our Creator because we fail to comprehend that unlike humanity God's ways are truly just. Isaiah 55: 8-9 remind us of this as it speaks by inspiration from God our Creator: ''For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the Lord. For as the Heavens are Higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts more than your thoughts. ''

We will wrestle probably all our life with why God seems to show more mercy to some than He does to others. But ultimately, that is not for us to question or decide. Our responsibility is simply to know our faith and believe what God has revealed to us. We have a limited time to live in this dying mortal world and it would be better that we suffer here and live with glory in Heaven than that we be rich and powerful in this world but burn in damnation forever and ever. 

Caedmon's Hymn is more than just beautiful words in lovely poetry. The message of its words are what counts the most, for grammatical beauty can only add to where there is a strong substance of thought to build upon. I think it would be wise for us to learn from Caedmon, for us to learn our inferiority before our Creator whom continues to love us as He draws us unto Himself. Outside of Christ, we will never have joy. We will turn as lost men to everything else to satisfy ourselves with potential happiness, yet be devoid with joy as we know of our damnable condition. Only in Christ, will we find true rest. As Saint Augustine once said, ''You have made us for yourself, oh Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in you.''  

How amazing it is that such a simple herdsman would write so beautiful and significant a poem to be added to the canon of English Literature. Truly the arrogant of the world make themselves look foolish, for there is much they are either ignorant of or blind to. Like this simple poet, Holy Scripture speaks of the saints: ''But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things that are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. ''* And elsewhere, ''Let no man deceive Himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.''* If God could use so many other simple men before us, He can use us for his great glory as well. The rewards are promising to those that obey Christ {James 1: 12, Revelation 2: 10.}Let us follow our Lord Jesus as Caedmon did, and let us take up our Cross every day {Matthew 16: 24-26} as Pilgrims headed to the Celestial City. 

Much of Anglo-Saxon Literature is new to me. As I am teaching you, I am teaching myself. I am also learning from others that have pointed out occasional errors in my posts that I often attempt to fix. As an English major, I find it unfortunate that much of Anglo-Saxon language and literature is unknown, and Caedmon's Hymn in particular, is unknown to so many modern people. J. R. R. Tolkien mourned the loss of Anglo-Saxon culture, and the more I learn about it the more I see why he did. After centuries of being ignored, the Old English language is now considered the greatest Germanic language. No doubt, Caedmon's Hymn, is a must read for any that aspire to know or teach English Literature.

Caedmon's Hymn praises God for His Creation. This poem adopted the Germanic heroic poetic tradition with Christian themes, and by so doing, it set the pattern that most Old English poetry would follow. Let us help revive knowledge of Anglo-Saxon Literature to all those around us. 

*1 Corinthians 1: 27-31

*1 Corinthians 3: 18-19

Further Sources: The Nortan Anthology of English Literature: The Middle Ages, Edited by Stephen Greenblatt The Politically Incorrect Guide to English and American Literature by Elizabeth Kantor, English Literature by Benjamin W. Griffith, Encyclopedia of Medieval Literature by Jay Ruud, The Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages by Norman F. Cantor, Anglo-Saxon Poetry Translated and Edited by S. A. J. Bradley.