Dr. Douglas Green Inaugurated to Full Professorship
Dr. Douglas J. Green, coordinator of the Old Testament department at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, was today elevated to full professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology in an inauguration ceremony held at the seminary. Seminary President Peter Lillback opene with prayer, Professors Stephen Taylor and Michael Kelly read Scripture, and Dr. Peter Enns provided a humorous and yet warmly touching introduction for Dr. Green. The inauguration concluded with a stirring charge by Professor J. Alan Groves and a passionate closing prayer from Elliot Greene.
In Dr. Green’s inaugural address, Psalms of Lament or Songs of the Suffering Servant, he laid out a fascinating proposal for a reconsideration of what we mean by messianic psalms. Traditionally, only a small number of the psalms have been considered messianic prophecies, usually only those cited directly by the New Testament. However, Dr. Green proposed that because the NT writers seemed to have in mind Isaiah’s suffering Servant in connection with the psalms they used, quite possibly all of the psalms of lament (and perhaps even the whole psalter) may be seen as messianic-prophetic. The address will be a future Westminster Theological Journal article.
On this occassion I wish to offer my sincerest congratulations to Doug and his family. Doug has not only been one of our most stimulating classroom teachers here at Westminster, but he has become a dear friend. Both Pete and Al today called attention to Doug’s pastoral gifts. I have been the beneficiary of those gifts numerous times as Doug provided wise counsel to me during my sometimes rocky beginnings at WTS. I aspire to be as wise, humble, and gentle a man as he certainly is. May Westminster and the church of Christ be able to receive the blessings of Doug Green’s teaching and counsel for many years to come!
Best line of the day: Pete Enns’s revelation that Doug is a (*gasp*) prelactarianist. That is, he puts the milk in his cup first, then the coffee. This avoids the grave error of the postlactarians, whose position leads inevitably down the slippery slope to having to dirty a spoon to stir their coffee. It will come of little surprise to my regular reaeders that I share Dr. Green’s position on this issue as well. This may make us both unordainable in certain presbyteries, but here we sip, we can do no other.
EXCLUSIVE SACRED JOURNEY UPDATE: Sacred Journey has just been granted exclusive reprint rights to the textus receptus of prelactarianism: Dr. Enns’s manuscript of his introduction. Below are Enns’s exact words on this important docrinal formulation. Let all scoffers be silenced!
It was also during these coffee times [Ed. note: early morning meetings between the Westminster Divines, AKA Enns and Green] that I was introduced to a doctrine that I came to embrace with zeal, what Doug calls prelactarianism, which is the doctrine of putting creamer in the cup BEFORE you pour the coffee, thus, upon introducing the coffee to the cup, the need for any sort of stirring device is obviated. I found this doctrine immediately compelling and completely logical in its simplicity, and I still find myself getting irritated with all other coffee drinkers who, without even a moment’s reflection, insist on a doctrine of postlactarianism, thus needlessly dirtying spoons. May there be a special cell among the damned for these reprobates.
Click "Digg It" to let Digg.com users know they should read this post!
October 12th, 2006 at 11:45 am
A prelactarian, eh? That’s good to know.
I myself am a midlactarian. Since I typically take a bit of sugar in my coffee, I first put in the sugar, add just enough coffee to dissolve it, then milk, and finally fill it out the rest of the way with hot steaming Joe.
But I am in full agreement on the dangerous and increasingly common error of postlactarianism. Perhaps our Reformed denominations would do well to set up study committees regarding this vexing issue, especially as it relates to the boundaries set out in our Standards.
October 12th, 2006 at 11:46 am
Oh…and congrats to Doug! I wish I could have been there.
October 12th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Joel,
In the two minutes since you went public with your midlactarianism on my blog, three web site have gone up denouncing you as a closet postlactarian, or that at the least your midlactarianism is most certainly a slippery slope away from postlactarianism. It’s every bit as certain as the undeniable fact that egalitarianism on women’s roles in the church inevitably leads to liberal theology! It’s a fact!!
October 12th, 2006 at 2:07 pm
I’ve always been a pre-lactarian myself.
Although, yesterday I was a nonlactarian–I was out of milk.
And this morning I was a relactarian because I didn’t put enough milk in the first time. The reason for that is that my milk went bad–and I found that out a few days before when after pouring coffee into my cup; then I wished I could be a delactarian…
October 12th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
That didn’t read right–I meant to say:
I’ve always been a pre-lactarian myself.
Although, yesterday I was a nonlactarian–I was out of milk. The reason for that is that my milk went bad–and I found that out a few days before when after pouring coffee into my cup; then I wished I could be a delactarian…
And this morning I was a relactarian because I didn’t put enough milk in the first time.
October 12th, 2006 at 2:22 pm
If you are adding milk to a mug to which you had already added milk before….aren’t you an analactarian?
October 12th, 2006 at 3:35 pm
Somehow I just knew the Sacred Journey would muse on the inauguration. Its was good to see so many men with such great scholarly acume having a good time.
Honestly i was struck by the deep sense of community displayed between these men, my prayer is that sense of fellowship would be shared across the whole faculty community at WTS.
And that the virtues weighed in Doug’s heart, students first and my own personal academic acume second; will as well be shared.
Sets
PS perhaps the issue is a heart matter, perhaps “bubble tea needs to be substituted for coffee”, unfortunately we are still over bearingly Anglo at WTS aren’t we :)Then again the matter would be raise in a different contextual fashion, sugar would be substituted for the ball like substances
October 12th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
Amen to your prayers for Westminster, Tony.
As for Ango-centrism at WTS…don’t you know that salvation is to Western Civilization first and then to the LDNs?
October 12th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
Mark: I presume that the fact that I take my coffee black makes me an alactarian? Hmmmm. Like living in a state of alacrity.
Doug: Congratulations, sir.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
Although I think you are in danger of confusing eschatology with lactology, a fatal flaw which led both Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons to reject coffee drinking altogether. I do not think you want to go down that road.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
Mark, I won’t go down that street. Why? Well, I never really learned to ride a bike, and well … seemingly, a place in the peloton is what gets you a place in Heaven. I would be so, so, so in trouble.
October 12th, 2006 at 9:26 pm
A sincere thank you to Mark and the others who have offered their congratulations.
BTW, why am I not surprised that Pete Enns’s pre/postlactarian comments proved to be more provocative than anything I said in my lecture!
Doug
October 12th, 2006 at 9:34 pm
I had thought about analactarian, but if said to quickly that could sound like something else…
There was one time I put too much milk in, and it spilled all over the place…I was a supralactarian.
I was just wondering now–are conlactarianism and prelactarianism the same thing?
October 12th, 2006 at 9:34 pm
Not your fault, Doug. Pete simply played to the intellectual level of my blog audience.
Besides, Pete has provocative trademarked, doesn’t he?
Seriously, it was a great lecture, and I look forward to its published form. Thanks for all you’ve meant to Karyn and me. You’ll probably never know how much of an influence you have been upon us (for good!).
October 13th, 2006 at 10:15 am
I consider myself a pan-lactarian. It’s all going to go down with a bagel in the end anyway.
October 13th, 2006 at 10:25 am
Sounds like we are about ready for Dr. Green to sponsor a three-day symposium on “Lactarianism in Reformed Perspective: Will There Be Starbucks in the New Creation?” … in his spare time
October 13th, 2006 at 5:19 pm
I’m antilactarian. The stuff is foul unless it’s fermented & served with beer.
Congrats Doug!
October 13th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Barb:
Your faction is putting beer in it? Hold on, you might have a convert here…
October 13th, 2006 at 6:51 pm
Well, no, not precisely. You see, we believe the time of coffee & milk has been fulfilled. We now enjoy beer & cheese, world without end. Amen.
I suppose we are Preterlactarians.
October 13th, 2006 at 11:47 pm
***ATTENTION***ATTENTION***ATTENTION***ATTENTION***
Sacred Journey has just been granted access to a well-attested fragment of the Enns speech wherein (it is believed) the doctrine of prelactation was first enumerated in public form. We are honored and privileged to present this increible find. Please see the update at the end of the Doug Green inaugural post.
October 14th, 2006 at 12:51 am
“Cell”? What, theologians now discuss terrorists?!
October 16th, 2006 at 1:01 am
I’m a little uncomfortable that this (extremely important) lactarian issue is only being viewed from a Reformed/Presbyterian lens. Doesn’t anyone care to know what the early church fathers thought? I’m almost certain Augustine was a rock-solid prelactarian, but Anselm was most likely a paedolactarian. And don’t you know this is major issue throughout many churches right now? RCs, Orthodox, Lutherans, Anglicans, Emergents, Methodists, and most importantly, the Backwoods Berean Bible-Thumpin’ Fellowship are all struggling with this vital topic.
Let’s be a little more catholic, guys, and realize that this impacts the entire visible, invisible and proto-lactarian triumphant church!
October 16th, 2006 at 1:05 am
John:
I’m afraid that your ecumenilactarianism is a slippery slope to liberalism.
And paedolactarianism? I’m a cedolactarian myself: I don’t put anything in my coffee until I’m sure it’s really coffee!
October 16th, 2006 at 1:34 am
Mark,
Well, I’ll always insist that my lactarian views are within the bounds of orthodoxy. However, I pretty much ruined my career when I participated in a conference a few years back entitled New Perspectives in Lactrarianism: The Validity of Multiple & Ecumenical Lactrarian Practices.
The True Lactarians (TLs) haven’t giving me any breathing room since.
Oh, your point on Mormons and JWs is a good one. Whenever someone suspicious comes to my door, I just say “Great, let’s brew up some coffee and discuss the Trinity!” That always seems to run them off…
October 16th, 2006 at 7:41 am
…and I suspect it’s the coffee that scares them most!
October 16th, 2006 at 1:54 pm
It’s fascinating to see that the church on this side of the Atlantic is finally catching up with the debate. As an undergraduate in England 15 years ago, I remember clearly having this discussion and then, as now, being utterly persuaded by the pre-lactarian position. This is unquestionably the only correct way to drink tea, which is of itself, clearly the superior hot beverage.
I’m surprised, however, that no-one has yet commented on the idiosyncratic way Dr Enns used the terminology. ‘Pre-lactarian’ is more usually the term given to the doctrine of putting the tea (or coffee, if you must) in before, i.e. ‘pre’ the milk; not of putting the milk itself in first. And conversely, ‘post-lactarians’ add the hot beverage after, i.e. ‘post’ milk.
With this correction to the terminology in place, I wholeheartedly support Dr Enns’ position, not merely on hygiene grounds but also on those of taste.
October 16th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
Now, Ros, someone as experienced in the world of theological nomenclature as you ought to know that such terms often are assigned or have taken on meanings at odds with their etymologies.
Is dispensationalism really primarily about dispensations? It is hardly that theologies distinguishing characteristic, as covenant theologians speak of dispensations as well. Is eschatology really about French snails? No one really thinks so.
So we must accept the foundational lactarian terminology as the Westminster (seminary) Divines intended them.
October 19th, 2006 at 3:21 pm
John: Holy crap, man. I bet John Wesley hated coffee. What is a conflicted Methodist to do?!
[Wait, I already said that I was an alactarian.]
October 19th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
From John Wesley’s Primitive Physick
or An Easy and Natural Method of Curing Most Diseases
“10. Coffee and tea are extremely hurtful to persons who have weak nerves.”
October 20th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
I had actually read that at some point in my life. Thanks for satisfying my quirky curiosity and refreshing my memory.
GFM <– always glad that none of the Reformed Scrabblers use him for a teething ring