On the Gospel Coalition blog, Ray Ortlund takes on the "Truly Reformed" camp and what it means for the rest of the church.
What unifies the church is the gospel. What defines the gospel is the Bible. What interprets the Bible correctly is a hermeneutic centered on Jesus Christ crucified, the all-sufficient Savior of sinners, who gives himself away on terms of radical grace to all alike. What proves that that gospel hermeneutic has captured our hearts is that we are not looking down on other believers but lifting them up, not seeing ourselves as better but grateful for their contribution to the cause, not standing aloof but embracing them freely, not wishing they would become like us but serving them in love (Galatians 5:13).
My Reformed friend, can you move among other Christian groups and really enjoy them? Do you admire them? Even if you disagree with them in some ways, do you learn from them? What is the emotional tilt of your heart – toward them or away from them? If your Reformed theology has morphed functionally into Galatian sociology, the remedy is not to abandon your Reformed theology. The remedy is to take your Reformed theology to a deeper level. Let it reduce you to Jesus only. Let it humble you. Let this gracious doctrine make you a fun person to be around. The proof that we are Reformed will be all the wonderful Christians we discover around us who are not Reformed. Amazing people. Heroic people. Blood-bought people. People with whom we are eternally one – in Christ alone.
There are way too many Reformed believers, and I counted myself among this group up until recently, who were more concerned about keeping the wrong kind of Christian out of fellowship unless they bowed the knee to Calvin. I am far more concerned these days in trying to focus on what unites us rather than what divides us and I hope that Ray's words will get a proper hearing from my fellow Reformed believers.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Best of the week entry 1
Comes from Seth McBee at Contend Earnestly and Seth asks and answers some questions about the church and how his thinking has changed. I appreciate a solidly orthodox brother who is willing to change where warranted by Scripture.
We need to focus in on our identity as the church, those who have been called out. What is desperately shown is that most people focus in on the church's functions instead of their identity.
Check out The Church Is Who We Are, Not What We Do
We need to focus in on our identity as the church, those who have been called out. What is desperately shown is that most people focus in on the church's functions instead of their identity.
Check out The Church Is Who We Are, Not What We Do
Friday, June 11, 2010
Even more thoughts on shepherding: 1 Peter 5
Kind of an odd picture but I will come back to it near the end. In 1 Peter 5 we see the shepherding function directly referred to elders in the church. It is an interesting passage because while most epistles to the church are directed to the church as a whole, and conspicuously not just leaders/elders/pastors, Peter specifically is addressing a subset of the church. This is a commonly referenced set of verses so I want to look specifically at verses 1-5 to see what they tell us about shepherding:So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” (1 Peter 5: 1-5)
Now at the onset I would point out that shepherding, as everyone knows, is hardly a glamorous profession. Shepherds didn’t have sheepskins from Sheep-Keeper Seminary (pun intended). They were, from my understanding, not the pillars of the community or terribly respected. They were just dudes who hung around with sheep and kept them from harm.
So what specifically is Peter exhorting his fellow elders to focus on in regards to shepherding?
- Exercise oversight
- Do so willingly, not under compulsion
- Not for personal gain
- Not with an attitude of domineering but through example
Missing from this list is what we traditionally expect from pastors. There is no talk of sermons or vision casting or counseling or budget committees. There is a serious disconnect between the Biblical description of shepherding and what we expect from shepherds/pastors. We expect them to lead and we will follow. They teach, we learn. They minister, we are ministered to. They rule, we submit. That all is fine and dandy but it is not shepherding.
Shepherding in God’s church does not come by dispensing nuggets of knowledge in 40 minute chunks during a sermon or by creating a “vision” that others are obligated to follow. It comes by sacrificial service to the Body and lives that should be emulated by others. We are called to imitate their example, not simply extol their virtues. Oversight, leadership, pastoring, shepherding are all less about ruling and control than they are about edification and self-sacrifice. When the Great Shepherd walked the earth, His ministry included a great deal of teaching but it also included modeling of service. In Matthew 20:20-28 we see Christ describing greatness as resulting from service, that even He came not to be served but to serve. Christ extolled the virtues of the humble and chastised those who sought personal recognition. Christ later lived this out in a most unbecoming act, stooping down at the feet of His disciples, the King of the Universe washing the dirty feet of His creatures. Service and holding others as more important than yourself are the hallmarks of shepherding and that sort of behavior is nowhere restricted to a special class of Christians. In other words, shepherding through leadership and service is a function of all Christians. It may manifest itself differently in different Christians but it shouldn’t be absent in any follower of Christ.
This brings me back to my original question. Is shepherding an office in the church or is it used to describe Christians who shepherd others in the church? It seems pretty clear that what is being described in the Bible is more functional than official, more serving than ruling.
Ultimately the most important thing to remember about shepherding is that pastors, elders, evangelists, shepherds in other words, are first and foremost sheep. They are not “under-shepherds” with some sheep like qualities; they are 100% sheep that are called on to perform some shepherding functions. That is an important distinction.
My point is that shepherding can only be correctly understood when we recognize Jesus as the Shepherd and ourselves, even the most famous pastors, as sheep. We may perform some shepherding functions but when we lose sight of Christ as the Shepherd and the only Shepherd of the church, we get into trouble. The two thousand year history of Christianity is littered with men who sought to supplant Christ as Shepherd and every time it led to heresy and error. Pope after pope proves this, not to mention cult leaders like Joseph Smith, David Koresh, Jim Jones and on and on.
So about that picture. Some years ago when we lived in Northern Michigan we had a short lived experiment with raising sheep. During this experiment we learned a lot about sheep, especially concerning the metaphor of Christians as sheep in the Bible and how that wasn’t really complimentary. The sheep in the middle of the picture is Cortland and she was the “lead sheep” in our little four sheep flock. Here is where this is pertinent. Cortland, even though she was the lead sheep and the one others would follow, would often wander off. The others would follow right behind her until they were at the neighbors farm or way down the road. You see, she might have been the leader but she was still just a sheep. The danger of sheep being reliant on other sheep to lead them is that sheep are…sheep. That is why we have a Good Shepherd and why we who are His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. We all know all too well how fallible men are but if we follow the Good Shepherd He will never lead us astray.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Apologetics is not the Gospel
I have long appreciated the work of apologists in the church. Lately though, not as much. What appealed to me about apologists and "discernment" was that it was an exercise in proving someone else wrong. The work of many apologists is quite valuable. I appreciate the work of men like James White and Matt Slick for providing resources and responses to errors and in addressing non-Christian faiths. However something about being a self-annointed apologist seems to either push people into pridefulness and anger or perhaps apologetics attracts people with that tendency already built in.
What brought this up was something I read at Christianpost.com, an interview with Josh McDowell. It is not so much that I have an issue with his main point, it is in how it is presented and in the presumptions he makes.
The faith of most Christians, even that of many pastors, will not stand up to intellectual scrutiny, according to renowned apologist Josh McDowell.
This is a concern because pastors’ inability to present biblical truth comprehensibly and relevantly has led to children from Christian families leaving the church, research has shown.
So, because one guy in a given church doesn't teach clearly enough, children from Christian families are leaving the church? First and foremost, if they aren't Christians they were never in the church to begin with, no matter where their parents made them go on Sunday or whether they memorized chunks of a catechism. Kids are not leaving the church because they were not given a sufficient training in apologetics. They are leaving because they find traditional religion to be empty or because they were never converted in the first place. Someone who is unregenerate but has been forced into religious conformity is never going to exhibit the fruit of being saved. Why wouldn’t they stop "going to church" once they are no longer being required to? Second, our faith is not required to hold up to "intellectual scrutiny". I am sure that there will be plenty of people in heaven who were not up to snuff with providing a synopsis of their faith that would hold up to "intellectual scrutiny"
What was more troubling was this next part...
In his 50 years of ministry, McDowell has asked several thousand pastors and leaders how they could be certain Jesus Christ said “I am the truth” and not one of many truths or a truth.
“Not one person has ever given me an intelligent, biblically-based answer,” said the author of The New Evidence that Demands A Verdict.
During the past six years, he asked hundreds of Christians and leaders why they see themselves as Christians. Again no one gave him an "intelligent" answer.
In the past 17 years, he has asked over 4,000 pastors, leaders and parents why they believe the Bible is true.
A mere six “came close to giving an intelligent answer,” McDowell noted.
So over 4000 Christians failed to give him an answer he found satisfactory? Why, they should all buy his book so they could intelligently articulate an apologetic argument! I found that entire thing to be incredibly pompous and prideful (says me, the most prideful person I know). I have only been a Christian for eight years and I haven't met 4000 pastors and leaders but I can name a dozen people off the top of my head who can give you an "intelligent" answer right now.
The theological ineptitude in the church is something we should be concerned with. In some ways I am at least as concerned about people who can explain the heck out of their faith but don’t do a thing to live it out. There was a time when I thought it was perfectly acceptable to spend time searching out people in error on the internet without giving a second thought to widows and orphans. I figured God gave me a sharp mind and a quick wit so that I could show others how much smarter I am and how much more theologically mature. (That is not a knock on Josh McDowell who has an extensive mercy ministry)
I know quite a few Christians who are unable to articulate an “acceptable” explanation of the Christian faith but who are devoted to reading their Bible, to praying fervently and to helping the poor. Are these "unintelligent" Christians in need of rescue? Or is it more accurate to say that many people who find heretics and fools under every rock could stand for some lessons in humility, sacrifice and love?
Christians need to be theologically mature so they are not tossed about by every wind of doctrine (Eph 4: 14) but that is not a license of dismiss those who are less mature as being incapable of a sufficiently "intelligent" response to questions. Anti-intellectualism has no place in the church. Neither does a prideful excess of intellectualism.
The Gospel is not an argument to be won, it is Good News to be proclaimed.
What brought this up was something I read at Christianpost.com, an interview with Josh McDowell. It is not so much that I have an issue with his main point, it is in how it is presented and in the presumptions he makes.
The faith of most Christians, even that of many pastors, will not stand up to intellectual scrutiny, according to renowned apologist Josh McDowell.
This is a concern because pastors’ inability to present biblical truth comprehensibly and relevantly has led to children from Christian families leaving the church, research has shown.
So, because one guy in a given church doesn't teach clearly enough, children from Christian families are leaving the church? First and foremost, if they aren't Christians they were never in the church to begin with, no matter where their parents made them go on Sunday or whether they memorized chunks of a catechism. Kids are not leaving the church because they were not given a sufficient training in apologetics. They are leaving because they find traditional religion to be empty or because they were never converted in the first place. Someone who is unregenerate but has been forced into religious conformity is never going to exhibit the fruit of being saved. Why wouldn’t they stop "going to church" once they are no longer being required to? Second, our faith is not required to hold up to "intellectual scrutiny". I am sure that there will be plenty of people in heaven who were not up to snuff with providing a synopsis of their faith that would hold up to "intellectual scrutiny"
What was more troubling was this next part...
In his 50 years of ministry, McDowell has asked several thousand pastors and leaders how they could be certain Jesus Christ said “I am the truth” and not one of many truths or a truth.
“Not one person has ever given me an intelligent, biblically-based answer,” said the author of The New Evidence that Demands A Verdict.
During the past six years, he asked hundreds of Christians and leaders why they see themselves as Christians. Again no one gave him an "intelligent" answer.
In the past 17 years, he has asked over 4,000 pastors, leaders and parents why they believe the Bible is true.
A mere six “came close to giving an intelligent answer,” McDowell noted.
So over 4000 Christians failed to give him an answer he found satisfactory? Why, they should all buy his book so they could intelligently articulate an apologetic argument! I found that entire thing to be incredibly pompous and prideful (says me, the most prideful person I know). I have only been a Christian for eight years and I haven't met 4000 pastors and leaders but I can name a dozen people off the top of my head who can give you an "intelligent" answer right now.
The theological ineptitude in the church is something we should be concerned with. In some ways I am at least as concerned about people who can explain the heck out of their faith but don’t do a thing to live it out. There was a time when I thought it was perfectly acceptable to spend time searching out people in error on the internet without giving a second thought to widows and orphans. I figured God gave me a sharp mind and a quick wit so that I could show others how much smarter I am and how much more theologically mature. (That is not a knock on Josh McDowell who has an extensive mercy ministry)
I know quite a few Christians who are unable to articulate an “acceptable” explanation of the Christian faith but who are devoted to reading their Bible, to praying fervently and to helping the poor. Are these "unintelligent" Christians in need of rescue? Or is it more accurate to say that many people who find heretics and fools under every rock could stand for some lessons in humility, sacrifice and love?
Christians need to be theologically mature so they are not tossed about by every wind of doctrine (Eph 4: 14) but that is not a license of dismiss those who are less mature as being incapable of a sufficiently "intelligent" response to questions. Anti-intellectualism has no place in the church. Neither does a prideful excess of intellectualism.
The Gospel is not an argument to be won, it is Good News to be proclaimed.
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Pure Religion
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world. (James 1:27)
So instead of complaining about something going wrong, how about I encourage you to support something going right. That would be a welcome change, for you and for me. It is way too easy to complain about the ways we waste money and in doing so overlook the quiet work being done that is for the Gospel.
I was made aware of a group that is working with Haitian orphans in the aftermath of the earthquakes, The Haiti Orphan Project. Honestly Haiti wasn’t the easiest place in the world to grow up before the earthquakes and I can’t imagine the conditions since. There was a lot of attention paid to Haiti in the aftermath of the earthquake but with the short attention span of Americans we have moved on to the next crisis. The world may have looked away but the need in Haiti is still as serious and nowhere is that need more acute than among the children who are basically fending for themselves. To try to grasp the magnitude of the problem, consider this:
15% of all children in Haiti are orphaned or abandoned (“practically orphaned”). Most estimates put the number of orphans in Haiti prior to the January 2010 earthquake at about 380,000. Experts now estimate that the number of orphans has doubled to about 750,000 since the earthquake.
Instead of looking forward to summer break and three months of fun, they are facing a of summer with no parents and bleak prospects. The good news is that there are still Christians in Haiti who are engaged in works of mercy in the name of Christ and those folks need financial support. I know one of the individuals involved in The Haiti Orphan Project and trust his discernment. Here is a summary of what they are doing in Haiti:
Our Vision may be best summed up as:
The Haiti Orphan Project seeks to meet the incredible need for housing, education and physical as well as spiritual nourishment for orphans and abandoned children in Haiti. Haiti continues to see huge numbers of children who have been truly orphaned or abandoned (practically orphaned). These children, therefore, lack even the basic human needs such as nourishing food, adequate housing and education. Most, if not all, also lack any Christian nurture.
The Haiti Orphan Project intends to play a vital role in addressing these needs. We partner with the Global Orphan Project and local, Haitian evangelical churches to meet these basic and essential needs. The model consists of establishing a “village” to provide adequate housing, a school for the orphans as well as other children in the community and a local church building where the children are exposed to Christian teaching and love in an evangelical congregation.
The Haiti Orphan Project also seeks to help facilitate self-sufficiency through Microfinance and/or Microenterprise Development
Now that is something that makes sense to me, something that seems like a worthy use of our resources. Just imagine if some of the half a million a month that goes to support one informational ministry were to go to Haiti? What could half a million a month do for these children? I would encourage you to check out the webpage for The Haiti Orphan Project and support them however you can. I made a small donation this morning and plan to continue to do so. It is not much compared to the enormous need in Haiti but God’s grace is sufficient.
What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. (James 2: 14-17)
And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked. (1 John 2: 3-6)
So instead of complaining about something going wrong, how about I encourage you to support something going right. That would be a welcome change, for you and for me. It is way too easy to complain about the ways we waste money and in doing so overlook the quiet work being done that is for the Gospel.
I was made aware of a group that is working with Haitian orphans in the aftermath of the earthquakes, The Haiti Orphan Project. Honestly Haiti wasn’t the easiest place in the world to grow up before the earthquakes and I can’t imagine the conditions since. There was a lot of attention paid to Haiti in the aftermath of the earthquake but with the short attention span of Americans we have moved on to the next crisis. The world may have looked away but the need in Haiti is still as serious and nowhere is that need more acute than among the children who are basically fending for themselves. To try to grasp the magnitude of the problem, consider this:
15% of all children in Haiti are orphaned or abandoned (“practically orphaned”). Most estimates put the number of orphans in Haiti prior to the January 2010 earthquake at about 380,000. Experts now estimate that the number of orphans has doubled to about 750,000 since the earthquake.
Instead of looking forward to summer break and three months of fun, they are facing a of summer with no parents and bleak prospects. The good news is that there are still Christians in Haiti who are engaged in works of mercy in the name of Christ and those folks need financial support. I know one of the individuals involved in The Haiti Orphan Project and trust his discernment. Here is a summary of what they are doing in Haiti:
Our Vision may be best summed up as:
The Haiti Orphan Project seeks to meet the incredible need for housing, education and physical as well as spiritual nourishment for orphans and abandoned children in Haiti. Haiti continues to see huge numbers of children who have been truly orphaned or abandoned (practically orphaned). These children, therefore, lack even the basic human needs such as nourishing food, adequate housing and education. Most, if not all, also lack any Christian nurture.
The Haiti Orphan Project intends to play a vital role in addressing these needs. We partner with the Global Orphan Project and local, Haitian evangelical churches to meet these basic and essential needs. The model consists of establishing a “village” to provide adequate housing, a school for the orphans as well as other children in the community and a local church building where the children are exposed to Christian teaching and love in an evangelical congregation.
The Haiti Orphan Project also seeks to help facilitate self-sufficiency through Microfinance and/or Microenterprise Development
Now that is something that makes sense to me, something that seems like a worthy use of our resources. Just imagine if some of the half a million a month that goes to support one informational ministry were to go to Haiti? What could half a million a month do for these children? I would encourage you to check out the webpage for The Haiti Orphan Project and support them however you can. I made a small donation this morning and plan to continue to do so. It is not much compared to the enormous need in Haiti but God’s grace is sufficient.
What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. (James 2: 14-17)
And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked. (1 John 2: 3-6)
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Money. Why is it always about money?
So I had a busy day, just got home with a ripping headache and opened my email to a solicitation from a ministry for...money. Not just a little money. They need a lot just to survive. Without naming the (very well respected) ministry in question, here is what they say:
Your financial support has an immediate impact on our global outreach. This month alone, we need $496,160 in donations to sustain every aspect of this ministry. Every gift counts, no matter how great or small, so please make your contribution today.
Seriously. Half a million this month alone for a ministry that primarily is involved in radio programs, online resources for Reformed theology and other academic resources. According to public source they have annual administrative expenses (which includes staff costs) of $2.3 million and they spend an additional $2.3 million on fund raising (so they need to raise $200,000 per month to pay for...raising more money). This would all make tons of sense if the greatest need in the world was more Reformed theology mp3's. As it is there are millions upon millions of people who have never heard the name of Christ and who have zero use for an mp3 or a book on Reformed theology. They could probably use a Bible and a warm meal though. I will have to respectfully decline to contribute my fair share for this months burden of half a million.
I really was not in the mood to read that.
(Addendum: I went to the online form 990 that this ministry files, the tax form that non-profit organizations are required to file. According to the filing, this ministry in 2008 had 116 staff with a total payroll and benefits of $4.5 million and had gross receipts of over $15 million. All of this to disseminate "information, instruction, and training on Reformed Christian theology" )
Your financial support has an immediate impact on our global outreach. This month alone, we need $496,160 in donations to sustain every aspect of this ministry. Every gift counts, no matter how great or small, so please make your contribution today.
Seriously. Half a million this month alone for a ministry that primarily is involved in radio programs, online resources for Reformed theology and other academic resources. According to public source they have annual administrative expenses (which includes staff costs) of $2.3 million and they spend an additional $2.3 million on fund raising (so they need to raise $200,000 per month to pay for...raising more money). This would all make tons of sense if the greatest need in the world was more Reformed theology mp3's. As it is there are millions upon millions of people who have never heard the name of Christ and who have zero use for an mp3 or a book on Reformed theology. They could probably use a Bible and a warm meal though. I will have to respectfully decline to contribute my fair share for this months burden of half a million.
I really was not in the mood to read that.
(Addendum: I went to the online form 990 that this ministry files, the tax form that non-profit organizations are required to file. According to the filing, this ministry in 2008 had 116 staff with a total payroll and benefits of $4.5 million and had gross receipts of over $15 million. All of this to disseminate "information, instruction, and training on Reformed Christian theology" )
Monday, June 07, 2010
Are you called to the ministry?
That is the question posed by Dr. David Murray of Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary on the Gospel Coalition’s blog this morning, Am I Called To Ministry?. I know that the post is speaking specifically of vocational pastoral ministry but the question is an interesting one because I think we often answer it in less than honest way.
Where the question goes astray is the idea of being called to “the ministry”. All evangelical Christians would affirm the idea of the priesthood of all believers. Let me clarify that: we agree on it in concept but in reality everyone knows that “the ministry” is reserved to those few who meet the proper qualifications. Sure we are all called to some sort of “ministry”, but when you add the qualifier “the” to the word “ministry”, it is unspoken but understood that you mean a very specific type of ministry. Now we aren’t talking about “ministry” like helping out in the nursery, we are talking about “THE Ministry”, i.e. ministry of the Word, i.e. pastoral ministry.
This topic gets me wound up and I crab about it constantly because the way it is commonly understood is so damaging to the church. We create a false dual-citizenship in the Kingdom based on extra-Biblical qualifications that serve to create a sense that ministry is something reserved for a special few in the church. The qualifications for ministry are pretty simple. Are you a Christian? If so then you are called to the ministry. I liked this quote from Total Church regarding the “qualifications” for ministry:
Most church leaders today are middle-class graduates who were trained in a college and whose qualification for ministry is a degree. The first apostles were from very mixed social backgrounds, most with no education. They trained by accompanying Jesus, and their qualification for ministry was that they knew Jesus. (Total Church, pg. 120)
As this article from the Gospel Coalition demonstrates, we have strayed pretty far away from what we see in the Bible. Merely knowing Jesus and being known by Him is not enough. For example:
I noticed that one of the recurring gifts in these lists is self-control, or self discipline. This is so utterly indispensable for time-management in pastoral ministry, when we have no boss or professor to keep us on track. If you have a record of being late for work or appointments, or if you are regularly late in submitting assignments, what reason is there to think that you are suddenly going to change when you have to preach a sermon every Sunday at 9.30 am?
Being a good time manager is a great quality in a person but is that what is meant by “self-controlled” by Paul? Here is another one:
Another vital gift is simplicity. Are you able to preach or teach simply? I’m not talking here about “dumbing-down.” I’m talking about taking profound truths and translating them into simple, clear language (as Jesus did). Some men seem to have the opposite gift, the ability to make the simple complicated and confusing. If that’s your gift, then please don’t burden the church of Christ with it.
Being able to deliver a simple but effective sermon weekly is nowhere to be found in Scripture, either as a desired quality or by example. In fact very little of what is described as sign of a call to "the ministry" has any concrete basis in Scripture. The whole blog post by Dr. Murray does sound very reasonable to our ears. It fits with how we understand “the ministry” in the safe, sanitized confines of American Christianity. I wonder how much sense his blog post would make to a believer in China or in India or in Ethiopia?
This was perhaps the most troubling:
When young men are converted, they or others often start talking about the ministry. There are exceptions to this rule, but in general it is best that young men spend some time working as Christians “in the world” before pursuing a call to the ministry. They will develop spiritual maturity there in a way that they won’t by going straight into Seminary. Even a few years of working among unconverted people has a rapid ripening effect on Christian character. It also helps to build empathy with Christians who are called to be salt and light in factories, offices, etc.
Sort of sowing your wild oats among the world before beating a hasty retreat to seminary? That is so contrary to Scripture but yet again it sounds so perfectly sensible to us. The idea that a young man should go out among the world to get a feel for it and then leave the world to go into church ministry is the opposite of what we should be doing. What we should be doing and what Scripture describes is that we disciple young men (i.e. equip them for the work of ministry) and then send them out of the church building to engage in ministry in the world. The world is not some place you go to “put in your time” to see how bad it is before scampering back into the confines of a seminary and then a church. It is the mission field and we should encourage young men to prepare to go to the world instead of hoping they will come to us to hear our nice, simple but well exegeted sermon on Sunday morning.
If you are a Christian, you are called to ministry. Period. It will look and function differently for different people. There are some contexts where some people will minister in different ways based on gifts, on gender, on age, on maturity. Regardless, every Christian is called to ministry and the notion that some are “more called” or “specially called” makes a lie out of the priesthood of all believers and runs contrary to what Scripture explicitly teaches. The Bible knows nothing to two classes of “ministry”: “The Ministry” and “ministry for everyone else”. The basic function, in fact the explicit purpose of leaders in the church is to equip all Christians for the work of ministry (Eph 4:12), not just those with that certain special something that cries out “preacher boy”. It is not a perpetual top-down ministry from one class of ministers to the rest, it is a mutual ministry to one another that will never come to fruition as long as 95% of Christians look to 5% of Christians to do all of “the ministry”. Pastors need to be ministered to as much as any other Christian and they shouldn’t have to look outside of the local church for that ministering.
We have culled certain sheep out of the flock over the years and told them they are to carry the burden of ministry for the rest of the flock. We send them away from their local gathering with a fond farewell. They land somewhere else as strangers in a new church (with a bunch of debt to boot) and are expected to minister to a whole bunch of people and when they inevitably get overwhelmed, they are sent away from their church family to be ministered to at a pastors conference or they go on sabbatical. Another great quote from Total Church captures this:
Many of my "minister" friends speak of church as something from which they must seek solace. They protect their day off and guard the privacy of their home. They feel the loneliness of ministry, looking outside the local church for people who will pastor them and events that will refresh them. For us church is where we find solace. The Christian community pastors and refreshes me through the Word of God. Someone put it to us like this: "if I were to say I needed a weekly day off from my wife and children, people would say I had a dysfunctional marriage. So why, if I say I need a day off from church, do people not ask whether I have a dysfunctional church family? (Total Church, pg. 124 )
Where the question goes astray is the idea of being called to “the ministry”. All evangelical Christians would affirm the idea of the priesthood of all believers. Let me clarify that: we agree on it in concept but in reality everyone knows that “the ministry” is reserved to those few who meet the proper qualifications. Sure we are all called to some sort of “ministry”, but when you add the qualifier “the” to the word “ministry”, it is unspoken but understood that you mean a very specific type of ministry. Now we aren’t talking about “ministry” like helping out in the nursery, we are talking about “THE Ministry”, i.e. ministry of the Word, i.e. pastoral ministry.
This topic gets me wound up and I crab about it constantly because the way it is commonly understood is so damaging to the church. We create a false dual-citizenship in the Kingdom based on extra-Biblical qualifications that serve to create a sense that ministry is something reserved for a special few in the church. The qualifications for ministry are pretty simple. Are you a Christian? If so then you are called to the ministry. I liked this quote from Total Church regarding the “qualifications” for ministry:
Most church leaders today are middle-class graduates who were trained in a college and whose qualification for ministry is a degree. The first apostles were from very mixed social backgrounds, most with no education. They trained by accompanying Jesus, and their qualification for ministry was that they knew Jesus. (Total Church, pg. 120)
As this article from the Gospel Coalition demonstrates, we have strayed pretty far away from what we see in the Bible. Merely knowing Jesus and being known by Him is not enough. For example:
I noticed that one of the recurring gifts in these lists is self-control, or self discipline. This is so utterly indispensable for time-management in pastoral ministry, when we have no boss or professor to keep us on track. If you have a record of being late for work or appointments, or if you are regularly late in submitting assignments, what reason is there to think that you are suddenly going to change when you have to preach a sermon every Sunday at 9.30 am?
Being a good time manager is a great quality in a person but is that what is meant by “self-controlled” by Paul? Here is another one:
Another vital gift is simplicity. Are you able to preach or teach simply? I’m not talking here about “dumbing-down.” I’m talking about taking profound truths and translating them into simple, clear language (as Jesus did). Some men seem to have the opposite gift, the ability to make the simple complicated and confusing. If that’s your gift, then please don’t burden the church of Christ with it.
Being able to deliver a simple but effective sermon weekly is nowhere to be found in Scripture, either as a desired quality or by example. In fact very little of what is described as sign of a call to "the ministry" has any concrete basis in Scripture. The whole blog post by Dr. Murray does sound very reasonable to our ears. It fits with how we understand “the ministry” in the safe, sanitized confines of American Christianity. I wonder how much sense his blog post would make to a believer in China or in India or in Ethiopia?
This was perhaps the most troubling:
When young men are converted, they or others often start talking about the ministry. There are exceptions to this rule, but in general it is best that young men spend some time working as Christians “in the world” before pursuing a call to the ministry. They will develop spiritual maturity there in a way that they won’t by going straight into Seminary. Even a few years of working among unconverted people has a rapid ripening effect on Christian character. It also helps to build empathy with Christians who are called to be salt and light in factories, offices, etc.
Sort of sowing your wild oats among the world before beating a hasty retreat to seminary? That is so contrary to Scripture but yet again it sounds so perfectly sensible to us. The idea that a young man should go out among the world to get a feel for it and then leave the world to go into church ministry is the opposite of what we should be doing. What we should be doing and what Scripture describes is that we disciple young men (i.e. equip them for the work of ministry) and then send them out of the church building to engage in ministry in the world. The world is not some place you go to “put in your time” to see how bad it is before scampering back into the confines of a seminary and then a church. It is the mission field and we should encourage young men to prepare to go to the world instead of hoping they will come to us to hear our nice, simple but well exegeted sermon on Sunday morning.
If you are a Christian, you are called to ministry. Period. It will look and function differently for different people. There are some contexts where some people will minister in different ways based on gifts, on gender, on age, on maturity. Regardless, every Christian is called to ministry and the notion that some are “more called” or “specially called” makes a lie out of the priesthood of all believers and runs contrary to what Scripture explicitly teaches. The Bible knows nothing to two classes of “ministry”: “The Ministry” and “ministry for everyone else”. The basic function, in fact the explicit purpose of leaders in the church is to equip all Christians for the work of ministry (Eph 4:12), not just those with that certain special something that cries out “preacher boy”. It is not a perpetual top-down ministry from one class of ministers to the rest, it is a mutual ministry to one another that will never come to fruition as long as 95% of Christians look to 5% of Christians to do all of “the ministry”. Pastors need to be ministered to as much as any other Christian and they shouldn’t have to look outside of the local church for that ministering.
We have culled certain sheep out of the flock over the years and told them they are to carry the burden of ministry for the rest of the flock. We send them away from their local gathering with a fond farewell. They land somewhere else as strangers in a new church (with a bunch of debt to boot) and are expected to minister to a whole bunch of people and when they inevitably get overwhelmed, they are sent away from their church family to be ministered to at a pastors conference or they go on sabbatical. Another great quote from Total Church captures this:
Many of my "minister" friends speak of church as something from which they must seek solace. They protect their day off and guard the privacy of their home. They feel the loneliness of ministry, looking outside the local church for people who will pastor them and events that will refresh them. For us church is where we find solace. The Christian community pastors and refreshes me through the Word of God. Someone put it to us like this: "if I were to say I needed a weekly day off from my wife and children, people would say I had a dysfunctional marriage. So why, if I say I need a day off from church, do people not ask whether I have a dysfunctional church family? (Total Church, pg. 124 )
The church is by and large a dysfunctional family and the solution to that is not more and more of the same. God created the church and He did so with a Body of sinners but it is inconceivable that He is pleased with the dysfunctional church family we have. Isn’t there a better way? There must be and I believe there is if we will have the courage to let Scripture dictate to us instead of tradition dictating to Scripture.
Ministry is not the responsibility of vocational ministers, it is the high and noble calling of every single one of God’s redeemed sheep.
Ministry is not the responsibility of vocational ministers, it is the high and noble calling of every single one of God’s redeemed sheep.
Spiritual but not religious? Religious but not spiritual?
CNN has a piece out about the new generation of adults who are labeled “spiritual but not religious”, those who want to express some sort of generally vague spirituality but reject organized religion.
The debate over being spiritual rather than religious is not just about semantics. It's about survival.
Numerous surveys show the number of Americans who do not identify themselves as religious has been increasing and likely will continue to grow.
A 2008 survey conducted by Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, dubbed these Americans who don't identify with any religion as "Nones."
Seminaries, churches, mosques and other institutions will struggle for survival if they don't somehow convince future generations that being religious isn't so bad after all, religion scholars warn.
That is very interesting. The debate is about more than saving souls, it is also about survival. Could it be that there are lots of jobs at stake out there? I think CNN is on to something that escapes many Christians. Honestly, Christianity is big business in America and there is a lot of money changing hands. I was reading over some information at the webpage of the Church Benefit Association, the association representing the pension boards of many denominations. The groups they represent as a whole manage $40,000,000,000 in retirement and health funds to church employees. I work in the financial services business and deal with some big numbers but no matter where you are, $40 billion is a lot of money and that $40 billion represents the retirement benefits of a lot of church employees. Make no mistake. Religion is big business in America, one of the biggest.
Predictably this is generating much hand-wringing, some of it justified and some…not so much. After seeing the emptiness of religion, it is little wonder so many people are walking away from it? We have peddled a lowest-common denominator church life where attendance=faithfulness and a cynical generation has seen right through that.
Is this move to "spiritual but not religious" really a big deal? Someone who “goes to church” for decades and believes they are "Christian by attendance" is actually in greater spiritual peril than those who have no church affiliation. One of the greatest barriers to the Gospel proclamation in America are the centuries of religious traditions that people associate with Christianity. As a culture we associate Christianity with church buildings, Sunday morning services, professional ministers, hypocrisy and anger, overtly political moralism. Our culture has made Christianity look like the antithesis of what it really is.
I have to ask a bigger question. Are these the only two choices? Are we stuck between choosing a vague, fuzzy spirituality or being locked into ritual and religion? Some will see this report as a clarion call to further entrench ourselves in institutional religion. I simply reject the either-or being presented here. Jesus is not calling His followers to be either spiritual or religious. We are to know what we believe and not be wish-washy about it. Jesus never proclaimed what the article describes as “Burger King spirituality” where you can have it your way. On the other hand Jesus had no use for religious people. I increasingly find it odd that His followers embrace religiosity so readily when our Savior rejected it so thoroughly.
This sounds like the latest bogeyman, the “spiritual but not religious” crowd. I understand the temptation to find these bogeymen. It is much easier, believe me, to rail against “those people” than it is to deal with the hard questions of Christian community in our own gathering. “Spiritual but not religious” is not a threat to Christianity. Affluence, comfort, repetition, lack of love? Those are the genuine threats. God’s elect will be saved but that doesn’t mean that those who are saved will live a life that is reflective of and worthy of the Gospel by which they were saved. That is where our focus should be.
The debate over being spiritual rather than religious is not just about semantics. It's about survival.
Numerous surveys show the number of Americans who do not identify themselves as religious has been increasing and likely will continue to grow.
A 2008 survey conducted by Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, dubbed these Americans who don't identify with any religion as "Nones."
Seminaries, churches, mosques and other institutions will struggle for survival if they don't somehow convince future generations that being religious isn't so bad after all, religion scholars warn.
That is very interesting. The debate is about more than saving souls, it is also about survival. Could it be that there are lots of jobs at stake out there? I think CNN is on to something that escapes many Christians. Honestly, Christianity is big business in America and there is a lot of money changing hands. I was reading over some information at the webpage of the Church Benefit Association, the association representing the pension boards of many denominations. The groups they represent as a whole manage $40,000,000,000 in retirement and health funds to church employees. I work in the financial services business and deal with some big numbers but no matter where you are, $40 billion is a lot of money and that $40 billion represents the retirement benefits of a lot of church employees. Make no mistake. Religion is big business in America, one of the biggest.
Predictably this is generating much hand-wringing, some of it justified and some…not so much. After seeing the emptiness of religion, it is little wonder so many people are walking away from it? We have peddled a lowest-common denominator church life where attendance=faithfulness and a cynical generation has seen right through that.
Is this move to "spiritual but not religious" really a big deal? Someone who “goes to church” for decades and believes they are "Christian by attendance" is actually in greater spiritual peril than those who have no church affiliation. One of the greatest barriers to the Gospel proclamation in America are the centuries of religious traditions that people associate with Christianity. As a culture we associate Christianity with church buildings, Sunday morning services, professional ministers, hypocrisy and anger, overtly political moralism. Our culture has made Christianity look like the antithesis of what it really is.
I have to ask a bigger question. Are these the only two choices? Are we stuck between choosing a vague, fuzzy spirituality or being locked into ritual and religion? Some will see this report as a clarion call to further entrench ourselves in institutional religion. I simply reject the either-or being presented here. Jesus is not calling His followers to be either spiritual or religious. We are to know what we believe and not be wish-washy about it. Jesus never proclaimed what the article describes as “Burger King spirituality” where you can have it your way. On the other hand Jesus had no use for religious people. I increasingly find it odd that His followers embrace religiosity so readily when our Savior rejected it so thoroughly.
This sounds like the latest bogeyman, the “spiritual but not religious” crowd. I understand the temptation to find these bogeymen. It is much easier, believe me, to rail against “those people” than it is to deal with the hard questions of Christian community in our own gathering. “Spiritual but not religious” is not a threat to Christianity. Affluence, comfort, repetition, lack of love? Those are the genuine threats. God’s elect will be saved but that doesn’t mean that those who are saved will live a life that is reflective of and worthy of the Gospel by which they were saved. That is where our focus should be.
Flock membership precedes belief
I am struck repeatedly by the Good Shepherd discourse in John 10 and what it says about a question that so many people wrestle with. When it comes to evangelism, why do so few people believe even when they hear the same Gospel presentation? Free will doesn’t explain it because all unregenerate people are in the same boat, dead in trespasses and sins (Eph 2: 1-3). Why then do some believe and not others? Jesus answers this question very clearly in this pivotal chapter of John’s Gospel record…
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10: 14-16)
Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. (John 10: 25-26)
To summarize...
- You are not part of the flock because you believe, you believe because you are part of His flock.
- People are not outside of His flock because they don’t believe, they don’t believe because they are not part of His flock.
- When someone who is part of the flock, those God the Father has given to the Son, hears the Gospel proclamation at the appointed time, they believe it.
This seems so straightforward. The Pharisees didn’t believe because they were not part of His flock. We who do believe do so because we are part of the flock. We were given by the Father to the Son (John 10: 29) to be part of His flock, all of those given to the Son by the Father will hear His voice, all will come to Him and none will be lost. As clear as this is, it is the source of so much confusion for people. Scripture and plain old common sense tell us that dead sinners don’t respond unless acted on first by an outside source but the majority report in evangelicalism is focused on us choosing God of our own volition. Little wonder that evangelism is so muddled in the church.
This does not negate our need to preach the Gospel to all people everywhere. One of His sheep doesn’t look much different from someone who is not His sheep. In fact, to our sinful eyes it sometimes might seem that some people look more like His sheep to us than those who really are because of our biases. It is often the unlovely, the poor, the unwise who are His sheep instead of the respectable, well-educated and wealthy. This knowledge does (or should) give us boldness because we know that those who are the sheep of His flock will believe the Word. It is not up to us through clever arguments or impassioned sermons or evangelistic methods. His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. If someone rejects the message, it is not because of you, it is because they are not His sheep.
I for one am glad that my status as one of His sheep was not left up to me.
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10: 14-16)
Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. (John 10: 25-26)
To summarize...
- You are not part of the flock because you believe, you believe because you are part of His flock.
- People are not outside of His flock because they don’t believe, they don’t believe because they are not part of His flock.
- When someone who is part of the flock, those God the Father has given to the Son, hears the Gospel proclamation at the appointed time, they believe it.
This seems so straightforward. The Pharisees didn’t believe because they were not part of His flock. We who do believe do so because we are part of the flock. We were given by the Father to the Son (John 10: 29) to be part of His flock, all of those given to the Son by the Father will hear His voice, all will come to Him and none will be lost. As clear as this is, it is the source of so much confusion for people. Scripture and plain old common sense tell us that dead sinners don’t respond unless acted on first by an outside source but the majority report in evangelicalism is focused on us choosing God of our own volition. Little wonder that evangelism is so muddled in the church.
This does not negate our need to preach the Gospel to all people everywhere. One of His sheep doesn’t look much different from someone who is not His sheep. In fact, to our sinful eyes it sometimes might seem that some people look more like His sheep to us than those who really are because of our biases. It is often the unlovely, the poor, the unwise who are His sheep instead of the respectable, well-educated and wealthy. This knowledge does (or should) give us boldness because we know that those who are the sheep of His flock will believe the Word. It is not up to us through clever arguments or impassioned sermons or evangelistic methods. His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. If someone rejects the message, it is not because of you, it is because they are not His sheep.
I for one am glad that my status as one of His sheep was not left up to me.
Sunday, June 06, 2010
Don't just show up
A Pilgrim's Progress: Some Questions to Ask About Your Church Gatherings
Eric Carpenter asks some thought-provoking questions about our church gatherings. In the hustle and bustle of getting ready to "go to church" this morning take a moment to read these questions and ask them yourself. Why are you doing what you are doing? Have you thought it through or is it just something you are supposed to do? You might be suprised at the answers.
Eric Carpenter asks some thought-provoking questions about our church gatherings. In the hustle and bustle of getting ready to "go to church" this morning take a moment to read these questions and ask them yourself. Why are you doing what you are doing? Have you thought it through or is it just something you are supposed to do? You might be suprised at the answers.
Saturday, June 05, 2010
Best of the week entry 3
Thought provoking post called Has American Christianity Jumped the Shark? I like the image, you can almost see the Fonz wearing a suit jumping the shark (assuming you know who The Fonz is) Here is a quote:
We live in a society that cares less and less about church and yet we’re still making Sunday morning the centerpiece of our strategy. I walk away from most Sunday morning services thinking more about how trivial the service was instead of being in awe of Jesus and His Kingdom. Is this the way it should be? Has American Christianity jumped the shark?
I liked that a lot. I think the institutional version of Christianity has jumped the shark. It's day is over although the vestiges will remain for a long time. The real question is how long will it take before we realize that the "come to church on Sunday" model is gone and start acting like the church in the 1st century, as aliens in the world, as sojourners? Better start soon.
We live in a society that cares less and less about church and yet we’re still making Sunday morning the centerpiece of our strategy. I walk away from most Sunday morning services thinking more about how trivial the service was instead of being in awe of Jesus and His Kingdom. Is this the way it should be? Has American Christianity jumped the shark?
I liked that a lot. I think the institutional version of Christianity has jumped the shark. It's day is over although the vestiges will remain for a long time. The real question is how long will it take before we realize that the "come to church on Sunday" model is gone and start acting like the church in the 1st century, as aliens in the world, as sojourners? Better start soon.
Best of the week entry 2
Comes from my friend Josh Gelatt. Josh writes a short devotional on unity and division in the Body of Christ, Divisions. Here is a sample:
Theology is important. Just because a doctrine is one of the "non-essentials" doesn't mean its unimportant. I want churches everywhere to come to decisions on things such as baptism, spiritual gifts, women in ministry, and end times scenarios. But I also want us to be willing to call brothers brothers and sisters sisters. If someone holds to Christ and His true Gospel he is my brother, despite his theological difference. Don't be foolish and run to the other extreme and declare "doctrine divides". That is the war cry of heretics and demons. But, do very much cry "Christ unites"!
There is nothing wrong at all with holding strong views on "secondary" doctrines. I make no pretense of being indifferent to many, many doctrines from baptism to ecclesiology to gender. However, more important than my views of these doctrines is my view of my brothers and sisters. Josh and I agree on many things and disagree on others but of preeminence in any conversation is that we agree that Jesus Christ is Lord and that trumps everything else. Praise God for strong opinions that can be held and disagreed about in charity and love among God's people but let these doctrines never divide us.
Theology is important. Just because a doctrine is one of the "non-essentials" doesn't mean its unimportant. I want churches everywhere to come to decisions on things such as baptism, spiritual gifts, women in ministry, and end times scenarios. But I also want us to be willing to call brothers brothers and sisters sisters. If someone holds to Christ and His true Gospel he is my brother, despite his theological difference. Don't be foolish and run to the other extreme and declare "doctrine divides". That is the war cry of heretics and demons. But, do very much cry "Christ unites"!
There is nothing wrong at all with holding strong views on "secondary" doctrines. I make no pretense of being indifferent to many, many doctrines from baptism to ecclesiology to gender. However, more important than my views of these doctrines is my view of my brothers and sisters. Josh and I agree on many things and disagree on others but of preeminence in any conversation is that we agree that Jesus Christ is Lord and that trumps everything else. Praise God for strong opinions that can be held and disagreed about in charity and love among God's people but let these doctrines never divide us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)