On July 4, 2011, we welcomed the newest member of the Burns family, Calvin Robert. For those wondering about his name, I thought I’d share a little about where it comes from.

To begin with, Robert is a family name. Both Jenn’s father and grandfather are “Robert.” Her dad was the only boy out of 5 kids and he went on to have 3 girls of his own. From his 3 girls he now has 5 granddaughters and, until Calvin, only 1 grandson. That’s a lot of ladies. As a way to honor Jenn’s father and grandfather (both great men in their own right), and to carry on a bit of the Jones lineage, we wanted to have Robert in his name.

As for Calvin, this name was in our queue long before we knew we were pregnant. After our first son Asher was born, I said I wanted our next son to be Calvin. While occasionally people think it is for Calvin from the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes, it isn’t. However, like the comic strip character, our Calvin is named after the 16th century theologian and reformer, John Calvin.

While there are many reasons we wanted to name our son after John Calvin, I’ll share three in particular.

First, John Calvin loved the gospel. Calvin experienced a conversion to faith, most likely in his college years. After his conversion, Calvin took every effort to help people see, hear, and savor the good news of salvation in Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone–whatever the cost. The cost of this love for the gospel was great and meant banishment from his home country, a life of constant persecution, and the looming threat of martyrdom. Despite these trials and challenges, it was his love for the good news of what God offers sinful man in the person of his son Jesus that motivated him and was at the very center of who John Calvin was.

Which brings me to my second reason we wanted to name our son Calvin, namely that John Calvin used every fiber of his being to serve the gospel. By all accounts, Calvin was an extremely brilliant man and a tireless worker who gave all his energy to whatever he put his hand to (often at the expense of his own health). After his conversion, he desired nothing more than to hide away to study, read, and write. But, obedient to the call of God, Calvin gave every ounce of his being to preaching, teaching, writing, and leading people to Jesus. He did this by preaching nearly 200 sermons a year, writing thousands of pages in books, tracts, and verse-by-verse commentaries on almost the entire Bible, and establishing a school for the training of pastors.

Finally, John Calvin changed my life. In my late twenties I sat in a Bible study class and heard, likely for the first time, someone open the Bible and explain the text in such a way that my vision of God was profoundly changed. The God I worshiped and served was now bigger and more glorious than I had previously seen. The subtle shift was that I now saw the story of the Bible, and all of history itself, revolved around God, not me (duh, right?). I came to discover that much of what I was hearing and seeing through the scriptures was nothing new, but the very thing boldly proclaimed by men like Martin Luther and John Calvin (though it is found much earlier in men like Augustine and the Apostles themselves). As I read Calvin and his contemporaries, I was pierced with a love for the gospel and the God who graciously saves sinners like me.

So, we chose to name our son Calvin with the hope that, like John Calvin, he would grow up with a deep love for the gospel and that he would use whatever gifts and talents God may give him to share that good news with others, leading them to worship the great and glorious God revealed to us in the Bible.

Finally, as a side note, his name is “Calvin” not “Cal.” Just like our other kids are “Asher” not “Ash” and “Grace” not “Gracie.” You have been warned ;o)

photo credit – Ryan Burns. Don’t steal.

I wrote the other day about John Calvin’s call for depth in the music we sing in church. In it was a challenge for those who lead worship to not simply play and sing in such a way as to “tickle the ears” of the listeners, but to sing deep, theological songs that glorify God. Today, I was reading another sections of his Institutes that was directed towards musical worship. In it, John Calvin reminds worshipers that the heart is just as important in worship as the songs and words. In clear Calvin form, he explains it like this (emphasis mine):

Hence it is perfectly clear that neither words nor singing (if used in prayer) are of the least consequence, or avail one iota with God, unless they proceed from deep feeling in the heart. Nay, rather they provoke his anger against us, if they come from the lips and throat only, since this is to abuse his sacred name, and hold his majesty in derision. This we infer from the words of Isaiah, which, though their meaning is of wider extent, go to rebuke this vice also: “Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid,” (Isa. 29:13.) Still we do not condemn words or singing, but rather greatly commend them, provided the feeling of the mind goes along with them. For in this way the thought of God is kept alive on our minds, which, from their fickle and versatile nature, soon relax, and are distracted by various objects, unless various means are used to support them. Besides, since the glory of God ought in a manner to be displayed in each part of our body, the special service to which the tongue should be devoted is that of singing and speaking, inasmuch as it has been expressly created to declare and proclaim the praise of God. This employment of the tongue is chiefly in the public services which are performed in the meeting of the saints. In this way the God whom we serve in one spirit and one faith, we glorify together as it were with one voice and one mouth; and that openly, so that each may in turn receive the confession of his brother’s faith, and be invited and incited to imitate it.

Institutes of the Christian Religion III, xx, 31

Head AND heart are vital for Biblical worship.

Photo credit: Vintage Collective

There was a lot of different worship music being played in the office today. Of it all, I was particularly drawn to the stuff done by Red Mountain Music, whom I had never heard before. While I am more naturally inclined to a folksy sound, I was mostly taken away by the beauty and depth of their lyrics, most of which are old hymns. If you haven’t heard them before, I highly recommend you check them out.

As the various songs and styles continued to be played throughout the day, I was reminded of a quote I read in John Calvin’s Institutes recently:

And certainly if singing is tempered to a gravity befitting the presence of God and angels, it both gives dignity and grace to sacred actions, and has a very powerful tendency to stir up the mind to true zeal and ardour in prayer. We must, however, carefully beware, lest our ears be more intent on the music than our minds on the spiritual meaning of the words. Augustine confesses (Confess. Lib. x. cap. 33) that the fear of this danger sometimes made him wish for the introduction of a practice observed by Athanasius, who ordered the reader to use only a gentle inflection of the voice, more akin to recitation than singing. But on again considering how many advantages were derived from singing, he inclined to the other side. If this moderation is used, there cannot be a doubt that the practice is most sacred and salutary. On the other hand, songs composed merely to tickle and delight the ear are unbecoming the majesty of the Church, and cannot but be most displeasing to God.

John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2010).

Worship Pastor, please, no ear tickling in church.

Photo Credit: darkpatator

I enjoy reading John Calvin on baptism. The other day I read something that has stuck in the back of my head, so I thought I’d share it and see what you think. Here is Calvin’s comments on who should administer the sacrament of baptism.

It is here also pertinent to observe, that it is improper for private individuals to take upon themselves the administration of baptism; for it, as well as the dispensation of the Supper, is part of the ministerial office. For Christ did not give command to any men or women whatever to baptise, but to those whom he had appointed apostles. And when, in the administration of the Supper, he ordered his disciples to do what they had seen him do (he having done the part of a legitimate dispenser), he doubtless meant that in this they should imitate his example.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997). Institutes IV, xv, 20

I feel like it has become more common these days for churches to allow believers to baptize other believers, for example fathers baptizing their children. Personally, I like the idea of “protecting” the sacraments so that they don’t become “common.” But, I also wonder if this is an area that falls into the “priesthood of all believers.”

So, what do you think? Can any believer baptize? What scriptural support do you see for/against?

Photo Credit: Jeremy Nelson