Virtual Founder

Today is the anniversary of the birth of the pastor, theologian, and social reformer, John Calvin (1509-1564). His father, an attorney, made certain Jean received the best possible education—so, he attended the little Brethren of Common Life school in his hometown of Noyon in the Picardy region of France, just about sixty miles north of Paris. Later, he went to study in Orleans and Paris where he first began to explore the ideas of Luther’s nascent Protestant Reformation. He published the first edition of Institutes of the Christian Religion in 1536, which propelled him as a thinker and spokesman to the forefront of Protestantism.

Calvin made his first trip to Geneva that same year while on the way to Strasbourg. He was compelled to stay there (very much against his will) and helped to establish the church until he was asked to leave two years later (for which he was actually quite grateful and delighted). The next two years spent in Strasbourg pasturing under the tutelage of Martin Bucer were the happiest of his life. But, the city fathers in Geneva had a change of heart and in 1541 they persuaded Calvin to return to the city (much to his own dismay).

The first Sunday he was back in the pulpit, he picked up exactly where he had left off two and a half years earlier—as if nothing had happened in the interval. He remained there the rest of his life. Laboring in the Word over the course of the next twenty-three years, he oversaw a dramatic reformation of the church and city—and ultimately, much of the rest of Western Europe. The transformation was stunning. As a result, liberty, opportunity, advancement, productivity, and innovation touched nearly every aspect of life and culture. Indeed, so great was Calvin’s influence that most modern historians (even those who despise his Biblical theology) have had to concede that he was the “virtual founder” of Western freedom and prosperity.

True Lies

To be sure, in the grand scheme of things, “that pesky Meccan heresy,” as one writer has characterized Islam, is just one component part of the whole world-system of unbelief wrought by the Fall and is thus simply one among many revolutionary attempts to counter the Gospel. Or, perhaps better, Islam is just a single aspect of the one great error of revolt against God. So for instance, radical Islamicists from the House of Saud, the Hashemite kingdoms, Hammas, or the PLO have through the years lent support to revolutionary and/or terrorist organizations around the world like the IRA, the Red Brigade, the Shining Path, and the Khmer Rouge to say nothing of their complicity with the Kaiser, il Duce, and the Fuehrer--thus, revealing their essential, innate revolutionary character. They are, were, and ever will be kith and kin, fellow-travelers, and birds of a feather--part of the same revolt against the truth and the Truth.

But during the past 1000 years, the most persistent, plaguing, and noxious of the many and varied pretenders to truth in this chaotic but unified revolution has undoubtedly been Islam. It should probably not surprise us to learn then that the literature of the West has reflected this great conflict in a myriad of ways that we might not have noticed before if our own troubles with Islam had not come to dominate the headlines, define our foreign policy, and give new urgency to the day-to-day mission of our churches.

Themes revolving around the persistent conflict with Islam crop up in the oddest places, it seems. They intrude on William Shakespeare’s plays and Walter Scott’s novels. They make prominent appearances in the great poetic works of Dante, Milton, Chaucer. They form the backdrop for the stories of Robin Hood, Richard the Lionheart, Wallace and Bruce, Don Quixote, St. Francis, St. Louis, El Cid, Marco Polo, Henry the Navigator, Columbus, Magellan, King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. They even make appearances in Pilgrim’s Progress, The Charge of the Light Brigade, Huckleberry Finn, Moby Dick, The Talisman, Greenmantle, and Ivanhoe.

Some have even argued that the very idea of the Western-style novel emerged from songs of chivalry, stories of knights in shining armor, and legends of the crusaders. One of the very earliest—and one of the best—of these tales describing the great conflict between Islam and the West is The Song of Roland. It is one of those strange works of literature that is almost entirely fictional but which nevertheless is more truthful than most history books filled with carefully verified facts. Indeed, its “true lies” tell us much about ourselves, our world, and the shaping of Western Civilization that we might not otherwise know.

Tour de Discovery

The seventh stage of the Tour de France took riders along a 228.5 kilometer ride from Luneville in France to Karlsruhe in Germany—with Lance Armstrong remaining in the yellow jersey for yet another day. Thus far, the Tour has been totally dominated by three teams—Armstrong’s Discovery team, Bobby Julich’s CSC team, and Jan Ulrich’s T-Mobile team. Indeed there are no riders in the top fifteen places from any other teams—and the Discovery team has claimed the first, second sixth, seventh, eighth, eleventh, twelfth, and fifteenth places. This is unprecedented in the history of the Tour. Of course, only about a minute and a half separate first from fifteenth place so anything could still happen between now and July 24 when the peloton rolls onto the streets of Paris.

The overall standings are:

1. Lance Armstrong (USA/DIS) 23:01:56
2. George Hincapie (USA/DIS) 0:55
3. Alexander Vinokourov (KAZ/TM) 1:02
4. Jens Voigt (GER/CSC) 1:04
5. Bobby Julich (USA/CSC) 1:07
6. Jose Luis Rubiera (ESP/DIS) 1:14
7. Yaroslav Popovych (UKR/DIS) 1:16
8. Benjamin Noval (ESP/DIS) 1:26
9. Ivan Basso (ITA/CSC) 1:26
10. Kurt Asle Arvesen (NOR/CSC) 1:32
11. Pavel Padrnos (CZE/DIS) 1:32
12. Paolo Savoldelli (ITA/DIS) 1:33
13. Jan Ullrich (GER/ TM) 1:36
14. Carlos Sastre (ESP/CSC) 1:36
15. Jose Azevedo (POR/DIS) 1:37

The Conflict

The terrorist attacks in London this morning have been a horrifying reminder of the battle that faces us—a battle, in fact, with which we have been faced for a very long time but with which we are just now coming fully to terms.

The reality is that the greatest human conflict of the past century has not been between Communism and Democracy. It has not been between Liberalism and Conservatism. It has not been between Socialism and Capitalism. It has not been between Rich and Poor, Proletariat and Bourgeoisie, Industrialism and Agrarianism, Nationalism and Colonialism, Management and Labor, First World and Third World, East and West, North and South, Allied and Axis, or NATO and Soviet. All of these conflicts have been important, of course. All of them helped to define the modern era significantly. None of them should be in any way underestimated.

But while every one of these conflicts has pitted ardent foes against one another and as a result, has actually altered the course and character of recent history, none of them could be characterized as the most convulsive conflict of the past century. The most convulsive conflict of past century—and indeed, the most convulsive conflict of the past millennium—has undoubtedly been between Islam and Civilization; it has been between Islam and Freedom; it has been between Islam and Order; it has been between Islam and Progress; it has been between Islam and Hope; it has been between Islam and the Gospel. While every other conflict pitting men and nations against one another has inevitably waxed and waned, this furious struggle has remained all too constant. The tension between Islam and every aspiration and yearning of man intrudes on every issue, every discipline, every epoch, and every locale—a fact that is more evident today than perhaps ever before.

That is a hard lesson to learn. But we had best learn it, post haste, or the horrifying scenes of human suffering we have now witnessed London and Madrid and Baghdad and Mosul will be repeated again and again and again--only in Chicago or LA or Dallas or Atlanta.

Brooklyn Boondoggle

Garish Gehry
originally uploaded by Gileskirk.

An ambitious, sprawling, and chaotic design plan was announced yesterday for developing the area around a proposed basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets in a Brooklyn neighborhood. It calls for building seventeen buildings including six skyscrapers, some reaching as high as sixty stories—all built above the arena court, all skewed at wild angles, and all covered in a kind of tres-haute graffiti. Oy veh! If that sounds almost too cartoonish to believe, even by the oh-so-hip-and-happening New York art world standards, just take a look at it!

The preliminary design for the project submitted by the avant-garde developer Bruce Ratner and the dystopic architect Frank Gehry, would add 6,000 residential units (housing roughly 15,000 people) and will cost around $3.5 billion while adding just under two million square feet of office space. It’s scandalously garish—even for one of Gehry’s typically horrendous designs (witness his bizarre Guggenheim Museum in Spain and his silly Disney Theater in LA).

Anyone who doubts that worldviews are evident in architecture simply needs to spend fifteen minutes thinking about where to put the couch and chairs in one of Gehry’s designs.

Tour de Lance Redeux

Tour de Lance
originally uploaded by Gileskirk.

No, he's not a good role model. No, he's not an admirable public figure. No, he doesn't even pretend to be a nice guy--much less a Christian. But, has there ever been a more remarkable athlete--in any sport? That's the sort of question folks will argue ad infinitum for years to come. Lance Armstrong certainly has lent substantial credence to such speculations--claiming the yellow jersey during the fourth stage of what Hemmingway rightly described as "the greatest sporting event in the world." The Tour de France is indeed beginning to look like the Tour de Lance. Will he make it a perfect seven? Maybe, just maybe!

Tour de Lance

Armstrong passing Ullrich
originally uploaded by Gileskirk.

Lance Armstrong began the Tour de France in dominating fashion as he blew past his arch-rival Jan Ullrich during the first stage time trial at Noirmoutier-en-l'Île Vendée.

Armstrong fished second overall to fellow American David Zabriskie on the 11.8-mile course along the western coast of France. The 25-year-old Zabriskie posted the fastest time trial in Tour history, clocking 20 minutes, 51 seconds, to take the yellow jersey as overall leader. He shattered the the old time-trial record held by yet another American, Greg Lemond, since 1989.

Though Armstrong didn't win, he accomplished what he set out to do on this first day: demorlaizing his major rivals by opening up important time gaps over the likes of 1997 winner Jan Ullrich--who finished 1:06 slower than Armstrong, and may have been affected by a crash in training Friday. Alexandre Vinokourov, Ullrich's teammate and another top contender to unseat Armstrong, placed third. But he was 51 seconds slower than the Texan.

"It's incredible what he has done today," said Armstrong's team coach, Johan Bruyneel. Indeed it is. It appears that Armstrong may really be on his way to claiming an unprecedented seventh straight Tour crown.

New College Edinburgh

This magnificent William Playfair buidling on Castle Mound high above Waverly Station in Edinburgh was commissioned in 1845 by Thomas Chalmers for the Free Church of Scotland's new seminary.



Inside the courtyard of the College is this broze statue of John Knox in his characteristic pose: proclaiming the doctrines of sovereign grace from the Scriptures.

1776 and Washington’s Crossing

McCullough's 1776,
originally uploaded by Gileskirk.

Once again, Ben House has written a fine review for us as we enter into the holiday weekend:

On January 1 of 1777, Robert Morris wrote to George Washington, “The year 1776 is over. I am heartily glad of it and hope you nor America will ever be plagued with such another.” History has a way of recasting difficulties as triumphs. It is a perspective that only makes sense if there is a transcendence beyond the moment. We live in an age that too often assumes that the pronouncements of the evening news or the findings of the latest poll are the final judgment of truth and reality. Robert Morris showed both a recognition of the miseries of 1776 and the expectation that both America and George Washington would go on to better things.

We celebrate the year 1776. We remember one event of that year—the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The year of 1776 was filled with a number of great events from the War for Independence, including the siege of Boston, the capture and removal of the guns from Fort Ticonderoga, defeat of the American raid on Canada, the defense and loss of New York City, the retreat across New Jersey, and Washington’s victories at Trenton and Princeton.

That year began with the focus on the siege and subsequent evacuation of Boston. This was an American victory of sorts. Boston carried lots of psychological weight for the Patriot cause. The British army was basically bottlenecked there. The British capture of Breed’s Hill (the battle better known Bunker’s Hill) was a tactical victory for the crown’s cause. But this victory was quite costly in the lives taken to acquire that height. It gave the American army a sense of satisfaction at having extracted such a price for real estate. From the British viewpoint, it interjected a sense of caution in General Howe, causing him to refrain from further efforts to break out of Boston.

This caution was heightened when the Americans occupied Dorchester Heights, overlooking Boston proper, and trained the newly acquired field guns on the British positions. For the British, evacuating Boston was simply a change of tactical emphasis. The British army and navy continued to amass strength in both numbers and resolve. The wiser course of action was to shift military operations—after a short interlude—to New York. From there the British could use both land and sea to better direct the war efforts toward New England to the north and toward the middle colonies of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

The struggle for New York tilted the balance of events strongly in favor of the British. Basically, General Washington was outfought, outthought, and outmanned. The capture of Long Island and later the capture of Fort Washington and even later the miserable retreat across New Jersey should have ended a short chapter in English colonial rule over North America. Washington and Jefferson and others should have been relegated to footnote status and obscurity, as well as infamy.

Several factors prevented this denouement from coming to a completion. First, Washington began conducting his most often practiced and successful military maneuver—a retreat. This is not as simple as it sounds. A retreat puts an army in a spread out, vulnerable situation. Communications, supplies, and ability to respond to an attack are all hindered. In terms of morale, it can be even more devastating: Only losers retreat. Yet Washington’s retreat from Long Island was successful. A second factor that made it successful was beyond Washington’s control.

David McCullough writes, “Incredibly, yet again, circumstances—fate, luck, Providence, the hand of God, as would be said so often—intervened. Just at daybreak a heavy fog settled over the whole of Brooklyn, concealing everything no less than had the night. It was a fog so thick, remembered a soldier, that one ‘could scarcely discern a man at six yards distance.’”

Nine thousand American soldiers escaped across the river during the night and during the morning fog without the loss of a single life. After the troops were safely delivered, the fog lifted, revealing the enemy presence on the shore left behind. Throughout the war, the weather did not always so favor the Patriot cause, but from a historical perspective, we can nudge McCullough’s speculation toward certainty: This was the Providential hand of God.

God uses means and God uses men. George Washington was one such man used of God. Washington’s personal faith and doctrine are disputable. He has been alternately described as an evangelical Christian believer and as a Deist. He was certainly a theist and a man of conviction about God’s governance of the universe and moral order. His theological restraint may have been an indication of a lack of personal faith in Christ or it may have been a characteristic of the times. Even today, many political leaders are guarded in their use of religious language. Whatever the status of Washington’s soul, he was certainly gifted by God and used by God in the events of 1776.

Washington is an amazing case study in the category of leaders. He excelled and ultimately succeeded both as a military and political leader. Because of this, he exceeds such men of greater battlefield gifts as Napoleon, Robert E. Lee, U.S. Grant, and Hannibal. Washington never lacked personal bravery and devotion to the cause. But as a military tactician, as a strategist, as an on-the-battlefield commander, Washington’s abilities seemed limited. He lost far more battles than he won; he retreated more than he advanced; he commanded men who more closely resembled rabble than armies; his military background and training were limited; and even some of his victories seem more like random lottery winnings than calculated strategic military calculations.

His greatest gift was perseverance. He said, “Perseverance and spirit have done wonders in all ages.” He was helped by having some very capable commanders serving under him. These included men like Nathaniel Greene and Henry Knox. Likewise he was hindered by a few who fancied themselves his superiors and who did not hesitate to convey such sentiments. One in particular was General Charles Lee. As Washington retreated across New Jersey, Lee insubordinately moseyed along on his own with his contingent of soldiers. He was content to let circumstances destroy Washington and advance his own career.

Here the British stepped in and, in effect, won the war for America: They captured Lee at a tavern. Washington’s response was careful and guarded, but inwardly he must have been delighted. The British were thrilled at any rate, for they ranked General Lee above Washington in their estimation.

Washington held an army together that lacking almost every ingredient of a successful military unit. It is said that an army moves on its stomach, yet the Continental army was malnourished and constantly in need of food. Pay was sporadic; the homeplaces were often nearby and as luring as the sirens of ancient myth; the cause seemed lost; and the middle colonies were increasingly coming under the sway and flags of the British army. On paper, Washington’s army numbered around 18,000 or a little more than half that of the British. But those numbers belied the true situation. Desertions and illness claimed many of the soldiers. In reality, Washington retreated across the Delaware River with only about 3,000 men. And many of these were nearing the end of their enlistments.

On the south shores of the Delaware River, the Patriot cause survived thanks to Washington’s command and initiative. From here he launched his famous crossing of the Delaware River on Christmas night, leading to his attack on the Hessian command stationed at Trenton. The crossing was slow, dangerous, miserably cold, and risky. Two of the columns that were to participate in the attack were turned back by delays and weather. The march to Trenton was likewise slow and miserably cold. The attack began sometime after daybreak rather than before as Washington had hoped for. The resulting victory was much greater than he had imagined.
In this short battle, Washington’s troops killed twenty-one enemy soldiers, wounded ninety more, and captured approximately nine hundred more. On the American side, the actual casualties in battle were four wounded and none killed. From this initial victory, Washington went on to conduct a spirited defense against a British counterattack. Once again, Washington showed his skill in retreating from the battlefield in the night, leaving the British poised against mere vacated campfires. But rather than simply retreating from battle, he swung his army north of Trenton where he surprised another British unit at Princeton, winning another victory and netting an additional three hundred prisoners. Only then did Washington take his victorious army back across the Delaware River.

In this particular campaign, Washington dominated the enemy in a manner worthy of such military greats as Hannibal or Stonewall Jackson. Up to this point, his success had consisted of avoiding total defeat and somehow holding his ragged troops together through thin and thinner. But in this case, Washington’s offensive kept his army moving swiftly as a sword, keeping the British forces unbalanced at a time when the war was all but won by the British.

The winter of the American soldiers’ discontent turned into the means of victory for the American cause. David Hackett Fischer writes, “Americans have known many dark days, from the starving times in the early settlements to the attack on the World Trade Center. These were the testing times and the pivotal moments of our history. It was that way in 1776, after the decision for independence and the military disasters in New York. In early December, British commanders believed that they were very close to ending the rebellion, and American leaders feared that they may be right. Then came a reversal of fortune, and three months later the mood changed on both sides. By the spring of 1777, many British officers had concluded that they could never win the war. At the same time, Americans recovered from their despair and were confident that they would not be defeated. That double transformation was truly a turning point in the war.”

This story of America’s struggle for independence and its triumphs in the face of incredible adversities should never grow dull or dim in the American mind. Our school children should be taught this story repeatedly. Adults need the story as much as children. The ever-present prophets of defeat and ‘nattering nabobs of negativism’ (to use the late Spiro Agnew’s only memorable phrase) can best be countered by recalling our own history. Whether coming from the morally hollowed-out eastern liberal establishment, the cynical and anti-American wings of the media, or even from overly pessimistic conservatives and defeat-oriented Christians, we need to be rescued from such by the perspective of history the year 1776 gives us.

David McCullough’s new book 1776 and David Hackett Fischer’s Washington’s Crossing overlap in their coverage of the glorious days of our country’s beginnings. Both books are excellent and well-written accounts of those times. Both writers have previous works that are related to these topics. McCullough’s biography of John Adams is a landmark example of excellent historical writing and of a great, though somewhat overshadowed, Founding Father. Fischer’s Paul Revere’s Ride gives a fuller account of a story that goes beyond Longfellow’s poem. He also aptly deals with the greater issues and events, political and theological, which led to the war.
Christian influences in the war are highlighted in both McCullough’s and Fischer’s recent works. For example, Fischer points out that “the hard core of the Revolutionary movement in New Jersey consisted of English speaking Calvinists.” He goes on to reference a comment by Lutheran minister Nicholas Collins who said, “By God there will never be any peace till the Whigs and Presbyterians are cut off.” McCullough cites the British General James Grant as saying, “If a good bleeding can bring those Bible-faced Yankees to their senses, the fever of independency should soon abate.” No doubt General Grant recognized the connection between the theology found in the Continental Army and the issue of independence.

Dr. Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the Continental Congress, and a physician who set up a field hospital for the American army, spoke quite brilliantly when he said, “Our republics cannot exist long in prosperity. We require adversity and appear to possess most of the republican spirit when most depressed.” The history of our country bears out the truth of Rush’s statement. Times like 1776 or September 11, 2001 demonstrate that depressed times and events make for the most glorious history and successes of our republic. The glory and success, of course, have to be seen from a historical perspective.

The Genuine Source

In 1832 in his History of the United States, Noah Webster wrote, “The brief exposition of the Constitution of the United States, will unfold to young persons the principles of republican government; and it is the sincere desire of the writer that our citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion. The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free Constitutions of Government.”