|
My blog posts revolve around my interests and vocation as a historian: the intersection of history and contemporary church life, the intersection of history and contemporary politics, serendipitous discoveries in archives or on research trips, publications and research projects, upcoming conferences, and speaking engagements.
The views expressed in these blogs represent the views of the authors, and not necessarily those of any organizations with which they are associated. |
 The ongoing trip around the moon and back of Artimis 2 got me wondering if the Canadian churches provided any commentary on the Apollo 11 moon landing on 20 July 1969. I did a quick search in a denominational paper and found an editorial and letter to the editor that provide a brief glimpse of opinion.[1] I did not have time to do more extensive searches, but I have little doubt there is more to be found by an intrepid researcher. What is interesting is that the commentary reflects current awe and concerns. The awe is no surprise. The Cold War was raging and the race to space and to the moon was a constant concern for both sides. The Russians won the race to put a satellite (Sputnik 1) in orbit in 1957, and America wanted to save face by getting the first person on the moon. The awe was in the accomplishment, deemed to be a “magnificent achievement” and a “giant leap for mankind.” It was even seen to be a success that united humanity, if even for a few minutes. The concern in the editorial was that people would not look to the creator of the moon and all creation but merely focus on the great accomplishment of humanity. Another concern expressed in a letter to the editor was that the money could have been better spent on issues on earth, such as poverty. The images I took of the denominational papers are clear enough to post, and I will let people read the papers themselves, knowing that such commentary in church newspapers was, for some, the major source of their weekly news. Enjoy! (click on image to enlarge)
[1] “Man’s Magnificent Achievement – God’s Greater Challenge,” Canadian Baptist, September 1969; John Mortimer, “Moon Travel,” Canadian Baptist, October 1969.
0 Comments
 St. John Chrysostom (347-407) was an Archbishop of Constantinople who became one of the most famous preachers in the early centuries of the church. In fact, his name Chrysostom means “golden mouth” – a clear indication of his rhetoric prowess.
One of the scariest things for leaders is answering tough questions, for good leaders recognize the importance of “getting it right.” If fact, Chrysostom knew that intense pressure surrounding questions came with being a leader in the church and noted that he was hesitant to become a leader for that very reason. St. John Chrysostom (347-407) was an Archbishop of Constantinople who became one of the most famous preachers in the early centuries of the church. Chrysostom means “golden mouth” – an indication of his rhetoric prowess.
(This is part two of my focus on St. John Chrysostom. For Part One, see here.) St. John Chrysostom (347-407) was an Archbishop of Constantinople who became one of the most famous preachers in the early centuries of the church. Chrysostom means “golden mouth” – an indication of his rhetoric prowess.
(This is part one of my focus on St. John Chrysostom. For part two, see here.)  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_First_Methodist_chapel_called_%22The_Foundry%22_-_Capel_Cyntaf_y_Methodistiaid_Wesleyaidd_a_Adnabyddid_Wrth_%22Y_Foundry%22.jpeg One reason why eighteenth-century English Methodism was such a spiritual dynamo was that much of it was built through the labors of lay (non-ordained) people. In fact, one cannot understand the birth and growth of the movement without acknowledging that vital role of lay people.
 One of the big surprises for me when I was a new doctoral student was the role of chairing a session. I had never before attended an academic conference let alone chaired a session. Yet there I was one day being asked to be a chair. On the advice of my supervisor, I said yes. And that was the start of over a quarter of a century of chairing sessions.
I make no claims about being a superpower when it comes to chairing sessions. Stated simply, I am not an expert. However, I have made a number of observations about chairing based on what I have seen others do, what I have done, and what I wish I had done. With that in mind, what follows are some bullet points of my thoughts on dos and don’ts of this unique and important opportunity in the life of academics. What also follows below assumes an in-person meeting. However, much of what is said can be adapted to an all-online conference.  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CAN_orthographic.svg Despite the surge of patriotism in reaction to Prime Minister Carney’s recent speech at Davos, it is readily apparent to anyone with a map and basic knowledge of history that Canada’s fortunes are inextricably attached to the United States.
Stated simply, geography determines basically everything about a nation’s fortunes. Whether it is security, economy, trade, development, prosperity, or culture, a nation must take geography into account. To think otherwise is folly. Imagine Mongolia trying to be a naval power or have an independent foreign policy. Or Belgium wishing it were left alone when Germany and France were at war? In fact, every war in human history has been shaped by its geography. Sometimes geography helps a nation win (such as Britain being an island) or sometimes lose (such as Poland being so flat). The same principle applies to economics. And that especially applies to Canada. For instance, the population of the United States is a roughly ten times the size of Canada and is a global superpower. Canada’s location between Russia and the United States makes it impossible to have an entirely independent foreign policy. Canada’s industry and trade is meshed with America in a complex symbiotic relationship forged over centuries, and its relatively small population and industrial base makes it impossible to compete head-to-head with the economic colossus to the south. Stated simply, to think that Canada can thrive apart from a good relationship with the US is folly. Canadian patriotic zeal and offense over the actions of the US President may fuel bluster and insults toward the southern neighbor. It will even gain political points for politicians who seek to capitalize on Canadian frustrations. But that is a fool’s game, Clear thinking realism needs to recognize Canada’s limitations due to geography, but also the opportunities. After all, many nations in the world would love to have the access to American markets and industry that Canada has due to its geography. What is needed now is less cathartic bluster or tough guy references to hockey but more wisdom and humility rooted in hard unchangeable realities on the ground. Stated simply, to think that Canada will prosper against the wishes of the US goes against common sense and Canada had better quickly pivot its rhetoric and policies to reflect its geography. To adapt an idiom from the Clinton era, “Its the Geography, Stupid.”  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Icon_of_St_Vincent_of_Lerins_by_Bojan_Teodosijevi%C4%87.jpg How does one remain faithful to the Christian faith as established by the apostles of the early church? For over two decades, I have found St. Vincent’s approach to this issue to be immensely helpful. Just recently a friend of mine, Seán McGuire, pointed out a further aspect of St. Vincent’s teaching that adds another important layer to St. Vincent’s position of such matters.
 Last week in one of my courses I was explaining to students that forty years ago I took a class that required a sermon outline per day, for the entire semester.
 For the past few months, I have been going through the periodicals of Canadian Baptists searching for material on Baptist chaplains during the Korean War (1950-53). While my attention was on scouring pages for references to chaplains, I made sure I spent some time in the early January issues looking for what they said about the new year. In fact, in my over twenty-five years of researching over 200 years of Canadian churches and war, I always paid special attention to what was said at the beginning of a new year.
There are two main reasons for that attention. |
Archives
March 2026
|
RSS Feed
