Tag Archives: leadership

June 8, 2012

Comments on the Collision

By Pooka

After five days of following the blogosphere’s Jason Stellman whirlwind, I just have a couple of comments to make.

I got in to work early on Monday, so had a chance to cruise around a couple of my regular favorites. At creedcodecult I had to do a double-take, I assume like many, at what appeared to be a very untimely April-Fools post or maybe an update on the FV-war. Of course, like many found, it was quickly clear that Stellman had in all seriousness communicated his changed convictions regarding Scripture and Faith.

My first reaction was a rather gut-wrenching sort of feeling. I think that, before I really understood the implications of the announcement (or maybe I actually grasped the real implications first), I simply grieved for a man I really don’t know.

Stellman is a semi-famous figure for a few reasons, though I can’t comment much on that. I’m 2k-ish, so I sort of get where he’s big there (I don’t get all the meanings and implications of 2k, so a lot of the details of his writing are beyond me). I’m fairly clear on the Federal Vision problem (as much as anybody can when it often seems there isn’t anything completely clear in the first place) and don’t agree with it, so I was supportive of his work to oppose Leithart’s position as a teacher and so on. But I’ve mostly followed Stellman’s blog because he seemed down-to-earth and, being new to the Reformed/Covenantal/Presbyterian world, I attached to whatever source was discussing the topics in language and imagery I could at least digest. Stellman has been that sort of good reading more often than not.

What does all that mean? It means I don’t have a great amount of attachment to the man himself. He is (was) himself a minister in the PCA, which is very significant. He was closely tied to WSCAL and some of the circles in which I found myself upon encountering my church and the PCA. So I think that, to a guy who’s only a year old in the Reformation, it weighs a lot when a highly regarded minister departs from his flock, his religious ties and ultimately two key threads that bind the faith that I understand to be Christianity.

I grieve for this man, because it appears he’s turned away. I don’t entirely understand his conflicts, but I think if he’s spent the last few months consulting the great and small in the faith for solutions and guidance, I bet he’s pretty squared with the facets involved. I don’t even think I can hazard a guess as to what secret key there is to unlock things for Stellman. Prayer, I guess.

What brings me to grieve the most is the miasma of darkness that has flowed from the blogosphere in only five days. The explosion wasn’t even a trickle. I swear it was like a dog-pile in a football cartoon. One after another just jumped on the man with the ball. And they somehow all succeeded in losing the man with the ball. I think Stellman just shot out of the mess like a greased pig. I wonder if, in all the horrid stabs, if anyone even touched the poor man’s heart with kindness or (Lord help us all) true help.

Sure, there were some real well-wishers and Lane Keister from Green Baggins was probably the most outspoken in compassion for Stellman. But overall, those who professed support and those who condemned very quickly turned upon each other in feral combat, often with little sense or sensibility. There was a flashmob of  slandering, pandering, stomping and biting with little care to Christian charity or even civility (there’s some 2k for you). Lost in the mix was a man who appears to have messed up somewhere, or has a huge chink in his theological framework, that everyone should clearly see needs help of some sort.

Pastors came out of the woodwork to use Stellman as a soapbox to condemn 2k or confessionalism. They analyzed and psychoanalyzed the Leithart trial and books and articles. They took opportunities to blast WSCAL theologians who have contributed immensely to my understanding of the Gospel and God’s revelation. And, to be fair, a couple from WSEAST too. The smear is broad and thick. The machine-gun staccato of “I could’ve told you so” and “That was so obvious years ago” echoed in the spaces between assaults.

So I can’t say I feel his pain because (from my humble perspective) Stellman is seeing a nuclear bomb going off in his heart right now, with all the people he’s interacted with (probably over a long period of time) turning on him or on each other with vitriol and spite. When I slipped quickly and quietly away from the faith in which I was raised and chose witchcraft for my religion, there was a fairly significant series of associated pains. My family and friends were pretty shocked and saddened by my defection. But I wasn’t the kind of person Stellman is. I wasn’t a pastor, theologian, trusted and known individual. I was just a little me with no influence and little credibility to start with . This kind of insanity, probably immense beyond what he could have predicted, is more than a decent man should have to endure – enough to bring the weight of age crashing down on him.

Granted, God is God and He deals with us as He wills. Stellman had a high office and calling. His suffering and trials must rate significantly more intensity than lil’ ol’ me. Especially if he is wrong. To depart from the faith at any time is huge, and to leave ministry under such terms is the biggest deal. Maybe he is wrong. Maybe he hasn’t made everything clear. Maybe he’s not clear on everything and this is (at the root) a long, dark teatime of the soul rather than defection from the Kingdom. I, personally, am inclined to trust that God will not depart from the servant He called to Himself, but that’s me and my little (often foolish) perception.

I guess the flash was inevitable. I suppose this is a miserable mess that must happen and maybe it’ll stir up something wonderful in the end. But for the time being? I haven’t gained much esteem for many in the Reformed world through this. I have lost respect for a few that, up until this week, I have held in fairly high regard. A couple of pastor/theologians I’ve enjoyed studying are not very enjoyable any more because of the opportunistic salvos they’ve released. Were they just rash leaps, I’d probably forgive and forget, but true colors were revealed and that’s enough for me.

It leaves me with this. I will continue to pray for Mr. Stellman and his family, though I don’t know them and probably won’t. I will pray for my own pastor and our elders, as I perceive anew the intensity of their burden and efforts. And I will pray for me and my family too. Closest to my weak little heart is the memory of “changing my religion” and this all reminds me of the hurt it causes. I had a little tweak of fear to realize that I am too easily swayed by the winds of doctrine and words of men. It could happen to me. Just look at the progression I’ve made in the faith since 2004.

I wish I could give encouragement to Mr. Stellman. I wish I could tell not a few pastors and laymen to get back to their church and think about how Christian they’ve been this week. I’ll finish off here with just one observation: Most of the people in the comboxes out there might need to be put back in the cage or whatever their particular tradition calls it.

Pax.

6 comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in special, The Faith

March 2, 2012

A Wall I Might Not Climb

By Pooka

I haven’t explored much me in recent times at this blog. So suppose there’s still a place for such things. I think it’s a trap. OTOH maybe I can record it and revisit in hopes I can work it out. As may be seen shortly, however, I haven’t much confidence of success here. Conversation seems to fail me – I cannot bring up the terms and phrases that make all this clear, so discussing this in person just doesn’t work at this point. Of course I wonder if it ever has in my short history.

Something that frustrates me greatly is my lack of mental acuity to know what to do in a situation involving conflict. Specifically I mean conflicting personalities or motives. I’m tied up in some sort of blinding bubble that seems to prevent me from thinking clearly how to respond to direction or make decisions based on how others respond to me. I am tempted to back into a shell. In some regards, I think my head is still spinning from the buzz of three very intensive weeks of change. Things are very different from what I remember of all my previous assignments, even the other ships. Granted, I’m in a different paygrade and therefore position of authority, but what I remember from before does not reflect in what I see now. So things are confusing.

All that being said, I see my typical failures coming right through, amplified in some cases, but consistent. I can’t seem to employ tact in giving direction or making decisions. I can’t seem to communicate in a way that appeals to others. In fact, I’ve done a fair job of ruining others’ good impression of me in a couple of cases and I’m not sure there is a quick way to repair that. That, however, is something I think I can handle, for I’m aware of the method by which I may seek restoration: humble patience. I’m not necessarily good at that, but I know to pursue it; and for as long as necessary. But I keep stumbling over my own intentions and desires, my own understanding of these conflicted situations and mixed personalities. And it’s highly discouraging. I simply do not know what to do at any given moment. I wish I could explain the circumstances in which I find myself with a little more detail, but due to the professional nature of the situation I cannot.

So why is it that I can’t seem to get things right? One would think that, after 16 years of experience in this field, variety in many aspects making me supposedly well-exposed to a great variety of character and wisdom-building events, I would have learned how to deal with these conflicts. I am highly tempted to fall back on my old belief that this simply isn’t the place for me. Perhaps I’m not really cut out for this role. But in many ways I love it. I do enjoy the technical work and caring for others; trying to help with the labor and profession of this team. Every team with which I’ve been associated has seen me wanting to do for them. But I think every time I have seen the same failures on my part. This one may well be up there for contention as the worst 3 weeks of them all.

I know the fault of mine. But I cannot trace the fault of mine to every corner of the trial I find. My sin has undone some things which will take time and continued repentance to repair (Lord willing). But I still can’t escape my weakness. I can’t seem to overcome this inability to make wise decisions and time them correctly. And I can’t respond correctly when the conflict comes. Once upon a time everything was easy. I didn’t have these responsibilities. But that was long ago and now I have it, have had it for quite some time. And I have not experienced any improvement over that time. It appears to me as though I was still fresh into the pool with no stroke or rhythm whatsoever. This is a race I just don’t think I can run. Now that the overconfidence that stems from selfishness and newness has been crushed, I’m back to zero again. It seems to happen that way every time. I’m 37. I know there are a lot of years left in the maturity scales (should the Lord be kind to me in my aging). I have plenty of time on the job but from my perspective I show no remarkable improvement.

I swear that I am not a leader of men and right now I regret that I am again in that position.

The words of a wise man’s mouth win him favor,
but the lips of a fool consume him.
The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness,
and the end of his talk is evil madness.
A fool multiplies words,
though no man knows what is to be,
and who can tell him what will be after him?
The toil of a fool wearies him,
for he does not know the way to the city.
(Ecclesiastes 10:12-15 )

6 comments   |  tags: , , , | posted in More About, special

November 23, 2011

Where we go, will you go?

By Pooka

Where you go, I will go...

Here is what Ruth said to Naomi:

“Do not urge me to leave you or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus may the LORD do to me, and worse, if anything but death parts you and me.”

Here is R.C. Sproul’s note on Ruth:

The Hebrew for clung in Ruth 1:14 is the same word used to describe the marriage relationship. In other words, Ruth clung to her mother-in-law in covenant fidelity, knowing that she was bound by her promise before the face of God to remain with and aid her mother-in-law, no matter how difficult it would be. This is the same devotion we are to have to the Lord’s people today. No matter our flaws, we Christians must love and serve one another.

And Matthew Henry’s Commentary:

Nothing could be said more fine, more brave, than this. She seems to have had another spirit, and another speech, now that her sister had gone, and it is an instance of the grace of God inclining the soul to the resolute choice of the better part. Draw me thus, and we will run after thee. Her mother’s dissuasions made her the more resolute; as when Joshua said to the people, “You cannot serve the Lord,” they said it with the more vehemence, “Nay, but we will.”

We might say today that no one can commit to such a thing as Ruth did without some move of the Spirit. This is an amazing speech from someone like Ruth, amazing and weighted with intensity. She’s entering into the covenant here. And we can’t think she doesn’t know what she’s saying, either. There is plenty of evidence that God’s covenantal structure was present in ancient non-Jewish traditions as well. This fine lady is dropping everything to align herself with Israel.

These are the membership vows we took upon joining our church. I’ve edited so they are personal and line up. The reference is the PCA Book of Church Order, Chapter 57.

I acknowledge myself to be a sinner in the sight of God, justly deserving His displeasure, and without hope save in His sovereign mercy. I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and Savior of sinners, and I receive and rest upon Him alone for salvation as He is offered in the Gospel? I now resolve and promise, in humble reliance upon the grace of the Holy Spirit, that I will endeavor to live as becomes the followers of Christ. I promise to support the Church in its worship and work to the best of my ability. I submit myself to the government and discipline of the Church, and promise to study its purity and peace.

I wonder that Ruth 1:16 isn’t commonly considered in the basic introduction for new believers. I certainly never encountered it. I don’t think it was covered much in the years I was in the church as a kid, either. I think this is something to plumb out in discussion with those who frequently reach out in evangelism. When we follow-up with folks, should we not use such clear examples of covenant-making? I must admit, a die-hard Arminian can see the value in Ruth’s declaration here.

Someone could say that Ruth didn’t know what she was getting into here, and was just being expedient about the whole cleaving to Naomi. Ruth just needed something to hang on to, right? I doubt it was that easy, though certainly some pragmatism should be understood. Ruth wouldn’t have a naive approach to what she committed to, considering it was a Jewish family into which she’d married and a Jewish woman with whom she was returning to Israel. Though Alimelech had taken his family out from Israel, I highly doubt he could have conceived of taking Israel out of his family. The traditions and practices would’ve remained, and from first meeting to final words in that relationship, Ruth and Orpah would have been exposed to the richness of the Israelites’ relationship to God. No doubts she had the best introduction to what she was getting into well before she committed herself to Ruth and the One True God on the roadside.

I wonder that our churches do not query us in the way that Ruth volunteered herself. I wonder if there’s anyone today who has been asked,

“Where we go, will you go? Where we lodge, will you lodge? Will our people be your people, and our God, your God? Where we die, will you die, and there be buried? Shall thus the LORD do to us, and worse, if anything but death parts you and us?”

It sounds a bit harsh for these modern days, doesn’t it?

So there’s another version:

1. Do you acknowledge yourselves to be sinners in the sight of God, justly deserving His displeasure, and without hope save in His sovereign mercy?

2. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and Savior of sinners, and do you receive and rest upon Him alone for salvation as He is offered in the Gospel?

3. Do you now resolve and promise, in humble reliance upon the grace of the Holy Spirit, that you will endeavor to live as becomes the followers of Christ?

4. Do you promise to support the Church in its worship and work to the best of your ability?

5. Do you submit yourselves to the government and discipline of the Church, and promise to study its purity and peace?

Updated for modern parlance and conversant with the realized covenant of Grace, of course, but isn’t it quite similar? The God of Israel instituted the church; and it is Christ’s body, sustained by Him, founded on Him, with all members finding their place in Him. We can all agree on that, it being well-developed throughout the New Testament.

So I find that this pair of vows, in Ruth and in the church are important enough to make me wonder what in the world could possibly be right about a church that refuses to require this of her members? Shouldn’t that be cause for deep concern? That one who hasn’t committed to the people of God, to Israel, to Christ is seen as an accepted, acceptable part of the Body? Good Lord! What standard is there for communion if not this? It would be like the President just walking in after elections and taking over the Oval Office without first standing in front of the nation and taking the Oath of Office! Only worse! God’s people are in office for far more than 4 years in a country far larger than one nation. We’re eternally bound to God and His country! And in our commitment, do we not absolutely have to have a door into that commitment? Dare I say a public one?

I didn’t have a problem taking the vows of membership at New Life. Now, after a year here, having learned much more about what Reformed, Confessional, Creedal and Covenantal really mean, I would retake those vows in a heartbeat, and say them again with far more gravity than the first time. I realize that we have a situation very analogous to Ruth’s covenant promise when we come to Christ’s church. I don’t see how a church could survive otherwise, for without these covenant oaths, there isn’t even a door-keeper. Ruth understood that, and said the password – and I don’t for a minute assume she didn’t intend to make this in front of God as much as Naomi and then expect to have to maintain the same before the Israel she was about to encounter.

Sheesh. The severity of these oaths, the commitment God has delivered to us, in light of the salvation He has made for us, all should take our breath away. If the continuity of God’s covenants and the Biblical consistency of our own promises which we make in return isn’t obvious by now, where can we go? I guess the test really is, at some point, to look carefully and see if we can honestly say, along with Ruth,

“where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus may the LORD do to me, and worse, if anything but death parts you and me.”

If that can happen, then we’ve at least the satisfaction of the keepers of the keys to Heaven.

1 comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in The Faith

October 31, 2011

Putting On and Taking Off the Mantle – Brother to Pastor and Back Again

By Pooka

I’ve been mulling a theme around for a few months now. It may go back as far as last year while we were attending the membership classes. This week, largely due to our Sunday school studies on worship, the unique role of Pastor hit me with enough that I want to explore some of my thoughts.

So I’m thinking about the unique situation in which we find ourselves each Lord’s Day with our brother and minister standing in the pulpit, proclaiming God’s Word. There, he is not Mr. Tallman or Brian or brother; rather he is God’s minister, acting in the role of a herald. For that period of the worship service, the minutes in which he calls us to worship, repentance, proclaims us forgiven, teaches the Word and baptizes and serves the Table, then blesses us and commissions us to go out into the world, he’s not the personality we know and love between the services.

It must be a real challenge for our pastor to switch gears from The Voice back to our brother. I’ve tried to envision what it’s like to come down from the pulpit at the end of the service and suddenly be interfacing with the people back on their level (no punning intended). We come up and thank him for his good preaching or comment on something he said in the sermon – or even tougher, come up with something entirely unrelated – selfish even that simply drops the entire last hour’s reverence. Perhaps it’s just as simple as this, that he takes a deep breath, shrugs and comes back into regular life. I mean, there’s no good thing to append to a properly run service – the interaction is complete (I know this sounds rather cold, but I mean it in a sense that’s reaching out to the hard thing our hearts have to sort of cross through). So when all’s done, there’s a truth here that all’s done.

Is it hard? Is it painful to step down and suddenly have this mixed up relationship that is a half-life of reverence for the minister and then a renewed Second Kingdom relationship with a brother we can turn to for comradeship, guidance and regular Christian interaction? There are times when I think I grasp a little of it – specially after the longer and more involved services we’ve attended. I’m thinking of those that include the additional components of new membership, baptism or the Supper.

When we get our things together and start the shuffle out of the sanctuary, occasionally I’ll end up on a path that passes by where the pastor has been “captured” by some of us up at the front. I’ve been one of the praise or off-topic folk plenty of times – though I admit at those times I haven’t thought much of what I was doing. But this week in particular, I was thinking, how do I talk to this guy? Do I compliment his preaching or a comment he made? Do I thank him in a general sort of way and just move on? Or maybe ask him about something that’s been bugging me for a while that I’m pretty sure could be wedged into context with the sermon (if I try hard)?

Now, I don’t want to create the sense that I’m griping or even raising the bar on reverence either in general or specifically toward the Office of the Minister. I do think that my perception of our pastor while he’s in the pulpit is growing more toward a sense that he’s not BST for that hour on Sunday morning. Though he is not suddenly transformed into some other thing, like an angel, maybe or into an apostle type, he’s not “just a man” at the same time, though he is just a man. I just wonder at the transition – and the dynamic that follows until we’ve really left for home. It’s remarkable.

Perhaps this can be read in Acts where the apostles are going about the business of picking the replacement for Judas and then contrasted with Peter’s sermon. Mundane (sort of) and then high and holy, magnifying God through the preaching of the Scriptures, probably illuminates the differences pretty well. But where’s the switch? Maybe later in Acts where Paul and Barnabas are preaching and reasoning and then suddenly they must shake off their “mantles of royalty” very abruptly to beat down the mob of would-be worshippers who are ready to sacrifice to these two who appear to be gods.

These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you. – Titus 2:15

Martin Luther served well to elucidate the high and serious position of the man in the pulpit in his Galatians commentary. Chapter 1 opened up right into the position of the minister.

“Every minister should make much of his calling and impress upon others the fact that he has been delegated by God to preach the Gospel. As the ambassador of a government is honored for his office and not for his private person, so the minister of Christ should exalt his office in order to gain authority among men. This is not vain glory, but needful glorying.”

“We exalt our calling, not to gain glory among men, or money, or satisfaction, or favor, but because people need to be assured that the words we speak are the words of God. This is no sinful pride. It is holy pride.”

There’s meat to all this. It’s not just a scholarly look into the philosophy or details of the Pastor’s phases of life. This is relevant to our view of worship in general. It presents a line, or boundary to our gathering that separates the church on Sunday morning from the church on Monday morning. There’s more than a functional gathering, more than something clinical to our practice.

I’ve occasionally visited a site that leads me to think about these things, and a couple of entries stand out: Pastoral Narcotic and Sabbath Preparation.

When Tolkien’s hobbits come home from Rivendell, they leave a sanctuary that is sort of transcendent-immanent, otherworldly with a far deeper connection to life and death, meaning and lore. And they cross the vale, the Bruinen Ford, heading west toward home, they start to see the familiar, commonplace world where carts kick up dust, taverns ply their meals and drink and people go about their days. And for Bilbo in the Hobbit and the Four Friends in the Return of the King, homecoming is somehow dimmer (at least that’s how I read it).

So our worship might be in turn: brighter and breathless, waiting for the sun to rise and elated when the Word is released to our ears and eyes and mouths. Though it means things may dim and lose their luster, once we’ve received our benediction,  perhaps it is good this way so that we are newly made and met each Sunday, out of the clay if only for a short while. It should increase our longing for the final Worship, which will not fade but will endure for all time.

I find that this growing sense of the immensity and value of the Worship time we have is something I want dearly for others. I want to see the Lord draw them from the water into a newness that they can savor. I think that this otherworldliness of our sanctuary on Sunday is more important than many of us are able (or willing) to consider easily. I don’t want to totally go mystical or sacramental on this – it’s not magical or miraculous in some occult or secret fashion. It’s secret to the degree that those who are not in Christ have no sense of or access to it. At best it must be a peripheral suspicion or inkling that something else is going on behind the obvious.

As with Rivendell, there is a mystical-ness to just being there, that does not follow once the Ford is crossed. The lore remains, in the minds of the departing as it remains in the Last Homely House. But for us, it remains in the gathered People of God, accessible when we are united in our worship on the Lord’s Day – we return to it each week. It is not passing, but enduring until a fulfillment which comes wonderfully and suddenly. I speak of an immediate time because it’s never very far off, the not yet of our Lord’s kingdom. Never far and we must live that way. Which is why the Lord’s day, the sacraments and the Word are not less frequently found than next Sunday.

6 comments   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in The Faith

October 4, 2011

The Finney Finish

By Pooka

Enemies of Soul Winning

Just another short, offered today for thoughts. My desire is for clear and discerning consideration of what we do, especially in tradition. I grew up in the following, and only at 36 years of age did it ever really occur that there was something really incorrect about the Finney Finish. How long it’s been in practice is an important question, of course, but more important, is there something in Scripture that promotes the practice in question? And how willing are we to blind ourselves in order to avoid making the critical call that damns generations of “accepted religion” to the rubbish heap.

Now ask the congregation, “With heads bowed, how many can say under God, ‘I know that if I died momentarily I would go to Heaven’?” Such an approach may be used, “Now while every head is bowed, every eye is closed, no one is leaving, no one is moving, with God being our witness, those of you who can say, ‘If I died today, I know beyond any shadow of doubt that I would go to Heaven,’ would you raise your hand?”

 

 

The Finney

“This is not the only way, of course, to conduct an invitation. It may not even be the best way. To be sure, there are many other good ways. But this pastor has found through twenty-two years’ experience that this is the most profitable way for his ministry. Perhaps, some of the aforementioned suggestions will help others in inviting the unsaved to come to the Saviour. One thing is certain: We need to put more emphasis upon the public invitation in our churches.May God help us to realize that this is a life-or-death proposition. Eternity is at stake. Eternal values rest on our efficiency and the anointing of God upon our methods and upon our message. May we spend more time than the surgeon would and be more diligent than the doctor would be as we wrestle, operate and work with the immortal souls of men, women, boys and girls.”

 

This was prompted by and therefore requires thanks to Andy Naselli’s Blog via Challies’ A La Carte

Some tasty, somewhat related eye-candy:

Altar Call

 

1 comment   |  tags: , , , | posted in The Faith, Three Minutes

October 3, 2011

The New Occupy Movement

By Pooka

Just a question.

Does anybody have an opinion on this thing that may be colored by a proper Biblical perspective? It doesn’t jive with my sense of right.

It started with the Occupy Wallstreet thing, but apparently has spread all over the US. And it all got inspiration from the Arab Spring thing.

“Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.”

Here are links:

http://occupywallst.org/

http://www.occupytogether.org/events/west/california/occupy-san-diego/

Comments open…

2 comments   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in special, The Faith

June 12, 2011

Escape Evangelicalism Or Reform Part 3

By Pooka

Carried over from Part 2.
Part 1 is here.

I don’t think we can ditch. Aren’t the Reformed still Evangelical? Aren’t Baptists from a history of devout believers? Just because either of these two camps have masses of stumbling congregations or tinkering leaders, should it be exit time? Even if there are waves of apostasy running through them, should we can the whole operation and become Catholics or worse (and I know I’m exaggerating). Writing off Evangelicalism just doesn’t seem the right way to me. Reforming it does. Rather than looking for a new religion that deviates just a little, and is off the grid, I think we should tackle the problem instead, before it does become high-time to run for the hills as with the Episcopals and the PCUSA. That’s the real sign that things are at the bottom.

Should we head off congregation that has the marks but with a big problem in the middle? In doing so, is it okay to convert to a different set of beliefs concerning salvation and sacraments that doesn’t jive with what we left behind?

I think, rather, that we should keep the mess, come at it with sound doctrine and grace in order to clean it up. If it’s one church at a time, so be it. I want others to know the joy of a Biblical church. What’s better than a church family that gathers around the Word and the Table, celebrating the freedom we have in Christ?

Here are some who are, in different ways, working on making that difference publicly.
Table Talk Radio
Fighting For The Faith
White Horse Inn
Albert Mohler

Those are just a few of my favorite things. I picked them because they’re podcasts and easy to follow. Funniest is, they’re from across the spectrum. Two Lutheran shows, a quartet of theologians from Baptist, Reformed and Lutheran spheres, and the President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

And you know what they’re all doing? Know what they are calling for?

Return to the Marks. Go back to the beginning. The Gospel, no frills. The Table, all the time. Discipline, courageously, passionately, lovingly. Just that. No more dollars under the seat, rock-star worship, outreach outreach outreach without in-reach in-reach in-reach. I heard somebody say, or maybe read it recently, “we need to pull back in and clean up the church before we head out to clean up the culture.”

I think that’s right on. If Christ isn’t in His Church, we can’t expect to bring Him out to the rest of the world.

3 comments   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in special, The Faith

June 11, 2011

Escape Evangelicalism or Reform Part 2

By Pooka

This is part 2 of my thoughts on my own travels through the church-o-sphere. Part 1 is here. I was talking about my experience and am now over to the difference in my arrival and finally the way it should be looked at from the beginning.

Coming in at a slew, I’ll explain. Three marks of the church (Four, sir!) are

• Preaching the Word (1 Timothy 4:6-16, 2 Timothy 3:1-4)

• Administering the Lord’s Supper and Baptism (Acts 2:41-42, Matt 28:19, Luke 22:19-20, 1 Corinthians 11:23-26)

• Church Discipline (Matthew 18:15-20, Titus 1:10-16)

• And, unofficially, Fellowship of the Saints

The preaching is straightforward. It’s focused on two things: Dealing with sin and Dealing with hope. We are given Law and Gospel for our sinful lives, to reveal our need and the remedy for our need. Then we are given, in the same breath, reason to continue, to persevere and look forward to our savior’s return. There’s no attempt to pull culture and philosophy of man into the teaching here. Our teachers want us to get the Bible. They want us to walk out on Sunday to face Monday with the Word of God as our philosophy and culture. I’m convinced of this. This battles my need for acceptance and significance. More importantly it humbles me, reminding me how dependant I am on the Word for my continuing as a faithful Christian. Losing the Word means losing my understanding of what’s really important. It’s humbling.

The sacraments are tougher, because they’re mystical, mysterious to some extent. But their impact is not. These two administrations are God’s most direct touch in our lives. Baptism is the monumental presentation of His claim on our lives and promise of the benefits of Christ. The Table is our fellowship with Christ at the head, meeting with us over His body and blood as He has done since the night before He died. These two things also battle my need for acceptance and significance by comforting me in the warm cloak of promises, belonging and being sustained.

Church Discipline knocks the ball out of the park. I’m thankful that there are caring, watchful leaders (and brothers) in my church who will step in to work me over if I’m in error. I have been straightened out a few times already. Discipline doesn’t mean punishment, it means care-giving from the education all the way to the calibration of a believer. It’s a church that desires most that her members believe, believe rightly and behave in keeping with that belief. True joy and contentment come from being on the right path!

These things aren’t marks of the True Church because the congregation simply does them. It’s because they WORK in the congregation. You can go about these things the wrong way. Just check out the problems listed all over the Web and in piles of (the intelligent ones) Evangelical publications.

The marks have to be a positive presence of Word, Sacrament and Discipline. I think you’ll best see that in the fellowship of the saints. It’s probably the real product of the rest. And I guess that’s why it’s not included in the official list, because if you have the Big THREE, you get the Big ONE.

Thing is, that’s what I think I was looking for. That’s what believers are looking for. Generally speaking, the Evangelosphere is not stocking it on the shelves.

I’ll grant that the MER churches are hiding the truth (not necessarily intentionally) behind meeting desires. They’re substituting Christmas Presents for Daily Rations. Ask your kids which they’d really like:

• Ask ‘em about a new toy and cookies or no present but a hearty meal and what will they say?

• Ask ‘em about a new toy and second-chance or no present but a spanking – what then?

• Ask ‘em about a new toy or an “I love you” and a hug – what’s the response?

You may mean well… But they’ll candy and play themselves to death. There are those who have gone so far that I’m sure they’re more than aware of their gross crimes. Thankfully, that’s not the norm. Yet.
Speaking to something that is probably a temptation for many, and happens from time to time as various movements or denominations head south, should we seriously consider separation?

Part 3 follows.

2 comments   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in special, The Faith

June 10, 2011

Escape Evangelicalism or Reform Part 1

By Pooka

A look at travels through the church-o-sphere.

Some of my background and travels through the Mainstream Evangelical Religion (MER): Having done the church search with my family through the years we’ve been a Christian household, we’ve gone through a fair gauntlet of the variety of MER congregations. We’ve been to

1. non-denom Pentecostal (Word of faith/prosperity/healing)

2. dry, dusty SBC

3. hard-chargin’ Fundamentalist

4. believer or disciple (two kinds of Christian) stereotypical MER

5. nearly isolationist Reformed Baptist

6. kind and faithful Evangelical Free

7. Confessional, PCA

And those are just the longer-termed stays. Being regularly moved around the country (ever 2-3 years), we haven’t been allowed to mesh thoroughly into our local congregation. Important as time is, I think that “giving it enough time” is overrated. In a couple of cases, we gave it too much time. I’ll give the credit to my Wonderful Wife, who is not guilty of this failure. She comes to good conclusions well before I do, and usually my decisions are made because she throws in the final Lego Brick that completes my constructed reasoning. I’m unwilling to just jump when it comes to churches – unwisely so, most of the time.

Point is, experience was a major part of joining all these churches, to the sacrifice of considering doctrine. I didn’t think through the -ologies very well. I can blame that on new-believer syndrome or simply grabbing for what sounded good in my lack of thorough understanding, but it was a failure either way. It took some time to settle down, learn, grasp the life-blood theology that has taken root in my heart and mind. I thought good environment was good theology, in other words. It matched my own desires, made me feel important or necessary, which is a major sin I’ve battled most of my life. I was blinded to my sin and the error in doctrine, culture and practice.

Later on, I ended up swinging on the pendulum and putting doctrine in front of environment. That is probably a better end, but not if the doctrine presented is in error. Or, worse, that it has replaced the subject of the doctrine. I bought that line, hook and sinker. I’m one of the elitist-intellectual types mentioned in an article “Why I Walked Away From Evangelicalism.” I love to look down my nose at those other “little people” who are wrong or hopelessly dumb. It’s a sin I love to sin. And I hate it. But the experience of being on the right path, passing up all those other Christians (leaving them in the dust) was too good, so I was blinded to my sin and to the error in the doctrine, culture and practice.

One could try the claim out on me, questioning “what’s different about the church you’re in now?” And I admit that my sin is not eradicated. I think I can still easily gloss over failures in my church because of the benefits. And I know I can stare down the roughest-toughest Evangellyfish sub-Christian with my newfound power-theology. But I believe a couple of things about this church that both provide a safety-net for me and are going to help me deal with my failures. On with the Reformed bandwagon in Part 2.

4 comments   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in special, The Faith

April 4, 2011

My Progress In Theology 6

By Pooka

From my paper “Covenant Theology As Grasped By A Regular Guy”

This part here is at the heart of covenant theology. It is where the Reformed depart from the Evangelical mainstream. My convictions are no longer a product of a roughly realized “second family” of God. There is a lot of cargo in this change in my theology. I understand that I’ve discarded a lot of the practices and systems of my past in cleaving to CT. Rather than discussing all this Church-Israel relationship, drum beating that I think is more diatribe and pontificating I don’t need to pursue, I intend to measure some of the differences into which this change has led. Here is what I wrote:

In the church, we see a correspondence to Israel. The church is Israel fully realized. This makes sense if we consider the nature of both New Testament Church and Old Testament Israel and see their positions in the covenants.

Israel is God’s People. They are His people. A holy nation. Exodus 6:1-9.
The Church is God’s people. They are His people. A holy nation. Hebrews 8:1-13.

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. Galatians 3:7-9

Both are given rules to live by and ordinances that set members apart from the outside. Circumcision and ceremonial law, the temple and priesthood served Israel for their identification, purification and instruction. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper serving the Church for their identification, purification and instruction. Note that Christ is ultimately the source of regeneration and forgiveness in both.

The Old Testament covenantal administration was a shadow of what Christ would do perfectly. From circumcision to sacrifice, from kings to prophets and judges, Christ is all of them now.

Similarly, both were required to accomplish God’s will. They both were to believe and obey Him.

This tells me that there may be differences in the way God dealt with His people economically, the fundamental essence of His people has not changed. Though the Old Covenant was outward in application, being written on stone and practiced in ritual and the New Covenant is inward, written on the hearts of men, the elect in Israel are saved in the same fashion as the elect in the church. God calls them to repentance and to trust in Him for new hearts, forgiveness, and to supply that obedience that cannot be accomplished by the people.

If this view of the Scriptures, that covenants guide our relationship to God and that Jesus fulfilled the covenantal requirements, is the heart of CT, then the spine is the character that Reformed churches maintain in being Confessional. Confessional churches are those who adhere to a set of standards which distill the Bible’s main teachings, regulate their practices and essentially clarify who is orthodox in their Christianity. This is not to say that a non-confessional church is not orthodox (properly teaching and believing in accordance with the Scripture), since there are many who are. It simply means that Reformed churches hold to a tradition that submits that men are not good at innovating when it comes to religion.

In order to conform to a Biblical standard of belief and teaching, worship and relationship in-and-out of the church, the Reformed (at least Presbyterian and derivatives of the Dutch Reformed) have submitted to a body of creedal or doctrinal statements called standards. Here are either the Westminster Standards or the Three Forms Of Unity that lay out the principles Christians have historically drawn from the Bible. I’ve sort of fallen in love with this aspect of my church. We have a government that doesn’t center around one person or even entirely on a group, but all members and leaders together have committed themselves to adhering to the Standards as the benchmark for their orthodoxy. The Standards are, as I said, a compilation of the central doctrines that have survived the test of the centuries in all the varieties of cultural complications since the Bible was canonized. In this system, confessionalism, the culture that grows up around one man or one theological emphasis is capably combated. Everyone has a basis for their perspective on the most critical aspects of the church and faith.

The thing that stands out to me in these confessions is that the idea of God dealing with His people in covenants is explicit.

WCF VII.I. The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto Him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God’s part, which He has been pleased to express by way of covenant.

Okay. I’m about to finish up here tonight. I have only 2 more things to say.

First, I have to make sure this is clear, that the Reformed don’t go to the Standards to form their hermeneutic relationship to the Scriptures. The Reformed developed the Standards as a synopsis and guide for reference based on their hermeneutic relationship to the Scriptures. In no way to the Standards determine orthodoxy, rather, they are the reflection of the ultimate standards that are present in God’s Word.

Second, I highly Highly recommend that everyone read through the Westminster Standards or the Three Forms Of Unity at some point in their theological studies. They are accessible to any reading level, valuable to pastors as well as us little guys and absolutely fabulous for instructing children. Anyone who doesn’t really get the idea of a high view of Church, the Preached Word, Elder Leadership and many other “highs” of the confessional churches should read these valuable resources with care. 

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in The Faith

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 123 other followers