January 2010 Archives

Antony, the blessed Rogue

| No Comments

The story of the life of Antony comes from Athanasius, a theologian of the early church who was driven into exile by several emperors.  While he was in exile in the Egyptian desert he met Antony.  Raised as a Christian, Antony was instilled with the desire to life a life pleasing to God at a young age.  When his parents passed away, leaving him to care for their household and his sister at the age of about twenty, he followed the advice of Matthew 19:21 which reads "If you would be perfect, go and sell what you have and give it to the poor; and come follow me, and you shall have treasure in heaven."  Most of the story takes place after this point and Athanasius describes the trails and joys Antony experienced throughout the rest of his life.  I would say that there was no doubt in Antony's mind that he, and everyone, should be a Christian.  Athanasius even writes, "But when he was grown and arrived at boyhood, and was advancing in years, he could not endure to learn letters, not caring to associate with other boys; but all his desire was, as it is written of Jacob, to live a plain man at home" (Callings, 59).  Antony's foremost desire was to be a plain man of God, just as Jacob had been.  Knowing what he would say about public Christian faith is a little harder.  While I don't think he would ever even consider denying his faith, his years spent in solitude suggest that he believes Christianity is more about the vertical one on one relationship with God rather than the horizontal relationships with his fellow believers. 

 

At the risk of being a total nerd, I have to admit that Antony's description of his role models brought to my mind Rogue from the X-men.  "One he admired for his endurance, another for his fasting and sleeping on the ground; the meekness of one and the long-suffering of another he watched with care... Thus filled, he returned to his own place of discipline, and henceforth would strive to unite the qualities of each, and was eager to show in himself the virtues of all" (Callings, 61).  While Rogue may have considered her ability to absorb the mutant abilities of those she touched a curse, Antony felt exactly the opposite, and would in fact strive to obtain the virtuous qualities he observed in others.  What a daunting task and an incredible example.  I know that, personally, when I see a characteristic in someone else that I know I lack I'm more likely to complain about it, or even complain that God didn't give it to me, rather than work to change myself.  But because Antony was willing to deny himself and study these people he became "beloved by all" (Callings, 61).  By taking the time and self discipline to learn from his own role models, Antony was able to become a role model to others as well.

 

I can say that there have been several role models in my life that have helped influence my decision to enter into church work.  One in particular is so devoted to God and turns to Him at every point in her life, studying the Word and devotions on a daily basis.  Another is so eloquent in his faith; he can speak to nearly any audience at a moment's notice.  Unlike Antony, however, while I covet (which in itself is my first down fall) these characteristics, I'm not usually willing to discipline myself until I obtain them.  I hope that someday I can become a role model that has some of those "virtuous" characteristics.  I don't have a reference for it, but I have heard it said that we witness strongly in our vulnerability.  While I may never have all of the characteristics Antony did, I do hope that even in my failings I can still be a role model and a witness to God. 

Tertullian - I love apologetics, even though I probably shouldn't

| 1 Comment
Tertullian, who wrote sometime between 160 and 225, was a Christian convert who established a latin base for what previously had been a Greek based religion (Callings, 51).  This excerpt, entitled "Apology,"  he wrote to the Roman emperor defending Christians from the rumors that were being spread about them (Callings, 51).  He defended Christianity by claiming the majority of criticisms were rooted in ignorance, and he tried to revive the livliness that had existed in the early church (Callings 52).  I believe that Tertullian would argue that people should most definitely be Christian, and very public about it.  He writes that "those who once hated Christianity because they knew nothing about it, no sooner come to know it than they all lay down at once their enmity" (Callings, 52).  As an apologist Tertullian obviously believed in defending Christianity, not shying away from criticism about it.  Also,  because he was writing to the emperor of the time, it can be inferred that he was very public about his beliefs and his defense of them.  In his description of how easily "haters" turned to Christianity after learning about it, it seems as though he's arguing that it is "that easy" to be a Christian.  The fact that he is arguing against rumors and criticisms that are focused on Christians shows that Christian life wasn't necessarily easy.

Tertullian responds to criticisms of sacrificing by saying "we do not worship your gods, because we know that there are no such beings.  This, therefore, is what you should do: you should call on us to demonstrate their non-existence, and thereby prove that they have no claim to adoration; for only if your gods were truly so, would there be any obligation to render divine homage to them...." (Callings, 54).  If I was to rewrite this today, I think it would say we don't pay homage to your gods because they don't exist, and there's no point in recognizing fictional beings (there are probably those who would argue that recognizing is too general of a term, but here I mean recognizing as one worthy of worship and sacrifice).  He makes a good point, but one that probably wasn't satisfactory to the Romans.  It's easy for those who are on his side to support his argument, but those who do believe that their gods exists are not going to see this as a satisfactory answer.  I do think he raises a better point in his discussion of the behavior Christians have after converting, and therefore their influence on Roman society.  "The father, who used to be so patient, now disinherits his son even though he is now obedient" (Callings, 53).  He's arguing that while Christianity in fact makes citizens better at their roles, the world instead views them as worse at them.  It's ironic, and I think this is a really good argument. 

I think Tertullian would agree that the two criticisms he presents here would apply to our world today as well.  For one, I think his ignorance argument still stands.  A lot of Christian criticism steams from the way Christians behave and act in spite of what they profess to believe.  If both Christians and non-Christians took the time to learn, and Christians live by, what we profess, a lot of criticism would disappear. I also think he would agree that the church today still lacks the rigor of the early church, maybe even in a Claiborne-like way.  What I think is different about Christians today from those in Tertullian's time would have to be the "blind hatred" he describes.  While I know that it exists in our world today, it's not something that I have really seen first hand.  I've heard of people being disowned for Christianity and such things, but it's not very widespread in the narrow section of the world I live in.  I know that's a very shallow, probably self-centered way to look at it, but for me it's the contrast between the attitude towards Christians in Tertullian's time and ours.  While the I believe the criticisms that Tertullian had of Christians in his time still exist, I also think that the overall opinion of Christians isn't as harsh as it used to be, at least in the here and now.

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from January 2010 listed from newest to oldest.

December 2009 is the previous archive.

February 2010 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.