In 1944, C. S. Lewis was invited to speak to the Oxford Socratic Club on the assigned question of whether theology is poetry. He did not seem to care much for question, and so after briefly answering “that for me at any rate, if Theology is Poetry, it is not very good poetry” in that “the whole cosmic story though full of tragic elements yet fails of being a tragedy.”

He then attempts to describe the nevertheless superior aesthetic value of Theology by comparing it to its chief contemporary rival, the “Scientific Outlook.” His comparison near the end of the essay is fascinating. The spelling is British.

When I accept Theology I may find difficulties, at this point or that, in harmonising it with some particular truths which are imbedded in the mythical cosmology derived from science. But I can get in, or allow for, science as a whole… If, on the other hand, I swallow the scientific cosmology as a whole, then not only can I not fit in Christianity, but I cannot even fit in science. …And this is to me the final test. This is how I distinguish dreaming and waking. When I am awake I can, in some degree, account for and study my dream. That dragon that pursued me last night can be fitted into my waking world. I know that there are such things as dreams: I know that I had eaten an indigestible dinner: I know that a man of my reading might be expected to dream of dragons. But while in the nightmare I could not have fitted in my waking experience. The waking world is judged more real because it can thus contain the dreaming world: the dreaming world is judged less real because it cannot contain the waking one. For the same reason I am certain that in passing from the scientific point of view to the theological, I have passed from dream to waking. Christian theology can fit in science, art, morality, and the sub-Christian religions. The scientific point of view cannot fit in any of these things, not even science itself. I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen not only because I see it but because by it I see everything else. — C. S. Lewis, “Is Theology Poetry?” in They Asked for a Paper (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1962) 164-165.

Hmmm. Your thoughts?

Popularity: 20% [?]

I used to be cool. I drove a Fiat Spider. I rode bulls. I had an earring.

Now I have a minivan. And reflux.

But I’m on my way back to being cool. I’m starting library school next month. Really. I’m convinced that librarians have been given a bad rap. I am convinced that being a librarian is really a hip profession (seminary students: read “ministry”), cutting-edge, and under-rated. Especially now. Library school is no longer just about dewey and cataloging. It’s about emerging technologies, information architecture, and well, cataloging. But that’s okay — librarians are cool.

That’s probably why Noah Wyle left the popular and cool tv show, ER, and is now starring in a movie series called “The Librarian.” The first sequel comes out next month.

Who knew? I expect some things to become cool again – the return of denim jackets, Mystery Science Theater, Fiat Spiders. But librarians? That was about as expected as would be the return of leg-warmers.

The truth is, I thoroughly enjoy what I do. In this context it is indeed a ministry – helping to train ministers of the Gospel for more faithful service. I love what I do. And I get to be cool again.

Popularity: 11% [?]

NOTE: I’VE CLOSED COMMENTS ON THIS POST SINCE I WAS RECEIVING SO MUCH SPAM TO THIS PARTICULAR POSTING.
_________________________________________________

The trend in academic libraries is moving toward providing reference and research assistance in ways that the patron finds most convenient: phone, email, IM, etc… I’ve been offering reference assistance via IM (instant messaging) for almost a year now, and I’m assuming that type of assistance will continue to grow in popularity.

Skype is similar to most VoIP telephone calls, but is free to other Skype users. I guess the reason why most libraries don’t use this sort of service is that most libraries don’t offer much in the way of distance education support. We do.

So for you distance education students out there, feel free to register for a free Skype account and call me for help. All you need is a microphone and speakers (and camera if you want to see me while I try to help you).

Skype ID: SBTS.Reference.Desk

MSN Messenger IM: reports@sbts.edu

AOL IM: SBTS Reference Desk

Library 2.0, here we come.

Popularity: 17% [?]

Library 2.0 is a movement to incorporate Web 2.0 ideas and technologies into academic libraries. I have made a few attempts to do this, such as

• The SBTS Research Guide – an online wiki which allows content to be edited or added to by faculty and current students in the Graduate Research Seminar. Everyone is invited to consult the guide and give me feedback. We plan to eventually migrate this to our own servers and host it in-house, but until then you can find it here.
• MP3 / podcast introductions and tutorials. This is where I really need some ideas. Instead of creating MP3s to be tutorials, I am thinking that they will be interviews with faculty, other librarians, etc…, on how to use the library for unique research. Jason Fowler and the Archives, for example.
• Screencasts such as this one on advanced “cross-searching” in the online catalog. I think this is the better way to create tutorials. Take a look and let me know you think, along with ideas for other screencast tutorials.

In the near future we will be completely overhauling the library website and bring it into the 21st Century. What features would you like to see? At some point (we have a three year IT plan) we will be adding features such as tagging and RSS feeds.

Give me some ideas!

Popularity: 20% [?]

More new titles of interest in the library:

Michael D. Bush, This Incomplete One: Words Occasioned by the Death of a Young Person (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006). A moving compilation of funeral and grave-side messages given on the occasion of the untimely death of a younger person, this short work includes contributions by sixteen different authors ranging from Karl Barth (upon the death of his own son) to Jonathan Edwards. Nicholas Wolterstorff’s foreword commends the editors choices in saying,

Michael Bush, the editor, could have found many sermons preached by Christian pastors at the funeral of a child that are not authentically Christian — sub-Christian sermons, pseudo-Christian, barely Christian. He has done a great service by culling out these authentically Christian, grief-laden hope-affirming sermons. [p. x.]

---

Paul Johnson, Creators: From Chaucer and Durer to Picasso and Disney (New York: HarperCollins, 2006). If you have a taste for art, music, or literature, then you may find this book of interest. It describes the creative genius in the life and work of people such as Albrecht Durer, J. S. Bach, and Jane Austen, and concludes by saying, “All creators agree that [creating] is a painful and often a terrifying experience, to be endured rather than relished, and preferable only to not being a creator at all.” [p. 286] While not a Christian work, this book provokes reflection on the imago Dei in the human’s ability to create, whether by visual art or written expression. Plus, I just plain like Durer. The art in this blog’s header is by Durer.

---

William E. Mann, ed., The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Religion (Malden, MA / Oxford, UK: 2005). All the topics you would expect to discuss in a typical philosophy of religion class at a typical university are addressed here. From Part I: The Concept of God, which covers omniscience, time, freedom, eternality and immutability, among others), through Part II: The Existence of God, which covers the ontological, cosmological, and design arguments as well as in introduction to theodicy, Part III: Religious Belief, and Part IV: Religion and Life, this book is clear and a relatively easy-to-read representation of the contemporary discussions of these issues. Just ask Wolterstorff. He loves it (see blurb on back cover).

Popularity: 28% [?]

I periodically pull a book from the shelves here at the library and just begin reading. Today, I pulled Albert Einstein’s Ideas and Opinions (New York: Random House / Modern Library: 1994), based on his Mein Weltbild. On page 49, he writes:

During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man’s own image, who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence, the phenomenal world. Man sought to alter the disposition of these gods in his own favor by means [50] of magic and prayer. The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. Its anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes.

Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. That is, if this being is omnipotent, then every occurrence, including every human action, every human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is also His work; how is it possible to think of holding men responsible for their deeds and thoughts before such an almighty Being? In giving out punishment and rewards He would to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself. How can this be combined with the goodness and righteousness ascribed to Him?

Clearly, even the great mind given to Albert Einstein could not fathom the mysteries of God. We must certainly uphold the righteousness of God (which is not just ascribed, but claimed), as well as the justice of God. The dilemma of theodicy then resides in his mercy and grace, not in his righteousness. The question Einstein should be asking is, “why does God choose to have mercy on whom He has mercy?” Personally, I am content to rest in the mystery and be thankful that I have been counted among those that know the grace and mercy of God.

Your thoughts?

Popularity: 7% [?]

Librarians are a funny group. We like to think that we can remain objective, provide services and assistance to patrons without bias or persuasion, and often such is indeed the case. A recent visitor to the library who had not been on campus since he graduated twenty-five years ago received thirty minutes of unprompted, courteous, attentive assistance.

But I have not come to this library to merely be a finding aid for the community. Though I am eager to be such when necessary, my desire to return to my alma mater was motivated not so much by the opportunity to serve the collection and steward the massive silos of information. I can do that at many libraries, and would enjoy it. My desire, however, was to do that here — to serve this seminary by serving this library.

I love this place. Or perhaps I should rather say, “I love these people.” Or perhaps even more accurately, “I love this ministry.”

This ministry is unique. It is academic, and yet pastoral. It is random, and yet intentional. It is pedagogical, and yet studious. It is old, and yet new. It is where I am to be. It is where I have peace (Col. 3:15). But more that all that, it is where my purpose in ministry is aligned with others who have the same purpose.

When I first entered “vocational Christian ministry” (oh how I hate that term!), I did so out of the desire to disciple others as I had been discipled. The powerful percent. The ministry of multiplication. StuMo. “Those things which I have taught to you in the presence of many witnesses, teach to faithful men who will be able to teach others also,” 2 Timothy 2:2.

I came to seminary and studied. I learned. I learned in order to teach. I learned that learning and teaching are in vain unless accompanied by practice (props to Hermann Witsius, “On the Character of a True Theologian”). So I graduated and went to pastor.

But I grew most while at this seminary. Most students do.

A few years after graudation, my mentor in ministry encouraged me to be “strategic” in my thinking — where could I most strategically minister and impact the most strategic group of people? This struck a chord with me given the whole StuMo, powerful percent background to my spiritual formation. And yet I found myself comfortably pastoring a comfortable church. A beautiful house by a beautiful lake. A godly and growing group of elders. Do they need me? Where could I be more “strategically” placed? Lord, forgive me for my pride.

I send an email. A position opens. I receive a phone call. The moving truck comes.

And now I am back at a place which is sentimental to me, where the purpose is to invest in those who will also invest in others — to saturate future pastors with a God-glorifying, Christ-centered love for Him, and a passion for healthy believers in healthy churches.

I do not pretend to have the influence that the teaching faculty have. Nor do I want it. Just give me a few eager students who ask, “Where can I find more information on …”

I picture this seminarian — who sits at the feet of godly instructors in class, and now through my ministry will sit at the feet of godly instructors in print — teaching and preaching the fruit of his study of God, His Word, and His Gospel to congregations of families and neighbors. What a blessing to be the pointer finger in body of Christ.

So I am a theological librarian. But I am such not for the books. I am such for the Church.

So to all who have made this ministry possible for me, thank you. I love what I do. May God find me faithful in it.

Popularity: 10% [?]

In a somewhat tardy observance of Reformation Day (Oct. 31, 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the Wittenberg Door, thus marking the traditional beginning to the European Reformations), I pass on to you the Reformation Polka.

I no longer live in an area saturated by German Lutherans and Catholics, so I feel like I can post this without much pastoral consequence.

Umpah.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Try Collarity. It claims:

The Collarity Compass enables publishers to deliver more effective site and Web search results by providing each visitor with the power to automatically define what is most relevant for them and provide search guidance for future searchers. Every visitor on a publisher’s site becomes both an information provider and an information consumer. Every user’s searches accrue to the benefit of every other user. As site visitors search, the system automatically and anonymously gathers, organizes and shares search knowledge.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Several people have recently asked me about visual search engines, so I give you my short list. Do you think that providing a graphical display (whether interactive or not) is helpful to information seekers? If so, in what way?

• Quintura
• Mooter
• Kartoo
• WebBrain – my personal favorite, by the way.

Also, check out AquaBrowser, a visual search interface for library OPACs. This one is at Queens Library New York.

Popularity: 4% [?]