Worship as Aliens

"So we must gather on a regular basis for worship. To speak about God in a world that lives as if there is no God. We must speak to one another as beloved brothers and sisters in a world which encourages us to live as strangers. We must pray to God to give us what we cannot have by our own efforts in a world which teaches us that we are self-sufficient and all-powerful. In such a world, what we do here on Sunday morning becomes a matter of life and death..."

Citation from "Resident Aliens"; Hauerwas & Willimon; (Abingdon Press, 1989 ; pg. 154

Resident Aliens

"The church exists today as resident aliens, an adventurous colony in a society of unbelief. As a society of unbelief, Western culture is devoid of a sense of journey, of adventure, because it lacks belief in much more than the cultivation of an ever-shrinking horizon of self-preservation and self-expression."

"Resident Aliens"; Hauerwas & Willimon; (1989, Abingdon Press); pg. 49

Of This & That

It has been a while since I have posted anything here. It is not for lack of ideas or issues to write and comment on. That said, it must be confessed there has been a certain lack of energy or enthusiasm to rush to print my pontifications on the latest cascading waves of news that have swept through the Evangelical church as well as the world at large. In an age of 30 second sound bites, news is here today and gone tomorrow.

Part of the ennui also has to do with the deja vu nature of the news cycle. How many fallen mega-church pastors have we heard about over the last umpteen years or more? How much political BS keeps repeating and repeating and repeating? What can you say that has not been said before, or at the issue in hand, others have already written about? Lord forgive me and deliver me from cynicism. With all that said, I will attempt to set forth a few thoughts.

Being a Deacon in an Evangelical Baptist church is interesting. Oddly enough, the greatest satisfaction I have from being a Deacon is in serving the Lord's Supper to the people of God. The tradition in our church is for the Deacons to serve the bread and cup, or more accurately in our case, the gluten free wafers and the trays holding the little cups of grape juice. The Communion assignments are rotated so that over time, a Deacon will have opportunity to serve the bread and cup to just about everyone in our congregation, I really enjoy and receive much satisfaction in the performing of that service,

There are of course, other duties and responsibilities I have as a Deacon. One of the questions we as a Deacon Council ask ourselves from time to time is, "Are we what we say we are, or are we what we do?" That tension comes from those responsibilities we have and perform that might more properly fall under the office of Elder. I am not convinced there are any churches that have a perfect form and organization for church government. I know there are some who like to make that claim, but from what I have seen, they doth protest to much. Nor am I convinced that the Bible and New Testament in particular, are as clear on how church government should be organized as some would have us believe.

Our church is a relatively large church, though not what I would call a mega-church. That larger size presents challenges in terms of ministering to the whole body. None of us want anyone to fall through the cracks. That is always a challenge. There is more I could say, but will leave it for another time.

The seasons are changing; another week and Autumn will officially be upon us. The days continue to grow shorter. I have now been retired for ten months. I am still sort of working out what "retired" means. I had visions of doing more writing, but though I did finish some projects earlier in the year, not much has happened over the last three to four months. Getting our kitchen renovated was part of the reason for lack of writing output as well as the general ennui spoken of above. Writing is a discipline, and if I am to be any kind of writer at all, I will need to be disciplined in pursuing it.

The Football season is in full swing,(Go MSU Spartans!), and hockey is not far behind. In the meantime our Tigers are doing what they can to make it to the baseball post-season playoffs. Will this be the year the Tiger roars? Time will tell...

Paul's Warning in Galatians 5

.

"You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other." (Galatians 5:13-15)

Bitter, angry, and vicious personal attacks. Ad-hominum argumentation. As I look on from a distance and see these things, what am I to think of you and the movement and person you purport to defend? I choose not to insert here any links to your "controversy". And I refrain from doing so more to protect you from the embarrassment of your own words. (I use plural pronouns here.) No my friends, this is not about the recent issues at the Gospel Coalition, but is something else entirely, of which most of you who read this have little or no knowledge, and for such unawareness you should be thankful. Where I had hoped for an increasing maturity, I find immaturity still reigns, and even if I thought one side did better at forbearance than the other, the back biting and scathing opprobrium speaks volumes. You bite and devour each other. Beware lest you end up destroying each other.

May God yet have mercy on you.

Of This and That

It has been very hot and dry in our part of Michigan. We have not seen a good rain since back in June somewhere. Lawns are brown. My water bill will be going through the roof from watering all the flower gardens. We have had several stretches where temperatures have been in the 90 - 100 plus F range.

Farmers are being hit hard by the drought. Over half the country is experiencing drought, and in more then a few places there will be no crop to harvest. I know some people that farm, and my prayers go out for them. It is going to be a rough year.

Reading:

"The little town behind them had vanished as if it had never been, had fallen behind the swell of the prairie, and the stern frozen country received them into its bosom. The homesteads were few and far apart; here and there a windmill gaunt against the sky, a sod house crouching in a hollow. But the great fact was the land itself, which seemed to overwhelm the little beginnings of human society that struggled in its sombre wastes. " ~ Willa Cather "Oh Pioneers!"

I am reading "Oh Pioneers". Willa Cather was a great writer. I am in awe of how she makes the land an integral part of the story. There is a sense in which "Oh Pioneers" is as much about the land as it is about the people. A Number of years ago I read "My Antonia" and when done with "Oh Pioneers", I have "The Song of the Lark" on my "to read" list.

Note to the Detroit Tigers: With this year's All Star game in the history books, we are now in the second part of the season, and it is time for you guys to put it all together and take this division. You may also want to think about winning enough games to secure home field advantage in the playoffs. Just say'n...

Regarding the SBC and Lifeway Bookstores and the movie "Blindside": Way to much has already been said by both sides, so I choose to mind my own business and avoid adding to the pontifical pronouncements profusely proliferating pompously over cyber-space.

A Holy Meal: The Lord's Supper in the Life of the Church

by Gordon T. Smith (Baker Academic, 2005)



I found this to be an excellent reading on the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper.  The writing is not shallow, but neither is it overly academic.  Often one's view of the Lord's Supper is skewed by the particular emphasis of our particular Christian tradition.  Dr. Smith opens with discussion of the meaning of eating, symbol, and sacrament. He then looks at the Lord's Supper as described by the following seven chapter headings:  

1. Remembrance: The Lord's Supper as a Memorial
2. Communion: The Lord's Supper as Fellowship with Christ and with One Another
3. Forgiveness: The Lord's Supper as a Table of Mercy
4. Covenant: The Lord's Supper as a Renewal of Baptismal Vows
5. Nourishment: The Lord's Supper as Bread from Heaven
6. Anticipation: The Lord's Supper as a Declaration of Hope
7. Eucharist: The Lord's Supper as a Joyous Thanksgiving Celebration

In my own church background and circles the historic emphasis has been on the Lord's Supper as a memorial.  As Smith rightly points out, the Lord's Supper is indeed a memorial, but it is not just a memorial.  This realization makes the Table even more meaningful and personal. 

Smith does not separate the Supper from the Word or the working of the Holy Spirit.  It is the Word that gives us the context and informs us of the meaning and purpose of the Supper.  It is  the Holy Spirit that makes the meaning and purpose of the Supper real to us in our corporate church life as well as in the individual lives of each believer participating.  The author also understands there is a certain mystery to the Lord's Supper that our intellect will not fully comprehend, but it is also that same intellect that informs our humble obedience in observing the Supper.

The reader may come across a statement or two in this book that could cause the eyebrows to raise in question or disagreement.  Dr. Smith's own view of the Lord's Supper has roots that go back through John Calvin, and as such reflects an overall view of the Table that I am personally sympathetic to.   Whatever few statements raised my eyebrows were far out weighed by the positive contribution Dr. Smith has made to the church's understanding of the Lord's Supper. 

If you are sensing that there is more to the Lord's Supper then your tradition's peculiar emphasis; that perhaps there is something about the meaning and purpose of the Lord's Supper that you are missing, this will be a helpful  book to read.

~ The Billy Goat ~

Billy Goat Log; October 17,2010

• In thinking of the Lord's Supper, the question is not, "Is the Lord's table a sacrament?" The question is "How is the Lord's table a sacrament and what is the nature of the grace conveyed in that sacrament?" That there would be an ordnance of worship that is not somehow a means of grace in bringing the worshiper closer to God strikes a discordant note similar to that of a fingernail scratching on a chalk board.
  
  This week I picked up the book; This is My Body: The Presence of Christ in Reformation Thought by Thomas J. Davis (Baker, 2008). I'm just getting into it. It is a bit on the scholarly side, but traces the development of reformation thought regarding the Eucharist. Stay tuned.
  
  
• In the discussion of young earth/old earth or young universe/old universe there seems to be a missing element on both sides. Time is not constant, but relative. I don't know enough about physics to understand if or how e=mc² proves time is not a constant. I do have a philosophical rationale argument for saying time is relative based on its measurement being founded in the relationship of mass and motion.
  
  Has anyone in the young earth camp on the one side, or the theistic evolution camp on the other side, ever discussed the implications of time's relativity on the whole creation question and our understanding of Genesis 1? They may have, and if so, I'd like to see it.
  
  
• Back in May I posted a note here about second and third hand reports of some of the turmoil in the loose association of churches our former church is part of. Recently I came across first hand proof of that turmoil on one of the blogs associated with that movement. The division, (and it is a division), is between the "old path" group and the "Reforming" group. The blog post was defending the old-path side, and it was in the comments that the differences between the two became highlighted as representatives from each side set forth their case.
  
  It is not my point to get into the details of those issues. (That's why I'm not linking to that blog post). That blog post and the comments made in response reinforced the conclusions I expressed back in the May posting referenced above.
  
  Reading that blog post reminded me of why it was that nine years ago we left that church and movement. I am so relieved and thankful we are away from that atmosphere and culture; that we are now beyond all that, and have gone on with our lives. And I'm also thankful the Lord directed our paths to another church that is much more healthy and balanced. "Here to the Lord has helped us."
  
  
• Story line: "The Life and Times of St. Lester the Unbeliever and His Role in the First Intergalactic Ecumenical Synod of 3457 (CEE)¹".
  
  (¹ Common Earth Era, formerly designated AD.)
  
  
• Once upon a time, in another lifetime, I graduated from high school. One of the hit songs of 1967 was this rock classic.
  

A Broader Vision of Ministry

"When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, "The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field." (Matthew 9:36-38)

We live very close to a metropolitan area with a population estimated to be over 775,000 people. Within a 10 mile radius from where we live there are about 218 churches, and that includes all denominations; Catholic, Lutheran, other mainline Protestant denominations, and so forth. Do the math and we have approximately 1 church for every 3,500 people in the metro area.

Now lets include a plus/minus for other factors involved in where people in the area might go to church, if they go at all. For that plus/minus, lets go as high as 30%. Why 30%? Because that's the number I pulled off the top of my head. (I'm not claiming this is scientifically precise.) Our range is now 4,550 - 2,540 per church. Even if my estimate for the number of churches in the area is off by plus/minus 30%, the ratio of the total population to the number of churches is pretty high. And it should be clear that if we divided the area's population by only the number of Evangelical churches in the area, the ratio goes up even higher. Let me ask a question.

Is this area "over-churched"?

I think not...

So what do we do? One of the things we do is pray for laborers to enter into the harvest, but do we recognize them when we see them? Do we recognize the answer to our own prayers?

A brother has a vision for the need. He wants to do something about it. He even has the audacity to believe there is a need to start another church in the area. How do we respond? Do we encourage him? I'm not talking about a man who is a novice, new to the faith. I'm talking about a man that has a relative level of spiritual maturity, and has even had some level of ministerial and theological training.

One of the objections we might hear is, "But he's not qualified..."

Oh really?

Maybe for your church and tradition he isn't. And maybe he doesn't fit your ecclesiastical circle, but do you really want to write him out of all ministry whatsoever because he doesn't cross all your "t"'s and dot all your "i"'s? You really want to claim that your tradition alone has the market on the what and how of the Timothy and Titus passages on the qualifications for ministry? Oh really?

What would happen if instead you said, "Brother! I thank God for your vision and desire. I'm not sure how well you fit our tradition and our way of doing things, but if you can find some group that you fit better with, and they are willing to help you, then go in peace with our blessing, and we will pray God uses you to start that church and that it will be able to reach some of those in our desperately needy metropolitan area that we are not able to reach."

To say such a thing and really mean it would require humility in several areas.

We would need to be humble enough to realize we in our particular Christian tradition are not Lord of "the call".

We would need to be humble enough to recognize the work of the Holy Spirit in building Christ's church is not limited to our particular Christian tradition or ecclesiastical group.

We would need to be humble enough to look beyond our own particular tradition and ecclesiastical circles and actively embrace and pray for God's work outside our limited boundaries. To do so requires the humility to admit that the churches of my own particular tradition or ecclesiastical circle cannot meet the massive overwhelming need in our metropolitan area by ourselves.

Over the past few months I've become aware of two separate situations of men with a vision of the desperate needs in our metropolitan area and a God given desire to do something about it. All tradition and ecclesiastical circles aside, here is my response.

"Brothers! God bless you! May He use you to reach some of those desperately needy people in our metro area that the rest of us are not reaching. God bless you! Go in peace! May He guide and direct you in all you do to His honor and glory alone! Amen!"

Rattling Your Theological Tradition's Sensibilities

Let's face it. I'm a conservative Evangelical who happens to go to a Baptist church. Over the past few year I've come to appreciate that "tradition" and value it much more then I once did.

I'm not talking about cultural evangelicalism; that culture which at times makes me want to just puke. I'm talking about a solid theological Evangelicalism and the expressions of that evangelical theology worked out in the lives of those who hold to it. It is in that sense I speak of the the Evangelical church as my mother. It was that Evangelicalism working through a campus ministry that the Sovereign God used to effectually call me unto Himself.

Now it is also true we can and do get in a rut in whatever Christian "tradition" we find ourselves at home in. That's why it is good to occasionally get outside of that tradition and expose yourself to something that, though orthodox, yet is different enough to really rattle the sensibilities of your own tradition.

You know in your head that the work of the Holy Spirit is not limited by the boundaries of your particular Christian tradition. But if you want to make that idea more then theoretical, then once in a while you need to go see for yourself.

I had a chance to rattle my Evangelical Baptist sensibilities today when we visited an orthodox Anglican church.

Today was Trinity Sunday and the focus of the worship was the Trinity. Ancient songs such as St. Patrick's Prayer were mixed with contemporary songs such as "How Great is Our God". The sermon was about the Trinity, and the preaching was articulate and orthodox. A recitation of the Nicene Creed was also part of the liturgy along with the Scripture readings from the Old Testament, Gospels, and Epistles.

Then there was the communion. The orthodox Anglicans hold a more sacramental view of the Lord's Supper. This raises the question of what is meant by the real presence of our Lord in the communion. At the same time, even though visitors from another Christian tradition, we were welcome to partake in the communion.

It was very clear that this church was very orthodox on the issues of the Trinity and on Jesus as both God and man. The same God I as an Evangelical Baptist worship was being worshipped in this Anglican church. It is also clear from the conversations we have had with family members who go to this church, that the Holy Spirit is working in the life of the church corporately, and in the lives of members of the church individually.

Yes Virginia, the Holy Spirit is at work in Christian traditions other then my own conservative Evangelical tradition. Frankly I think that's just fantastic, and I thank God for it... I love it when in a good way, my sensibilities are rattled like that.

Will I ever be an Anglican? Very probably not for all the reasons I first mentioned. I did find myself pondering the question of the real presence, and I may do some more study and wrestling with that.

I also found myself thinking of the Evangelical Baptist liturgy used at our church. I found I did appreciate it; that in its essence God is honored and worshipped and the Holy Spirit is working through the ministry of the church in the life of the church corporately and in the lives of the members individually.

Sola Deo Gloria!

The Real Meaning of a Word

It was recently mentioned to me, second or third hand, how a certain somewhat loosely associated group of churches were going through some degree of turmoil. The division was labeled as being between "traditionalists" and "progressives".

It is not at all my purpose to comment on the issues between the two sides. I have no direct connection to these events or the issues at hand. That said, I do have some familiarity with the history of this particular movement. It was that knowledge that prompted me to question what was meant by "progressive".

"Progressive" is a relative word. To be progressive is to, at some level, move from a base reference point towards a point away from that base; and in doing so, make the new point the base of reference. Opinion may vary as to that movement being "progressive" or "regressive", but my point is that either term is relative to that original base reference point.

In the case in question, I might look at the progressives and say that, relatively speaking, they are making what I believe is positive movement, but at the same time believe the movement made, while progressive, has not progressed far enough to get those involved to where they really need to be. It all goes back to where that original starting point is.

In thinking of this I was again reminded of examples I have observed in the past of how necessary Biblical change is sometimes resisted.

"We don't want to over react." This statement gives a certain level of recognition that we may be imbalanced, but no plan ever comes forward for how we should react, and we end up not reacting at all, thus the status quo is maintained.

Related to this is the saying, "If we have to err, we should err on the side of (fill in the blank)." The Bible doesn't give us the option of erring on either side. The ethical demand of the Bible is that we get it precisely right. Now thankfully the Bible is more then just ethical demands, and forgiveness and redemption are also a major part of the story. The point is we should not allow this statement to give us false comfort, nor allow it to feed our sense of self-righteous complacency. If we know we err to one side or another in a matter, we need to hold out both arms, and with our hands, firmly grasp both extremes.

Then there is the "slippery slope" argument; known in debate as the slippery slope fallacy. The argument is that once we take that step in the other direction, it will be the first step in a series that leads to a very bad end. The problem with that argument is that if the Bible is telling us we need to move, then we need to move period. To use the slippery slope fallacy to avoid that movement results in sin based in fear; fear that in spite of its appearance of holiness and doctrinal zeal, is often rooted in a failure to more fully trust the promises of God.

All of that said, I confess I have to make a conscious effort to avoid sinful cynicism. It is not for me to say the Holy Spirit can't or will not work in the hearts of those involved in any particular movement of churches. In this particular situation, I welcome any degree of true Biblical progressive movement, and thank God for it.

Peace,

~ The Billy Goat ~

Joylessness in Reformed Chritianity

"I wasn't born and raised in the Reformed church. In other words, I am a Reformed immigrant. Like many people in the Reformed church today, I migrated out of broad based evangelicalism and non-denominationalism. Many of my friends, both ministers and laypeople, have had similar immigration experiences.

Recently, at the funeral of my father-in-law, I had the opportunity to get reacquainted with many of my Reformed immigrant friends. Much to my surprise, I found myself having a very similar conversation with this group. They shared with me that they felt like something was missing in their Reformed experience. While they were all satisfied with the doctrine, worship and government of the church they spoke of a missing intangible element. They had trouble articulating the exact nature of this missing element. I suggested a variety of terms to give it a name and the one that seemed to come closest was "joy." These immigrants perceived the Reformed church to be suffering from a deficiency of spiritual joy."

These conversations got me thinking. I did my own assessment of my Reformed experience and, I must admit, I had to agree that "joyful" was not one of the first adjectives that came to my mind to describe it. Then I began to contemplate why the Reformed church seems to be lacking in the joy department. My contemplation yielded two main reasons.

(The Joy of the Reformed by Anthony Selvaggio December 2009.)

If it was appropriate, I'd copy the entirety of Mr. Selvaggio's article. He goes on to discuss two reasons he sees for the lack of joy in the Reformed church; the migration of Evangelical malcontents into the Reformed movement, and "...perpetually circling the theological wagons." Please also note Selvaggio's evaluation comes from his position within the Reformed movement. This is coming from one of the Reformed's own.

Selvaggio proposes a remedy, and in so far as it goes, I believe the proposed remedy has merit as it does, in its own way, call for a focus on the promises of God.

That said, what was noticeable in my mind was his lack of discussion of joy as the fruit of the Spirit, and in fact, among the very first of the fruit of the Spirit as listed by Paul in Galations 5:22. This is where my own concern for the Reformed church comes to focus.

I spent a little over 25 years in a Reformed (Baptist) church. About 7 years ago we left that church and started attending a more mainstream Evangelical Baptist church. It is on the basis of that experience that I totally understand Mr. Selvaggio's statements, "...they felt like something was missing in their Reformed experience." and "These immigrants perceived the Reformed church to be suffering from a deficiency of spiritual joy."

One of the very first things we noticed about our new church, in contrast to the Reformed church we had left, was the much greater and obvious level of honest, genuine, authentic Christian joy expressed by the people and manifest in the life of the congregation corporately.

This raised a question in my mind. If, as the Bible says, joy is a fruit of the Spirit, what does that say for the joyless Reformed church? A tree is known by its fruit. If my Reformed theology and the Reformed preaching from the pulpit of the Reformed church is not producing the fruit of the Spirit in my life, then something is not right and we need to do some VERY deep soul searching.

This becomes even more critical and vital when I look at raising my children in such a church. It was that very concern that 7 years ago drove me from the Reformed church back into the Evangelical mainstream. (I'm still a Calvinist, but I no longer call myself Reformed.) If my children were to know true Chrisitan joy, the joy that is the fruit of the Spirit, then they need to be raised in a church and thological climate that clearly demnstrates that joy in the life of individual believers and in the corporate life of the congregation, and that along with all the other fruit of the Spirit as well.

I beleive there are probably some Reformed churches out there somewhere who have managed by the grace of God to hold and nuance their theology in a way that produces a noticable level of genuine Christian joy. That said, in a sizable part of the Reformed movement there is the need to do some VERY DEEP soul seaarching at this point.

Kyrie eleison...

"One of the tragedies of the current Christian evangelical scene is the divisive tendencies present in many strands of the community. When the subtradition is more crucial than the Christian tradition, we fragment the unity to which God has called us and for which the Lord intercedes (John 17)......

In our zeal for creedal commitment, we can draw lines to identify our subtradition and forget we share a larger, more fundmental identity. This is not to deny the value of subtraditons or their contribution to the whole body of Christ, but it is to say that the task before the Christian community to reflect the love of Christ and evangelize the world is so vast that no subtradition can do it all by itself. It is also to say that the basic commitments and obligations to which God calls us commit us to the whole of His body, not just the part of it in which we function most easily......"

Craig A. Blaising & Darrell L. Bock, Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition; Baker Academic; (September 1, 2000)

Of This and That

• Of Matches and Autumn Fires: I'm losing my touch. Tonight I went to light a fire in our portable outdoor fireplace and it took me about 6 or plus matches to get the fire going. That's a little humbling to me because I've taken pride in being able to start such fires with just one match. The kindling would not cooperate. That was my fault for not being more careful about the material I was using for kindling. I finally got a steady flame going, and in the end it was a really nice fire. It was a beautiful crisp Fall night for having a fire. I enjoyed just sitting out on the patio and watching the flames dancing and flickering.
  
  
• Revisiting Hemingway: Back at the first of this year I picked up and read Hemingway's For Whom The Bells Toll. In my mind, Farewell to Arms, The Sun Also Rises, and For Whom The Bells Toll constitute a Hemingway trilogy of sorts. It is the two war novels that give the setting and context for understanding the rampant anomie found in the story being told in The Sun Also Rises. The generation that fought in WW-I (Farewell To Arms) is the "lost generation" of The Sun Also Rises. And if that was not enough, we then have the disillusionment that came out of the horrors and atrocities of the Spanish Civil War (For Whom The Bells Toll). Someday I want to develop this perspective into a full blown essay with the premise that these three Hemingway novels taken together, give us a picture of the birth and development of post-modernity in the early 20th Century.
  
  
• I love "the Church". Yes, the church that is represented by institutions known as local congregations. It is because of the church, universal and institutional, that I have the Bible in my own language. It was this church that supported the college and university Gospel outreach that a Sovereign God used to bring me to Himself. (Rest in peace Mr. Bill Bright.) It has been the "Doctors" of this church that honed and worked out from that Bible the theology that helps me understand and make sense of what the Christian life is about. It is the Pastors of that church that faithfully explain the Word of God and feed my soul. It is in the fellowship of that church where I find encouragement and friendship with those in whom I see the image of Christ being formed.
  
  I know this church is not perfect. I know it's not always as authentic as it should be. Yes, there have even been times when some in this church have let me down, or even betrayed me. I'm not perfect either.
  
  I love the church. I love the church because I love Jesus Christ. Because I love Him, I also love the bride He loves. The church is not perfect, but one day it will be. I am not perfect, but by the grace of God, one day I will be.
  
  I love the Church.
  

Calvin on External Discipline and Ceremonies

[I separated and underlined the part of this quote I wanted to focus on. I'm including all of section 30 and 31 so that part can be seen in the context in which Calvin wrote it. ~ The Billy Goat ~]

From: Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book Four, Chapter 10

30. But as there is here a danger, on the one hand, lest false bishops should thence derive a pretext for their impious and tyrannical laws, and, on the other, lest some, too apt to take alarm, should, from fear of the above evils, leave no place for laws, however holy, it may here be proper to declare, that I approve of those human constitutions only which are founded on the authority of God, and derived from Scripture, and are therefore altogether divine. Let us take, for example, the bending of the knee which is made in public prayer. It is asked, whether this is a human tradition, which any one is at liberty to repudiate or neglect? I say, that it is human, and that at the same time it is divine. It is of God, inasmuch as it is a part of that decency, the care and observance of which is recommended by the apostle; and it is of men, inasmuch as it specially determines what was indicated in general, rather than expounded. From this one example, we may judge what is to be thought of the whole class—viz. that the whole sum of righteousness, and all the parts of divine worship, and everything necessary to salvation, the Lord has faithfully comprehended, and clearly unfolded, in his sacred oracles, so that in them he alone is the only Master to be heard.

But as in external discipline and ceremonies, he has not been pleased to prescribe every particular that we ought to observe (he foresaw that this depended on the nature of the times, and that one form would not suit all ages), in them we must have recourse to the general rules which he has given, employing them to test whatever the necessity of the Church may require to be enjoined for order and decency. Lastly, as he has not delivered any express command, because things of this nature are not necessary to salvation, and, for the edification of the Church, should be accommodated to the varying circumstances of each age and nation, it will be proper, as the interest of the Church may require, to change and abrogate the old, as well as to introduce new forms. I confess, indeed, that we are not to innovate rashly or incessantly, or for trivial causes. Charity is the best judge of what tends to hurt or to edify: if we allow her to be guide, all things will be safe.

31. Things which have been appointed according to this rule, it is the duty of the Christian people to observe with a free conscience indeed, and without superstition, but also with a pious and ready inclination to obey. They are not to hold them in contempt, nor pass them by with careless indifference, far less openly to violate them in pride and contumacy. You will ask, What liberty of conscience will there be in such cautious observances? Nay, this liberty will admirably appear when we shall hold that these are not fixed and perpetual obligations to which we are astricted, but external rudiments for human infirmity, which, though we do not all need, we, however, all use, because we are bound to cherish mutual charity towards each other. This we may recognise in the examples given above. What? Is religion placed in a woman’s bonnet, so that it is unlawful for her to go out with her head uncovered? Is her silence fixed by a decree which cannot be violated without the greatest wickedness? Is there any mystery in bending the knee, or in burying a dead body, which cannot be omitted without a crime? By no means. For should a woman require to make such haste in assisting a neighbour that she has not time to cover her head, she sins not in running out with her head uncovered. And there are some occasions on which it is not less seasonable for her to speak than on others to be silent. Nothing, moreover, forbids him who, from disease, cannot bend his knees, to pray standing. In fine, it is better to bury a dead man quickly, than from want of grave-clothes, or the absence of those who should attend the funeral, to wait till it rot away unburied. Nevertheless, in those matters the custom and institutions 2437of the country, in short, humanity and the rules of modesty itself, declare what is to be done or avoided. Here, if any error is committed through imprudence or forgetfulness, no crime is perpetrated; but if this is done from contempt, such contumacy must be disapproved. In like manner, it is of no consequence what the days and hours are, what the nature of the edifices, and what psalms are sung on each day. But it is proper that there should be certain days and stated hours, and a place fit for receiving all, if any regard is had to the preservation of peace. For what a seed-bed of quarrels will confusion in such matters be, if every one is allowed at pleasure to alter what pertains to common order? All will not be satisfied with the same course if matters, placed as it were on debatable ground, are left to the determination of individuals. But if any one here becomes clamorous, and would be wiser than he ought, let him consider how he will approve his moroseness to the Lord. Paul’s answer ought to satisfy us, “If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.”

On Being Evangelical
(being a somewhat rambling personal manifesto of sorts.)

It is really easy to bash Evangelicalism. To often Evangelicalism seems to go out of its way to invite the bashing it gets. I'm not talking so much about the antagonism of the unbelieving secular culture, I'm talking about how Evangelicalism gets bashed by those who are its friends and by Evangelicals themselves. And again, all to often, the criticism from within and from without is well earned and deserved.

Evangelicalism is a pretty broad spectrum. Just look at all the different theologs signed up as members of the Evangelical Theological Society. With that broad a spectrum, there is plenty of room for the oddball and the weired, and it is very little wonder that Evangelicalism seems to stumble all over itself. In the world of Blog, much has and is being said about the Evangelical crises and some have looked at the future of Evangelicalism and concluded the future is not very positive at all.

In recent years, one of those critiques of Evangelicalism has come out of the Emergent movement. Much has been written back and forth by both sides of that "conversation", and it is not my intent to bore you to death by rehashing all the nuances of that conversation.

I’ve verbalized before that for Christianity to remain authentic, it is and ultimately has to be counter-cultural, and that means being counter-cultural to both modernity and post-modernity. It occurs to me that what I hear missing in the emergent conversation is the witness concept of the church, and what it is the church is to witness to. The church is to bear witness to God and His redemptive acts in history. Evangelicals tend to lose focus on their role as witness when they get preoccupied with numbers and programs and whatever the latest evangelical fad happens to be.

But this also begs the question, how does being “emergent” bear witness to God and His historical redemptive acts; His breaking into time and history to work redemptively? How is “emergent” countra-postmodernity? If “emergent” is only countra-modernity, and not also contra-postmodernity, then I do not see how “emergent” can be bearing authentic witness to God and His historically redemptive acts.

Once upon a time I was in a church situation where I sensed that I was being forced to choose between the theological tradition of the movement this church was part of, and Evangelicalism at large. Whatever words or assertions to the contrary, the standard of reasonable doubt indicated otherwise. I could either be of tradition "X", or I could be Evangelical, but I would not be allowed to be both at the same time without becoming a major disruption to the peace of that church. What was really sad is the confessional standard of that tradition is, in the main, an evangelical document, but the mentality pervading the churches in that tradition refrained and shied away from embracing evangelical commonality with Evangelical groups that did not share that particular tradition. I ended up leaving. I found that first and foremost, before whatever specific church or theological tradition I would find myself in, I was and remain an Evangelical.

When I first became a Christan, the Almighty gracious God used a “modern” Evangelicalism to reach down and grab me by the scruff of the neck and bring me to Himself. The specific context was a "Four Spiritual Laws" presentation. God sovereignly used that Evangelicalism to bring me to Himself in spite of all of that Evangelicalism’s deficiencies and problems and scandals, and in spite of the weakness, theological or otherwise, of the evangelistic methodology used. For in spite of all that weakness and deficiency, at the foundation and kernel of that presentation was an authentic witness to God and His redemptive acts in time and space, -ie history.

A Jesus devoid of those historical redemptive acts is a Jesus not worth wasting my time or anybody else’s time on. That’s not just my assessment, it was the Apostle Paul’s assessment in I Corinthians 15. No physical bodily Resurrection of Jesus, no reason to believe at all.

I am an Evangelical. I do not fear for the future of Evangelicalism. Christ will, as He has been doing for 2,000 years, build His church. As such, there will always be some sort of Evangelical witness. Evangelicalism as we know it may fade away, and perhaps it should, but there will always be an Evangelical witness to the fact God is, and He has acted in time and space. To be evangelical is to to proclaim the hope of the Gospel; that God exists and He has acted redemptively in history to redeem a lost mankind from their fallenness and enstrangement from Him.

Come! Worship Him!

~ The Billy Goat ~

Christianity as Counter-Culture

“Christian culture” is always a counter-culture, not a consumer culture, an entertainment culture or a political lobby. “The Church” is a gathering of people loyal to Jesus who believe certain things, but it is a movement of people who apply the gospel to those issues in their midst that demonstrate the meaning of the Kingdom of God.
"Gospel Relevance = Gospel Application", Michael Spencer, Internet Monk

Jesus Is Not A Brand
Why it is dangerous to make evangelism another form of marketing.
By Tyler Wigg-Stevenson (CT)

"...The difficulty with the pro-marketing arguments, however, is the failure to recognize that marketing is not a values-neutral language. Marketing unavoidably changes the message—as all media do. Why? Because marketing is the particular vernacular of a consumerist society in which everything has a price tag. To market something is therefore to effectively make it into a branded product to be consumed...

So, given this cultural setting, any salvation that needs a sophisticated sales pitch is a salvation that won't really do anything. It will make you holy the same way a new pair of Nikes makes you athletic—which is to say, not at all. It only changes your religious brand. Yet this is the only kind of evangelism possible when we separate salvation from life in the redeemed community, because it's in the redeemed community that God has ordained the enduring demonstration of his power, against which nothing can prevail (Matt. 16:18)....

The problem with implicitly salesy evangelism is bad theology, not bad technique, and it requires more than a simple change in method. If you feel like a used-car salesman talking about Jesus, the solution to the perceived lack of authenticity isn't a smoother pitch—it's a renewal of the church. The potency of personal evangelism is, as it has always been, the simple and earnest retelling of what God has done in the lives of his people. Of course, this requires a community to back up our claims...

In other words, people who respond to church marketing approach Jesus as another consumer option. This is first and foremost a problem because it is blasphemy: We are talking about the incarnate Logos, not a logo. Additionally (in case blasphemy isn't bad enough), this should concern us because of the problems it creates for discipleship. Consumerism isn't just a social phenomenon—it's a spirituality. And it comes with spiritual habits and disciplines that conflict with the particular practices of the Christian life.

There are many such conflicts, but let's look at four key ones.

1. "I am what I buy" vs. the lordship of Christ...

2. Discontent vs. the sufficiency of Christ...

3. Brand relativism vs. the supremacy of Christ...

4. Fragmentation vs. unity in Christ...

Click on the link above to see the whole complete article.

Recognizing the Phenomena of Evangelical Commonality and Embracing It

A Reformed Christian hears a particular sermon by a Dispensatonal Preacher, and finds him or her self in substantial agreement with that sermon. A Dispensational Christian hears a particular sermon by a Reformed Preacher and finds him or her self in substantial agreement with that sermon. A Baptist happens to visit a Lutheran Church and hears a particular sermon, and says to himself that sounds pretty "Evangelical".

What's going on in each of these incidents?

The Dispensational Preacher is still a Dispensaionalist. The Reformed Preacher is still Reformed. The Lutheran Pastor is still Lutheran. What is happening in each of the above cases is the hearer is recognizing a certain degree of theological commonality with the Preacher.

This kind of reaction and response that can be observed among the differing Evangelical denominations, church groups, and Evangelical theological camps is what I have chosen to call the phenomena of "Evangelical Commonality". This commonality comes out of the fact that amidst the differences that define the various theological camps of the Evangelical world, there is to varying degrees a common shared theological consensus that gives common meeting ground between those various camps.

Case in point: Many Dispensationalists are very Calvinistic. More then a few might tell you they are a 4 point, or 4 1/2 point, or even a full blown 5 point Calvinist. That means that on the issue of soteriology, from 80 to 100% of what they say is in sync with what the Reformed Pastor down the street is saying about that subject. But when you get into issues of eschatology and the relation of the Old Testament to the New Testament, the issues that define each groups difference from one another are clear.

For the most part, much of the Evangelical world intuitively understands this phenomena of Evangelical commonality and embraces it, taking it for granted. They hear a radio preacher like Chuck Swindol or John MacArthur, or Allister Begg, and appreciate these men for upholding fundamental foundational evangelical truth. It is not a matter of these men being Baptist, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, or Calvinist, or any other name you want to use to describe your Church or theology. It is a recognition instead of shared beliefs that cut across the lines of those denominational and theological camps.

In a previous post I took our Reformed Baptist friends to task for a persistent nagging tendency on the part of of some of them to want to claim this preacher or that preacher for their "Reformed Baptist" camp. This is a failure to embrace the concept of Evangelical commonality. Part of the reason for this failure is the prevalent tendency in recent Reformed Baptist history (the past 30 some years) to define the RB movement by those things that distinguish RB's from the rest of the Evangelical world. This tendency, (which I personally observed over many years), feeds an "us verses them" mentality that focuses on separateness from the rest of the Evangelical world, instead of recognizing the Evangelical commonality the Reformed Baptist movement shares with the rest of the Evangelical world.

I am not asking RB's or anyone else to give up their distinctives. But I am asking RB's as well as all other Evangelical groups and theological camps to hold those distictives in balance with that Evangelical commonality that to some degree or another, we all share with one another.

To put it in other words, I am asking the Reformed Baptist movement to acknowledge and embrace that Evangelical commonality. Why? Because until they do, they will continue to remain on the outskirts of the Evangelical world in spite of the clear basic Evangelical character of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.

If you choose to remain on the outskirts, that is your choice, and it is an unfortunate choice. It is also unfortunate that you will have to live with the consequence of that choice. Based on the history of other groups and movements who made that same choice, those consequences are not very pretty.

"So and so" may not be a Reformed Baptist, but they are an Evangelical brother. Can you in Christian love accept and embrace that without giving them your particular label? May God Almighty help you to do so...

Shalom,

~ The Billy Goat ~

Servant Leadership: An Excerpt from a Note to a Friend

"I have had occasion again to ponder the matter of servant leadership, and can only sadly conclude there is to little of it in this world...

We had occasion this past month to see servant leadership in action at WCBC. For some time the church has been looking at expanding and building some more much needed space..... We were asked to carefully consider giving a pledge to the project. Pledges were anonymous, you indicated what you thought you may be able to give, but no names anywhere on the cards turned in.

As it was, the amount pledged was inadequate for the building under consideration. There was no "exhortation" to "give more" and etc.. as is all to familiar in to many churches in this situation. Pastor very gently and quietly explained what the pledge results were, and the leadership took that voice of the congregation as God's way of telling the church they needed to reconsider the plan. The leadership clearly respected the voice of the congregation and did not try to lord if over us to keep the original plan going... We were asked to fill out another anonymous survey to give some indication of the factors affecting how much we had pledged. The leadership acknowledged Michigan's economy is headed for the tank, and other reasons for the low response were not a matter of "right" or "wrong"......

You probably have some idea what it is like after the church we came out of, to go to a church where the leadership has consistently demonstrated respect for the congregation, and how easy that makes it for the people to respect the leadership in return...."

Jesus reigns!

~ The Billy Goat ~

The Anomaly of the Lone Ranger Local Church

A local Orthodox Evangelical Christian church dose not exist in isolation from other Orthodox Evangelical Christian churches any more then individual Christians exist in isolation without reference to other Christians. There is no place in the New Testament that gives an example of such a church.

Now it is possible a local church may exist in a remote area, and under primitive conditions that hinder that local church from having vital contact with other churches. But for a healthy church that isolation is not something deliberately chosen as matter of policy or church culture.

The universal ("catholic" small "c") church is a body. Nothing happens in one area of the universal Christian church that does not in some way, large or small, impact other parts of the universal body.

The New Testament picture of relationships between local Christian Churches is one of sharing mutual concerns and mutual accountability. We may argue if that accountability is ecclesiastical or only moral, but that there is mutual accountability can not be escaped.

By the way, did I mention it's very possible for a denomination or association, or movement to have a "Lone Ranger" mentality also? Over the years I've seen that mentality both in local churches, and in groups and movements at large.

The Law of Love demands that one part of the Body of Christ not hold itself aloof from the other parts of the Body of Christ. For example, when was the last time we as regular Baptists, or Reformed whatever's, or Wesleyan Methodists, or "Non-Denominationl" Evangelicals prayed for our Evangelical Episcopal brethren caught up in the Civil War that is ripping apart the North American Anglican community?

We can not totally isolate ourselves from issues in other denominations or associations or movements. What happens in the Southern Baptist Convention, or the General Baptist Association, or the GARBC, or the various Presbyterian and Reformed Synods is happening to the Body of Christ. As such we are to weep with those that weep, and rejoice with those that rejoice.

Do you have a vision for the whole Body of Christ, or are you so focused on your particular part that you can not see the forest for the trees? Does your vision of that Body include all whom Christ has included? Why not? What are the demands of the Law of Love?

Shalom,

~ The Billy Goat ~