Primary Sources for the Presbyterian Masses

Archive for March, 2012|Monthly archive page

Bultmann Reads Mother Goose

In Uncategorized on 21/03/2012 at 10:45

Like all humor, this sort of thing is at least funny if you’ve not seen it before. Otherwise it may come off a bit droll. This was found today as I continue processing the Papers of the Rev. Albert F. (“Bud”) Moginot, Jr.  A note in the corner of the sheet indicates that it was received from Dr. W. Harold Mare, via Bastiaan Van Elderen.

But my main purpose in posting this is also to inquire about the author of this parody. The stated author is one “Jack Lindquist.” But Andreas J. Köstenberger, in a footnote in his Excellence : The Character of God and the Pursuit of Scholarly Virtue attributes the piece to Dr. Edmund P. Clowney. [see that footnote #7 here.]  Dr. Clowney was not above using a pseudonym on occasion and for years he authored the regular column “Eutychus and His Kin” in Christianity Today under that pseudonym of “Eutychus.” There was even a gathered collection of the best of those columns, published in the volume Eutychus and His Pen (Eerdmans, 1960). I have a signed copy here in the Historical Center. I think it was only when he decided to stop writing those columns that his identity was finally revealed.

But is Köstenberger correct in attributing this little parody to Dr.Clowney? Dr. Köstenberger certainly had the connections to be knowledgeable about the matter. Maybe someone else can fill in the story.  Anyway, here it is:

by Jack Lindquist

I-A    Hey diddle-diddle
I-B    The Cat and the Fiddle
II-A   The cow jumped over the moon.
II-B  The little dog laughed to see such sport,
III-   And the dish ran away with the spoon.

1.  Authorship and Date.  Internal evidence rejects the view that we have here an original composition by Mary (Mother) Goose of Boston (1686-1743).[1]  The phrasing of I-A is definitely late 18th century, since the Goose Period would have rendered it “diddley-diddley” (and thus “fiddley” in I-B).  Furthermore, the sequence “cat-cow-dog-dish” represents an obvious redaction and is a compilation of at least four different accounts.[2]  Thus, the author of the piece is unknown,[3] and its date is set between 1789 and 1820.[4]  The Sitz im Leben of the Depression of 1815 may be reflected in III.

2.  Text.  The received text is very corrupt.  The mythological element in II-A is typical of many other interpolations, as in the anthropomorphism in II-B.[5]  However, I-A may be original, excluding, of course, the “hey.”[6]

3.  Interpretation.  Stripped of its thought forms, the piece tells us of something revolutionary as existentially encountered by three animals, two cooking implements, and one musical instrument.[7]

Footnotes :
[1.]  Discussed in F. Saurkraut, Gooses Werke, Vol. XXVII, pp. 825-906; G. F. W. Steinbanger, Gooserbrief, pp. 704-862; Festschrift fur Baron von Munchausen, pp. xiii-xx; R. Pretzelbender, Die Goosensinqer vom Boston, p. 10.

[2.]  See P. Katzenjammer in Goosengeschichtliche Schule Jahrbuch, Vol. X.

[3.]  Some attribute it to Mary’s grandson, Wild Goose (1793-1849), and others to Wild Goose’s nephew, Cooked (1803-1865).  Both views are challenged by A. Kegdrainer in the 30-volume prolegomenon, Gooseleider, Vol. XV.

[4.]  F. Pfeffernusse contends it is an English translation of a German original by the infant  Wagner.  See his Goose und Volkgeist, pp. 38-52; also his Geist und Volkqoose, pp. 27-46.

[5.] The authenticity of both II-A and II-B is poorly argued by the redactionary American Goosologist Carl Sandbag in his Old Glory and Mother Goose (see Vol. IV, The Winters in the South, p. 357.

[6.]  The meaning of the word “hey” is now hopelessly obscure.  See my articles on “Hey, that aint” and “Hey, what the” in Goosengrease, Fall, 1942.

[7.]  Perhaps an eclipse of the moon?

This Still Preaches

In Auburn Affirmation (1924), Bible Presbyterian Church, Modernism on 12/03/2012 at 08:29

Another of the many tracts found as a collection among the papers of PCA pastor “Bud” Moginot was one titled “The Crime of the ‘Auburn Affirmation’ (A Sermon)”. This tract was authored by the Rev. Ira Miller, and is dated 4 February 1942. Miller had been a minister in the Presbyterian Church,U.S.A., from around 1906 until 1942, at which point he was entered on their rolls as honorably retired. He attended the Fifth General Synod of the Bible Presbyterian Church in 1942 and in November of that year, transferred his credentials to the BPC. He was active in the BPC Presbytery of the Midwest, and served as the moderator of Session when the First Bible Presbyterian Church of St. Louis was without a pastor, up until that church called the Rev. Francis A. Schaeffer. Rev. Miller even participated in Schaeffer’s installation as pastor, with Miller giving the Charge to the Congregation. By 1948 he was no longer on the roll of Presbytery and we think he may have moved to California.


But if any provideth not for his own, and
specially for his own household, he hath
denied the faith, and is worse than an unbeliever.”
(I Tim. 5:8, R.V.)


Let no one suppose that I am ignorant, or seeking to take advantage of your ignorance, in denying that Paul is here speaking of provision for the PHYSICAL and TEMPORAL needs, especially of a man’s parents, widow and children. He is exposing to well-deserved contempt the conduct of a man who would be indifferent to these while at the same time pretending to be devoted to the service of God. His faith, says Paul, is worse than NO faith ; his service worse than NO service ; his state worse than an unbeliever’s state. The condemnation is severe.


But let us suppose this same man, or the men of an entire Christian congregation, or the minister of that congregation, or the entire denomination to which that congregation belongs, is equally indifferent to proper provision for SOULS under their care? Is that not a greater fault? Consider that the soul, unlike the body, is not for a fleeting day, and then dissolves into dust. No, it is for ETERNITY, and must live eternally, or die eternally. Then consider that God has constituted each father a shepherd and provider for the souls of his household, each congregation for its people, each pastor for his flock. If they neglect this duty, would not the guilt be greater, seeing that eternal, and NOT temporal loss, would be the certain consequence? Then should not the condemnation be more severe even than this of Paul here? Read the rest of this entry »

Early Tracts by Francis Schaeffer, Part 5 : Children for Christ

In Francis A. Schaeffer on 09/03/2012 at 10:36

These last three tracts by Dr. Schaeffer all concern the Children for Christ organization which he established in 1945. When Schaeffer moved to St. Louis to serve as the pastor of the First Bible Presbyterian Church, he had already been quite involved with children’s ministry, both with his first church in Grove City, PA and at the church in Chester, PA, under the leadership of the Rev. Abraham Lance Lathem. Schaeffer had employed Lathem’s Summer Bible School program immediately upon arriving at his first pastorate and took that church from twenty members to one hundred members in just two years. Regrettably, under Dr. Lathem, Schaeffer was tasked largely with overseeing the construction of a new church (during the Great Depression and constructed by the members of the congregation!). Schaeffer soldiered on through the construction, but when the building was built and Schaeffer was ready to get back to full time ministry, Lathem’s decision to construct an education building prompted Schaeffer’s departure to another pastorate.

In those same years, Dr. Lathem had been pondering the need for something more than just a summer Bible program. A solid year-round program was needed. Schaeffer shared that same concern, and not long after his arrival in St. Louis, after an initial association with the Child Evangelism Association, Dr. Schaeffer and others in the St. Louis church came up with the Children for Christ program in 1944. Named after a well-known book by Andrew Murray, the program was described as “a complete, integrated program for the entire children’s work of the local church or mission.”

The first tract, above, is a simple tri-fold promotional tract telling about the program. The content of the tract places the publication date around 1949-1950.  The second tract, “7 Points . . . How?” is dated 1946 and is a more extensive description of the full program of the Children for Christ ministry. This tract bears only the St. Louis address of the ministry, which incidentally was the address of the church manse. Pictured on the cover of the tract are two children from the St. Louis church, Susan Schaeffer and Nick Barker. The original photographer’s still shots for this cover were recently located among the Papers of the Rev. Albert F. (“Bud”) Moginot, Jr.

By 1945 the program had become national. Our third tract thus bears a copyright date of 1945, but was printed around 1949-1950, given that the cover has both the St. Louis address for the ministry and an address in Switzerland for the director, Dr. Schaeffer, who had by this time relocated his family there in order to begin a ministry of church planting, as well as overseeing the establishment of Children for Christ chapters in Europe.

The seven points of the Children for Christ program were as follows:
Evangelization of the Children
1. Home Classes.
2. Dismissed or Released Time Classes.
3. Open-Air Work.
Directing the Children to the Church.
4. Boys and Girls Club Work.
5. Summer Bible School.
6. Camp.
7. Rallies.

Early Tracts by Francis Schaeffer, Part 4 (1946)

In Francis A. Schaeffer on 02/03/2012 at 15:47

From our recent accession of the Papers of the Rev. Albert F. (“Bud”) Moginot, Jr., the next in our series of early tracts by Dr. Schaeffer is one titled “Peter Versus The Papacy”.  Whereas we already had one or two copies of each of the tracts on Baptism and The Holy Catholic Church, I had not previously seen a copy of this tract.

Like the other two tracts, this title bears a date inside the front cover indicating when the message was originally delivered—in this case, February 17, 1946.

Rev. Schaeffer’s message in this case is shorter than that of the previous tracts. The tract prints out to just fourteen pages in length. And there are no printed subdivisions of the text, as there were with the others. Rev. Schaeffer opens the message in this way:

Tomorrow is February 18. This is a great date in thereligiouslife of the world. It is a great date: (1) for the Roman Catholic Church, because the largest number of men ever to be named as Cardinals at one time will receive their official notification from the Pope; (2) for Protestants, although most Protestants do not seem to realize the significance of the day, because tomorrow marks the 400th anniversary of the death of Martin Luther.

. . .The falling of these two events on a single day could not be by coincidence. Rather, Rome has chosen this time to name her Cardinals to join the issue once more between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. Since Rome has so seen fit, our theme for this morning will be “Peter Versus the Papacy.”

The keystone of the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church is the primacy of Peter. Therefore, today let us see what the Word of God has to say concerning Peter and his teaching. . .

Physical aspects: The construction of the tract is similar to that of the other two. Four sheets of tan 30-35 lbs. paper, measuring 6″ h. x 7″ w. and duplex printed with dark brown ink, folded and assembled to form the signature, with a single saddle-stitch staple for binding. And as I mentioned before, the Moginot collection has copies of the “Holy Catholic Church” tract with this same tan colored paper, as well as with a salmon colored paper. That message was first printed in 1944 and the one on “Peter versus the Papacy” in 1946. Given the related topics, it is easy to see how there might have been a need to reprint the first title.

Early Tracts of Francis Schaeffer, Part 3 [1944]

In Francis A. Schaeffer on 01/03/2012 at 12:55

Continuing with our series on the handful of tracts by Francis Schaeffer, all of these tracts were published while he was the pastor of the First Bible Presbyterian Church of St. Louis, Missouri. That pastorate began in December of 1943 and ended late in 1948. Leaving that pulpit, he then moved his family to Switzerland to begin a ministry of church planting.

Today we’ll focus on another of these tracts which were recently accessioned from the estate of the Rev. Albert F. Moginot.

“The Holy Catholic Church”

Inside the front cover of this tract there is the note that this message was originally preached in St. Louis on 12 November 1944. At that time Dr. Schaeffer had been the pastor of the St. Louis church for just less than one year. St. Louis is a city with a particularly large population of Roman Catholics. In fact, the city is second only to New Orleans in the observation of Mardi Gras. So in that setting it would not be surprising to find many in a Protestant congregation who were troubled by some of the words in the Apostles’ Creed. It is a common concern and misunderstanding, one that the young pastor sought to address. Going beyond that, the tract is also a brief apologetic for a biblical faith, over against the errors of Roman Catholicism. Rev. Schaeffer begins his message with the following statement:

Of all the phrases of the Apostles’ Creed, the one which is most open to misunderstanding is: “I believe in the holy Catholic Church.” Many Protestants, feeling that in some way this portion of the Apostles’ Creed refers to the Roman Catholic Church, are ashamed to repeat it. Let us say, as we begin, that not only does “the holy Catholic Church” have no reference to Roman Catholicism, but it is the very antithesis of it.

Schaeffer then touches on the following points in examination of his topic:
• The Church Is One.
• Entrance into the Universal Church.
• The Bible.
• The Sacraments.
• Baptism.
• Confirmation.
• Penance.
• Mass.
• The Church Is Holy.
• Conclusion.

Rev. Schaeffer’s conclusion provides an excellent summary of his message:

We should repeat this portion of the Apostles’ Creed with heads held high and with the determination not to give up this name catholic, which is ours. We who are true believers are the holy Catholic Church. I am a Christian because I have put my faith in Jesus Christ and for no other reason. My friends, therefore, I am a member of the universal Church, the Church catholic.
. . . Let me say again that I do not hate or dislike the individual Romanist. I hate no man because of his creed any more than because of his race. There is no place for these things in the Christian heart. I also realize that there may be Christians in the Roman Catholic Church; but if there are, they have been saved through faith in Christ in spite of the errors of their Romanism. Perhaps there are Roman Catholics here this morning, and perhaps there is someone here that the Roman hierarchy has sent to hear what we have to say because of the ad we had in the paper yesterday. If this is so, I am glad you are here, and it is my prayer that you will put your faith in Jesus instead of any church, and thus be saved. Do no misunderstand us, we are not urging you to believe in our church to be saved. No church can save you—ours or any other. You must believe in Jesus Christ who paid all the price for your sin on the cross. Then you will have everlasting life immediately and forever. Jesus Christ Himself said in John 3:18, “He that believeth on him (on Jesus) is not condemned; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
For those of you who are Christians, it is my prayer for you that you go from this place with a realization that it is our task to lead the Romanist to Christ. If you leave with any other feeling, then our study this morning has been a failure. By the grace of God, realizing that no church saves, but that each individual soul must put his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, let us be determined that we will bear a good testimony to all who are lost.

Physical features of the tract:
This tract is similar in quality and construction to the tract on baptism. Four sheets of salmon colored paper, approximately 30-35 lbs. basis weight, form the signature with a total of 16 numbered pages. The text is duplex printed with dark red ink. Two saddle-stitch staples bind the assembled tract. Apparently there was at least a second printing of this tract, based upon the presence in the collection of another copy of this title but with light tan paper printed in dark brown ink. I judge this to be a second printing, probably dating from 1946, based upon another tract of that date with the same color scheme. We’ll look at that tract tomorrow.