Read more… »

I have spoken a great deal about worshiping through Fowler’s stages of faith; what do I mean by this? I believe that each of us has a primary stage in which we spend most of our time; we have a stage that is our comfort zone. Throughout the course of our life, our comfort zone may shift to a different stage, but there will usually be one primary stage we work out of. This, however, does not mean that we are unfamiliar with, or incapable of working out of, the other five stages.

To worship through Fowler’s stages of faith is to attempt to connect to the part of ourselves that best operates at each stage. I can worship God through the innocent faith my parents bestowed upon me; I can worship God through the critical faith of my twenties (even if I am well past that age and stage). It is useful to discover and worship God through these different lenses.

This raises an obvious question: is it possible to worship God through a stage which we have not yet been through. I am not willing to give an answer to that question at this time, but I believe that it can stretch us to try. I believe that stretching, that effort to connect to God, will help each of us grow in our faith.

Worshiping through the stages of faith is not something that you can do each week. It may be something that you can only do over the course of a year or even a decade. I think to effectively worship in this way, the individual must take a prearranged length of time (at a minimum three weeks) and decide that for that period of time, they are going to focus on worshiping God through a given stage of faith. Then there should be an interval of time, not less than the time spent worshiping in the stage of faith, in which the individual returns to their natural worship habits. After a period the individual may move on to the next stage of faith. This allows the individual to work out their spiritual muscles without destroying themselves.

How does each stage of faith worship? How do force your spirit to worship in a way that is contrary to your current natural stage? These are both important questions. Below I shall take a look at each stage of development and examine how an individual can reflect on their faith and on God by using Fowler’s six stages of faith.

Stage 1 is “the innocent.” This is the stage we are born into. At this stage of faith, all that we know of God is what our parents have given to us. For some individuals there was great instruction of God’s love and care during these early years. For other individuals these early years were completely devoid of Godly influence. Either way it is good to contemplate how our parents formed our thoughts of God.

To worship through this stage is to reflect on the faith my parents gave me. This early faith was a simple faith when my only possible spiritual acts of worship would have been singing “Jesus Loves Me” or saying a simple prayer of grace at the dining table. For those who are worshiping through this faith stage, those are good activities to focus on. The simple songs and prayers of early childhood have a great power to them because they are sincere.

To worship through this stage is to retreat into safety for a time. This was a time when we were loved and protected and all was right with the world. This was a time when our parents were all we knew. Focus on this simple faith and what it has to speak to you.

Stage 2 is “the literalist.” This is the stage of early childhood when we know that everything those we respect tell us is absolutely true. This was a time of fantastic stories such as Noah and the arc, Daniel and lion’s den, Joshua and the battle of Jericho, and David and Goliath. Our acts of worship were learning these stories and learning how God had cared for each of these people.

To worship through this stage is to reflect on the certainty I have in the faith. How could any part of these stories be false or embellished? To worship through this stage is to accept the beauty of these stories and imagine them as fantastic tales of God’s work. Take children’s picture books and try to recapture to imaginative flourishes you gave these stories when you were young. Re-memorize John 3:16 and try to understand it like you did when you were six years old.

To worship through this stage is to retreat into certainty for a time. A time when you could ask an adult a question and they could tell you the answer, and they were always right. During this time of worship take time to write out what the Bible tells me I should believe and what the adults of my church tell/told me I should believe. And then…try to believe it. For a time try to accept it as a six year old child would accept it.

Stage 3 is “the Loyalist.” This is the stage of conformity and comfort in groups. In this stage people do not like to be alone or outsiders. At this stage of faith we cling to creeds and statements of faith. We can hold these and, as a group, affirm them to be what we believe. Staying with the group assures us that we have not strayed into heresy or sin.

To worship through this stage is to reflect on the confidence my community gives our faith. I can boldly proclaim what is true and what is false because those around me will support me and back me up. Write down your community’s creeds and statements of faith. Learn them, memorize them, and treasure them. These are valuable aids to worshiping God.

To worship through this stage is to retreat into community for a time. It can be very difficult for a person whose comfort zone is stage 4 to accept that there is some validity in the community. This is a chance to discover the truth your community is willing to proclaim. This is a time to ask the question: are there things that I only believe because my community believes them? That’s okay. Take time to rest in the comfort of your community.

Stage 4 is “the Critic.” This is the stage of rejecting the norm and exploring divergent viewpoints. In this stage, people begin to wonder if what their community believes is really true. They often ask the question, “is this all there is?” At this stage of faith we explore God in new ways, through new communities and through new methods.

To worship through this stage is to reflect on the fallibility of faith. Just because I believe something does not mean that it is true. There are all sorts of avenues of faith to explore. The Christian right, the Christian left, non-Christian spiritualists, pacifists, humanitarians, deists, humanists. To worship through this stage is to spend time asking all of the “unaskable” questions. To worship as “the critic” can be very uncomfortable. There are no assurances of anything being true, right, or Godly.

To worship through this stage is to retreat into chaos for a time. Through the chaos God’s perfection is perceivable. Through the chaos we can be led to a stronger sense of God then can be had before the chaos. All those “unaskable” questions will not be answered but your spirit and your faith will be better off for asking them.

Stage 5 is “the Seer.” This is the stage that people move to when they have moved beyond the chaos to a place of synthesis. At this stage people have their faith “their” faith, but because of the journey they have been through they are able to comfortably rub elbows with people who do not necessarily share their faith.

To worship through this stage is to reflect on “my” faith. This is a time for direct personal interaction with differing spiritual contexts. Go to a monastery and explore the life of a monk, go on a mission’s trip to a radically different culture and embrace the people. This is a time to explore where faiths converge.

To worship through this stage is to retreat into assurance of my faith for a time. A time when I can interact with communities I do not necessarily agree with because I know what my faith is. During this time write out what your faith is; explore why it is your faith and what events in your life brought you to this point. Take time to go where you would not have previously gone for fear of “losing” your community’s faith.

Stage 6 is “the Saint.” This is the stage few people ever reach. At this faith stage the person is no longer motivated by their faith or beliefs, but rather by a total commitment to the guiding presence of God in all aspects of life. For people at this stage, God is all. There is no other way of expressing it that I know of. God is all. An example of this stage might be Jesus praying on the Mount of Olives in Luke 22:42, when he says, “not my will but your will be done.”

To worship through this stage is to reflect on God’s faith. To worship here is to move beyond my faith, your faith, or their faith. At this stage the only faith that exists is the faith of God. Allow God to do what he will do with you. One of my favorite stories is “The Pilgrim’s Tale,” which is about a man searching for how to pray without ceasing. He walks and walks and walks trying to find God’s leading. To worship through this stage we need to forsake all the world and walk, write, fast, pray, read, do without ceasing until God shows us his will.

To worship through this stage is to retreat into God for a time. To worship here is to allow God to be all. The sum total of your thoughts, desires, wants. Everything you are working for.

That is how you worship through Fowler’s stages of faith; taking each step carefully over the course of many months or years. Stretching and strengthening your spiritual self.

The other issue I wish to focus on is the need for both solitude and community in a healthy spiritual life. It is interesting to note that three of the six stages are best done in community (those stages being 1, 2, and 3). The other three stages require times of both solitude and community.

To have healthy spiritual worship we must take time to commune with God alone and we must take time to commune with God corporately. If we neglect either we are hurting our own spiritual walk and the walk of those who depend on us. There is not Christianity without Christians coming together to be the church. In order to worship God we must be the church community. In order to be the church community, we must be healthy spiritual individuals.

I believe that an excellent way of exercising our faith and our ability to worship God is to worship always, in both solitude and community, and to worship through the six stages of faith. This will help to keep us strong Christians who are part of a strong Christian community.

« Hide it

Read more… »

This is a question that must be explored by every generation of people because there will always be a time when it is time to transfer in the young folks, who they raised and whose faults they have known since birth, into positions of responsibility and leadership.

The way to transfer leadership from one generation to the next is through servanthood and relationship building. If a leader does not first think of themselves as a servant, then they will never be able to lead in directions that are best for the church, rather than best for themselves. If a leader does not build relationships with the next generation, then that leader will always see the next generation as the foolish teenagers they helped raise and will always overlook the God given gifts and abilities of these fellow servants.

In the same way, the emerging leaders in the coming generation must first be servants. They must be willing to submit themselves to their elders so that they can learn from them and not commit the same trespasses that the older generation committed. The emerging leaders must also build relationships. Without strong relationships built up, the older generation will always seem unchanging, uncompromising and out of touch with the world.

Before we delve further into the issue of generational transitions, two questions must be asked: why is generational transitioning in the church a problem and why, as we look at history, does it seem to be such a recurring problem? I believe that there are three answers to these questions. First, different cultures have different ways of experiencing God; second, individuals want thier needs met first; and third, change is hard.

Each generation, to a lesser or greater degree, produces with it a different culture. There are ways of worshipping God that better suit different cultures. The fact that God is worshipped in different ways neither makes one style right and one wrong, nor one style holier than another style. The different ways of worshipping God are just different.

I would take a moment here to say that we do not need to be comfortable in order to worship God; we can worship God regardless of outside style, substance or even theology. Worship of God is a matter between the individual and God. The only one who can keep me from worshipping God is me.

However, when two cultures worship God together there is a tendency for people to be uncomfortable. God is either worshipped in the style which one culture is comfortable with, which makes the other culture uncomfortable, or God is worshipped in a combination of styles, which makes both cultures uncomfortable.

This difference in style makes an older generation uncomfortable in handing over some leadership to the next generation, because it will erode their style and they will thus become less comfortable in the church. It is human nature to make one’s self as comfortable as possible and to defend that comfort. It is for this reason that leaders must be servants; they must be willing to think of others as being more important than themselves. The next generation leader must also be a servant and recognize that their comfort will make someone else uncomfortable.

This leads into the second reason for difficulty in generational transitioning: individuals want their needs met first. Humans are inherently selfish beings. We look to defend that which makes us comfortable. It is human nature for congregants to want the church to serve their needs and then serve the needs of the others. There must be mutual submission from both cultures to create an environment where intergenerational transfer of leadership is possible. Each culture must recognize the importance and value that the other culture represents.

Finally, generational transition is difficult because it requires change. Change is not easy for anyone, but it strikes some people especially hard. Because of this, it is necessary for generations to intentionally build relationships across generational lines. The younger generation needs to not promote change just for the sake of change, understanding that this will hurt other people. The older generation needs to accept that change is necessary and, with proper supervision, will make their church stronger than it ever was.

Having discussed the question of why generational transition is problematic, it would be good to briefly turn to the question of why generational transition of leadership is necessary. It is necessary for the older generation to build up leaders in the younger generation to perpetuate God’s ministry here on earth. If younger leaders are not given a chance to lead while there are still older leaders who can help guide them through the early learning stages of leadership, then the younger leaders are more apt to fail and hurt God’s ministry.

God has called us to go into all the world and spread the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This mission can not be accomplished if we are not intentionally building up new leaders all the time. In Leighton Ford’s book, Transforming Leadership, he speaks of the leadership gap that emerged in the business world of the 1990’s due to old school corporate leaders not building up the leaders who would eventually succeed them. As we look at what leaders emerged in the late 1990’s, they were largely young educated individuals who had tremendous powers of creation. Unfortunately, no one had taught them anything about business. I would suggest that the reason the tech bubble burst was because these brilliant people had not been given the opportunity to learn how to lead. The church should avoid making this mistake at all cost.

As a church’s leadership begins to transition leadership into a new generation there are three things that leader must do and three things that a leader must not do. A leader must not take sides, be alone, or command; a leader must work toward solutions of compromise, involve those he or she disagrees with, and respect all opinions.

When the time has come to transition a new generation into leadership there are usually at least two easily definable sides in the church: the new generation and the old generation. To successfully begin transferring leadership to the new generation, the current church leadership needs to avoid siding with either of these groups. If the leadership sides with the older generation, the church will tend to dismiss the younger generation as irrelevant. If the leadership sides with the younger generation, the older generation will begin to see the leadership as irrelevant. The leadership must submit to both sides and work towards solutions of compromise. By submit, I do not mean letting them have their way, I mean letting them have their say and affirming that they and their ideas are important for the church. When you have worked out a solution of compromise nobody is completely satisfied, but quite frankly that is probably best for the church. When a church meets all the expectations of any one person, it is only meeting the needs of one person.

The church leadership must not work alone; it must involve even the people that the leadership disagrees with. This does not mean that those who are in disagreement set the agenda, rather as the leadership moves toward compromise all ideas are affirmed and taken seriously. When leadership works in a vacuum, group-think takes over, then it becomes impossible to compromise because there are no known positions to compromise with.

Finally leadership must not command, but must respect all opinions. Going back to Leighton Ford’s book, there was no emerging leadership because the old-school leadership had a commanding style that did not allow for new opinions to be brought forth and thus did not allow younger potential leaders to emerge. Respecting opinions rather than commanding does not mean that leadership sways to whichever opinion is most popular, there are times when leadership must make unpopular decisions in order to lead a church where it needs to go. Respecting other opinions is a means of submission and facilitates the growth of relationships.

The “4-R’ model has tremendous implications for intergenerational transition. When we look at relationships, roles, responsibilities and results it becomes apparent that for one generation to successfully begin transferring leadership to the next, there must be considerable effort from the servant-leaders of the church.

Focusing first on relationships, for a leader to successfully begin a generational leadership transition, that individual must have strong relationships with God, him or her self and with other people (specifically the current generation of leaders and the prospective new generation of leaders). Without a strong, growing relationship with God the leader will not know God’s will. Without a strong, growing relationship with him or her self the leader will not be able to deal with the internal struggles that change creates. Without a strong, growing relationship with the current and emerging generations, the leader will be seen as an outsider trying to dictate change upon one group or the other.

The leaders beginning a generational leadership transition must posses all five “DICE+1” characteristics. They must have the dynamic determinism that will enable them to lead others in such a way that the others would wish to follow. They must have intellectual flexibility in order to adapt to the problems and concerns that will present themselves. This will also help them address the difficulties that the new generation leader will encounter. They must have the strength of character to do what God wants them to do, regardless of the outside pressures to do otherwise. They must have the emotional well-being to survive a rollercoaster ride that transition always is. Finally, they must have partner-up-ability so that they can lead the next generation leader and the old-school leaders to work somewhat harmoniously together.

During the generational leadership transition, the roles of the leadership are vital. There must be an agent of change who is willing to bring the idea of building up the next generation of leaders. There must be a strong coach who can guide the church through change, educating them about God’s plan and how it is working. There must be a spokesperson who can explain to those outside the church why there appears to be turmoil within the church. There must be a direction setter who can give hope and explain why it is such an exciting time to be a part of God’s church. If any of these roles are missing, the ability to have a positive generational transition is weakened.

The responsibilities of leadership must also be carried out. A vision must be cast that includes multiple generations leading together toward one central purpose; that is, the purpose of demonstrating Christ to the world. A strategy must be formed as to how the new generation of leadership will be meaningfully incorporated into the church structure. The goal is not necessarily to take power from those already in leadership; the goal is to be constantly building up new leaders. People must be aligned behind the vision to build up new leaders. As Jesus said, “a house divided can not stand.” If the church does not fully support a mentality of building up a new generation of leaders, then it will splinter and the attempt will hasten the decline of the church. Finally, the church must be motivated. The question, why do we have new leaders when the old ones were doing just fine, must be answered. The church is not building up new leaders for the here and now, but for the future expansion of the church.

Results are difficult to determine when dealing with generational transition. The best results for the early work of the next generation leader might be failure. It is important that leaders fail; much can be learned from failure. It is best for the next generation leader to fail while there are still other leaders around who can support and correct. However, it is also necessary for the next generation leader to succeed so the church can see that it is worthwhile to build up new leaders. The eventual result desired is the creation of a culture that is constantly seeking out and building up new leaders; when this happens then much of the tension that exists around generational transitioning disappears, since it becomes part of the normal operation of the church.

Often the problems that are experienced with generational transitioning exist in churches because those churches are failing to see beyond the here and now. I believe that once a church recognizes that it must plan for the future and realizes that the only way to do this is to bring up new leadership then generational transitioning becomes less of a problem. The goal of the church should be to create a culture that is constantly seeking out and building up new leaders who help the church spread the message of Christ to the world.

I know of many churches that have reached the point were generational transitioning is not a problem. These churches seek out and build up new leaders in the church. It is these churches that are growing and are bringing people into the Kingdom of Heaven. It is the church who cannot hand leadership over to the next generation that hurts the reputation of the church community as a whole and harms the message we were sent out to share.

At the end of Matthew chapter 28, Jesus instructed his disciples to, “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” No one person, no one group, and no one culture is able to reach all nations. It takes diversity and an appreciation of the differences that exist between us to work towards Christ’s commission. When we reach the point where we can accept that the people I don’t particularly care for are able to reach people that I have no shot at reaching, that is when we become a healthy church that is able to carry out the will of God and share the message of Christ Jesus with the world.

« Hide it

Read more… »

Acts 1:8 says, “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (NIV). Jesus instructs all of his followers to spread the news to the entire world that there is a way we can be close to God.

Humans were created to desire closeness with God. Genesis 3:8 tells us that Adam and Eve would walk with God in the Garden of Eden. Everyone is seeking this closeness. It is the responsibility of all who have found this closeness to God to share it with the world around them.

There is an important progression in the second half of Acts 1:8. Jesus tells his disciples that they will be his witnesses in Jerusalem. Jerusalem is where the disciples were, it was essentially their home base. Then Jesus tells them they will be his witnesses in all Judea and Samaria. Finally Jesus instructs his disciples to spread his name to the ends of the earth. This is like telling a resident of my hometown, Fairfield, Iowa, that they will be God’s witness first in Fairfield and then in all of Jefferson county and the state of Iowa and then to the ends of the earth. It is important to share the news of Jesus with your local community, with the people you come into contact with every day. Then every follower of Christ needs to expand their evangelistic influence in ever increasing circles.

Every follower of Christ plays an important part in determining the eternal condition of all the souls we come into contact with on earth. God, through the Holy Spirit, can use us to save every soul that will ever be on this planet. It is our choice of whether or not we listen to God that determines if some people will be destined to experience an eternity apart from God. God is a timeless entity and knows who will be with him forever and who will be separated from him forever. Humans are not yet timeless; our choices have an effect on the world around us. God wants a perfect world, we are the ones that have messed it up and we will continue to do so.

Sin is our effort to achieve self-salvation. We all attempt to achieve salvation, which is spiritual fulfillment, by our own good works. Repentance is coming to the realization that we must become dependant upon Christ’s good work to achieve spiritual fulfillment. Repentance is becoming aware of the sin nature rebelling against it and placing ourselves under Christ’s leadership.

The evangelist, a category which must include all those who have repented and found salvation through Christ, has the responsibility to follow the leadings of the Holy Spirit and seek out ways to share the gospel of Christ with others. Each Evangelist must not sit idly by waiting for opportunity to come along, rather, each evangelist must prepare. Ephesians 6 speaks of dressing ourselves in the armor of God. We must have truth, righteousness, faith, the Holy Spirit, the word of God, and salvation through Christ. We must develop and nurture each of these aspects of our lives. We must have “the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.” This readiness only comes from preparation, practice, perseverance and prayer.

To be a “disciple” is to be a follower. Discipleship is the process by which we learn how to follow Christ. Discipleship is what allows all followers of Christ to engage in effective evangelism; however, evangelism is not the sole reason we pursue discipleship. Discipleship is the process by which God teaches us, brings us closer to himself, and enables us to minister to others.

Matthew 13:45-46 says, “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it.” We are all merchants seeking for “the pearl.” Evangelism is the searching for and finding of the pearl. Discipleship is selling everything we own and buying into the pearl. Discipleship is the process by which we discard all of the things that keep us from a relationship with God. Discipleship is rearranging ones life so that we are living as Christ lived, that is, with the relationship between God and self at its core. The basic components of discipleship are submission, prayer, Christ-centeredness, education, confrontation, collaboration and ministry.

There are times when God wants us to grow closer to him by submitting to him and trusting him. There are times in life when you are figuratively hanging from the thirtieth floor of a burning building and God says, “Jump, I’ll catch you.” In order to grow we just need to jump. In Mark 14:36, Jesus is praying on the night of his arrest. “’Abba, Father,’ he said, ‘everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.’” Jesus was hanging from a more treacherous place than most people will ever experience, but he had faith and submitted to God’s plan.

One of the best ways to allow God to bring us closer to him is by talking to him. Jesus’ first act after his baptism was to go into the desert and commune with God in prayer. Jesus spent forty days talking to God. Allowing ourselves uninterrupted time with God is very important. It lets us ask God our questions, tell God our hopes and fears, thank God for all that he has done, and listen to God’s leading.

To be a disciple, to be a follower of Christ, you must be Christ-centered. The goal is to live life as Jesus would lead your life. To be Christ-centered is to have allowed Christ to be the leader of your life. Christ-centeredness is a freedom beyond any other freedom we can experience; it is freedom for the soul.

Education is important for a new disciple of Christ, but it is also a process that never stops. A new disciple needs to learn what it actually means to be a follower of Christ. What did Christ teach? What have other church leaders taught? Is what I believe based on what Christ taught or on my culturally influenced sense of right and wrong? What does the Bible say? These questions are never fully answered regardless of how long one studies. Education is, in my opinion, one of the least emphasized aspects of discipleship. When Jesus visited Jerusalem as a boy in Luke 2 he was knowledgeable enough to converse with the teachers. Paul was instructed by one of the greatest Jewish scholars of his day, Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). God does not shy away from questions, he encourages them, and the more questions that are asked, the more questions there are to ask. God has provided the Bible, teachers, tradition, and other texts to give us more opportunity to learn more about him and become closer followers of Christ. As disciples we need to take advantage of these resources.

Immediately after Jesus spent forty days with God, Jesus faced confrontation. The devil tempted him. Matthew 4:1-11 is often read as if Jesus was never fazed by the offers the devil made. I am convinced that the devil offered Jesus all the things that Jesus would have most wanted. Jesus was fully God, but he was also fully human. As a human he had wants, urges, desires and needs. I am sure Jesus struggled in refuting the devil’s offers. Jesus used his knowledge of God’s teachings to avoid falling to the temptation to sin. Jesus trusted God to help him through a treacherous time. Temptations are important for our spiritual growth. If we are not tempted we are not stretched and we do not grow. James 1:2-4 says, “Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.”

Collaboration is another important aspect of discipleship. We need mentors who can offer us experience. We need accountability partners to hold us to our word. We need encouragers to bring us up when we are down. We need teammates to carry us through the difficult times. In Mark 6, Jesus sends out the twelve disciples for the first time. He sends them in pairs of two. Throughout the book of Acts, Paul always had a traveling partner such as Barnabus, Silas or Timothy. Jesus had Peter, James and John who went with him to pray on the night of his arrest. Collaboration helps us to grow closer to God.

Ministry is at the heart of discipleship. It is impossible to separate Jesus from his ministry. In the same way it should be impossible to separate our ministry from our lives. Ministry is not something we do, it is something we are. Ministry is what allows us to combine all of the other areas of discipleship and implement them into our lives. Ministry is the primary objective, and ministry is the main point at which discipleship and evangelism overlap.

God created all humans with a desire to be close to him. We need to recognize that even the most ardent atheist or agnostic is seeking God in his own way. We need to ask God to use us in whatever manner he needs in order to reach out to the lost.

In any community there are four groups of people. They are the churched, the lost-churched, the semi-churched and the unchurched. The churched are those in the community that have discovered salvation through Christ’s forgiveness and are living their lives to glorify God. The lost-churched have received salvation but are not living their lives to glorify God. The semi-churched have a background in Christianity but have not asked Christ for his gift of salvation. The unchurched have no background in Christianity and no knowledge of Christ.

Evangelism focuses primarily on the last three groups, the lost-churched, the semi-churched and the unchurched. All those in the first category, the churched, are called to be evangelists.

The mission of the church is to move the community out of the lost churched, semi-churched and unchurched groups and into the churched group. Within the churched group, the goal is to be ever moving toward a closer relationship to God.

The lost-churched need to be provided an opportunity to rediscover the glory of God. This can be accomplished by small groups led by the churched that focus on building community and exploring what Christianity actually is.

The semi-churched need to be given a reason to re-explore Christianity. They need an event that will do four things. First it will interest them, second it will not scare them away, third it will assuage some myths they have heard about Christianity and finally it will give them a desire to seek out spirituality in a Christian context.

The unchurched need to be befriended and shown the love of Jesus. Generally, this group has no conception of sin. With no knowledge that sin creates a problem, the unchurched see no need to correct it.

The church is obligated to facilitate the growth of healthy groups in which the churched can provide education, encouragement, prayer, accountability, and ministry and evangelism opportunities. The church also needs to recognize that the events they create to reach out to the lost-churched will not appeal to the unchurched; the reverse is also true. The church needs to create opportunities for ministry that will help all four groups grow closer to God.

It is important for the church to emphasize that at one time we were all lost. Some have been found, but it is our duty to ensure that we give others the opportunity to find this salvation. Finally, it is important that we focus on our immediate community, that we be involved with our larger community and that we be active in evangelizing the world.

Finally it is important to nurture a culture of evangelism inside the church. The attitude around evangelism needs to be changed from “that’s something those people do,” to “that’s what I do.”

Discipleship focuses mainly on the churched group, although, it is often an effective tool in educating and reaching out to the lost-churched and semi-churched. Discipleship and evangelism cannot be separated; one naturally flows into the other.

The mission of discipleship should be to make a fully devoted follower of Christ. We do this in three ways: by connecting with Christ, by being a part of the body of Christ, and by engaging in the mission of Christ.

We connect to Christ by submitting to his will. Our first act of submission is when we admit to God that we cannot save ourselves and we ask for the free gift of Salvation that Christ offers us. The rest of our lives need to be led in such a way that we submit to the leadership of Christ.

We discover where Christ is leading us by communing with him in prayer on a regular basis. God has left the Holy Spirit to be the light that will guide us closer to God if we admit that we do not naturally know the way. We must continually ask God to lead us and we must continually be listening for God’s leading.

The eventual goal is that, through submission and prayer, God will transform us toward the character of Christ. Few, if any, ever achieve this Christ-centeredness in life, but it is the eventual goal. We need to want to lead our lives as Christ would lead in our place.

We become a part of the body of Christ by engaging in education, collaboration and confrontation.

We educate ourselves by studying the Bible, understanding church tradition, listening to and reading from church leaders both past a present and engaging in conversation with those around us who are also on this journey of discipleship.

Each of us experiences confrontation every day. We will always be tempted and, while we should not seek out temptation, we should be thankful when it comes our way. Temptation represents an opportunity to glorify God by submitting to his leadership and, through his power, resisting the things that most tempt us. As we confront these things and, through God’s grace, resist them, they begin to have less power over us. Through this process of overcoming we move closer to the goal of Christ-centeredness.

We collaborate by meeting with other disciples in groups of various sizes. We gather in large group services and corporately worship God. We gather in small groups and gain insights as to how God is working in others’ lives. We gather in groups performing some form of ministry and grow in our faith through our experiences.

Finally, we connect to the mission of Christ by performing ministry. Ministry is both evangelizing the lost and discipling those that have already submitted to Christ’s leadership. It is important to be engaged in both evangelism and discipleship, because both help us grow more Christ-centered. A balanced ministry that reaches to those both inside and outside the church is necessary for a healthy disciple.

« Hide it

Read more… »

Europe in general and England in particular had largely eliminated religious diversity within Christianity. Each part of Europe had its specific Christian identity, be it Catholic, Lutheran, or Reformed, and England was almost entirely Anglican. These monopolies on religion had developed as Christianity became more and more tied to state functions. By eliminating rivalries both the church leaders and the state leaders could maintain their power.

Minority Christian groups viewed the Colonies as providing ample room for them to take their religion and worship as they chose. Over time English Puritans moved to the Massachusetts area in hope of creating a New England, that is, a society where church and state functioned in harmony to fulfill what God required of the people. Catholics settled in Maryland which was founded by a prominent Catholic. Pennsylvania was established by William Penn and became the home to many Quakers. Anglicans were especially abundant in Virginia. A large group of Lutherans from Austria were forced to leave their homeland about the time that the colony of Georgia was established, so Georgia had a substantial Lutheran population.

With this wide array of denominational beliefs came a wide range of opinions of how the other denominations should be treated. There were those, such as the Puritans in Massachusetts, who felt that they were recreating society in the way God would want it to be and therefore removed those individuals who did not share their religions beliefs. There were others, such as the Quakers of Pennsylvania or the colonies of New Jersey and Rhode Island, who felt that there was a strong need for religious liberty. There were still others, such as the Anglicans of Virginia, who attempted to import wholesale the denominational structure of their mother country.

William Penn wrote that there was liberty of conscience for each person to decide his or her religious obligations, and “worship toward God, must not be denied, even by those that are most scandalized at the ill use some seem to have made of such pretense.”[1] About the same time Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island, felt outrage when Massachusetts hanged four Quakers and Williams sent a strong letter to the Massachusetts governor when three Baptists were arrested resulting in one being publicly whipped. Williams wrote, “Sir, I must be humbly bold to say that ‘tis impossible for any man or men to maintain their Christ by their sword”.[2]

The Puritan vision of a state structured by religion was in constant conflict with the vision of religious tolerance and freedom (at least within the boundaries of Christianity) that was held by colonies to the south of Massachusetts. The Puritans felt that Christianity overall had become corrupted; this corruption had affected European schools, the Catholic Church, and even the Church of England. The puritans felt that in order to recreate the true church Christ had planted, they needed to cut themselves off from these corrosive influences and from the untrue Christians who would try to infiltrate their society.

At the same time, the very diversity the Quakers of Pennsylvania and other Colonial Christians chose to embrace caused tension within their communities. Pastor Muhlenberg, a Lutheran minister in Pennsylvania, tells the story of a woman who had been baptized a Lutheran at the age of 9 who wished to be baptized into the Baptist church.[3] The Baptist minister had told her that she would not be a Baptist congregant if she was not baptized into the Baptist church. The woman’s husband objected to the minister’s reasoning, and so the couple called Pastor Muhlenberg in to confer with him. He stated that the woman should absolutely not be baptized again, but that he had no objection to the Baptist minister receiving her as a communicant. This is one example of the tension caused by the liberty of conscience again, wrong word.

Pennsylvania’s neighbor to the south, Virginia, never developed the same kind of conflict between differing Christian groups that developed in New England. Virginia, like Massachusetts, was founded with the idea of having an exclusive church-state relationship; the church of Virginia would be the Church of England. Virginia did not welcome in a plurality of beliefs as did Pennsylvania. In fact, in 1641 enacted a statute forbidding Catholics from holding any kind of political position[4]. However, Virginia avoided the kinds of religious conflicts encountered in Massachusetts because of its size. The Anglican Communion imported a parish model hierarchy; in a place as large and spread out as Virginia the parishes became so large that it was difficult for one priest to care for his parish. This inability to organize seemed to keep much conflict from erupting.

Ultimately, much of the tension between those who promoted and those who denigrated the idea of liberty of conscience was due to the traditions the different groups had brought with them from Europe. The Quakers had a tradition which allowed for God to speak to each individual; therefore, individuals could coexist even if there was disagreement over the details of Christianity. The Puritans of New England brought a tradition that combined a strict faith with a need to yoke together church and state; this tradition put them in conflict with many of their colonial neighbors. The Anglicans of Virginia had difficulties because of the parish organizational tradition they brought with them. Virginia was too big a land and the people were too spread out for there to be an effective parish network. Each of these groups had found their “Elbow Room” but their need to maintain their traditions was causing conflict.

Over time these traditions would change and some of these traditions would be cast aside; but as the colonists were entering a frightening new world to explore and settle there was something about repeating a familiar act, a tradition, that comforted them and helped them to rely on God.

« Hide it

Read more… »

Let’s pray:

Lord as we enter into a new chapter at your church here in Ridge Farm I would ask that you lead us in your will. Help us discern daily what your mission is here in this community. Please work through us so that you can add daily to the number saved here in Ridge Farm and in all of Vermillion County. Thank you good. Amen.

Today, I would like to take a closer look at the second chapter of Acts. Christ has died, been resurrected, and ascended to heaven after spending time with his disciples. These disciples have received the Holy Spirit and Paul has just preached the first Holy Spirit inspired sermon to the Jews in Jerusalem. Three thousand accepted Christ after that first message and started the first Christian churches in Jerusalem.

Then in verses 42-47, Luke (the author of Acts) gives a summary of the next two or three years of activity within the early church. Luke writes:

They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.

Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

The early church grew through the direct presence of God facilitated by the churches focus on relationships, fellowship and worship. Assuming that we can still have the direct presence of God in our church (and I certainly believe we can), how can we focus on relationships, fellowship and worship to create a climate of growth in our church?

Why is it important that we grow? Why can’t our little community just love and respect God, and one another, and leave it at that? Why do we need to reach beyond our walls? It’s so much more comfortable to just hang out with the people we know. If we build each other up isn’t that good enough?

No. We must grow! Jesus instructed us to grow before he ascended to heaven. His entire ministry on earth was focused on expanding the group of people who could receive salvation and spend eternity with him. The most explicit command to grow comes in Matthew 28:18-20, commonly known as the great commission. Jesus says:

All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

To make disciples of all nations means that we must grow. We cannot merely give money to missionaries, sending them off to evangelize Africa while ignoring the nation that we live in. We must make disciples of our friends, and neighbors, and coworkers, and even our enemies, and bosses. If we as a church are not growing, then it suggests that we as a church are not living up to this commission.

How, then, do we grow? There is only one way to grow, and that is through the presence of the Lord. How did the early church grow? The early church was enveloped by God and cultivated a relationship with him. In verses 42 and 43 Luke writes:

They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles.

The early church learned about God. They praised God. They worshipped God. They fellowshipped with God. They stood in awe of God. They had faith in God’s miracles. On a daily basis the early church individually and corporately allowed God to infiltrate every aspect of their lives. The early church let God wrap his arms around them and hug them.

You’ll notice that verse 47 said, “The Lord added to their number daily.” It didn’t say that, “Peter brought in 30, and John baptized 16.” It says the Lord added to their number daily. We cannot save anyone only God can save and thereby add to our number. Paul addresses this idea in 1 Corinthians 3:1-7. Paul writes:

Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere men? What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow.

It is only the Lord, God, who can grow his church. In our efforts to cultivate a church that is ripe for growth our focus must always be on God. We do not grow so that we can become prestigious or respected. We do not grow so that we can be like the church down the street or in the next town over. Rather, we grow in order to follow Christ’s commissioning of us, his disciples.

In Acts 2:42-47 we are given three characteristics that facilitated the growth in the early church. These three characteristics are a focus on building relations, a focus on joining in fellowship, and a focus on worship. I do not want to suggest that this list is all inclusive and God only grows his church in these three ways. But, I believe that these are the three areas in which we can best facilitate the growth of God’s church here in Ridge Farm.

Relationships are a rather broad topic; let’s narrow it down a little. Verses 44 and 45 read:

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.

In following this example I am not suggesting that we start a commune as many did in the 1960’s (although I would suggest that maybe you don’t need everything you think you need). What contemporary social structure is similar to that presented in these two verses? What social grouping holds their goods in common and cares for one another? The family does.

Families can be the base unit from which our church can grow. How do we build strong, health family relationships? Much of our energy must be focused on ministering to families. This includes more than just teaching their children and youth about Jesus for one hour on Sunday morning. Building up families involves helping parents learn how to parent. It involves caring for Grandparents and giving them a space to reach out to the generation twice removed from them. It involves all of us taking time and mentoring children, youth, adults, couples, singles, and parents. We must build up strong families. God will use these families to reach out to our community and grow his church.

Fellowship is a tricky concept. It is more than just sitting around and eating or jabbering away with someone about the Colts game last Sunday. These could both be aspects of fellowship, but fellowship is more than that. In verse 46 Luke writes:

Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts

The early church met in large groups in the temple courts. They also met in small groups at each others’ homes. In the same way I think that it is important for us to meet all together here on Sunday morning, in this short three hour window we fellowship with one another. We are able to strengthen and encourage one another. We are able to build one another up through teaching and discipleship.

However, I think that it is also important for us to be actively involved with a smaller group of Christians. In this small group, outside of our Sunday morning time together, we are able to develop deeper friendships and bonds, which allow us to have a stronger church that is more able to be used by God in growing his church. The growth that is possible in small group fellowship is not possible through only large group fellowship.

In verse 46 it also says, “they broke bread”. I would suggest that this refers to both eating together and the physical act of communion. Communion at it’s heart is fellowship with God. It is important that we spend time communing with God, not only corporately, as a body, here on Sunday morning, but also individually every day. It is important that we spend time in individual communion with God were we can privately fellowship with him.

Worship is an activity that Quakers have a speckled tradition on which to build. Our tradition is very good at private worship of God and even public individual worship of God. We are not very good at corporately coming together and praising God. There are no Quaker hymns. Why? Because we had only silent worship for several hundred years. Verse 47 says:

praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

To praise God can be calm and quiet. But I believe that the praise of God can be loud and boisterous; even chaotic at times. It is okay to break out of our Quaker shells and let God know how we really feel about him. If we truly understand God and we truly wish to say how we feel about God; then there is no way we can do so in anything but a great exclamatory shout.

Many forms of worship exist, but I would suggest that in our current time and place the form of worship that best reaches our culture is musical. We live in a musical society. I have a habit of breaking into the lyrics of a song at the slightest provocation. We all have songs that when they come on the radio they make us feel better. I must look like a lunatic to the people driving by me when certain songs come on the radio.

If a non-spiritual song can touch us as we drive down the highway in our car then doesn’t it seem that Holy Spirit inspired lyrics can touch us in our church. The problem with music is that different people are inspired by different styles. It is important to respect al the variations we may incorporate into our worship. The music is meant to be a means of facilitating the growth of our church.

I am new at this church. I don’t know you or how you work. I don’t know your history or really how you came to be here today. But I do know that if God used relationships, fellowship and worship to grow his first church, then those are areas we can focus on to help God grow this church.

From the start my focus as pastor here is going to be of relationships, fellowship and worship. How can I minister to families? How can I help you develop and grow through small groups? How can I help you express yourself to God through music? Those are the questions I am asking as we start this journey together.

I must finish this message with a warning. We can put all of our energy into something, we can even put all of our energy into something good, but ultimately we can not grow the church. Only the Lord can add to our number daily those who are being saved.

« Hide it

Read more… »

It is surprising that any African slave could experience the Protestantism practiced in pre-Civil War America and still have come to a faith in the Christian God. Henry Bibb, a former slave from Kentucky, laments how there is “no one to preach the gospel who is competent to expound the Scriptures, except slaveholders. And the slaves, with but few exceptions, have no confidence at all in their preaching, because they preach a pro-slavery doctrine.”[1] In the same manner William Thomson, a Scottish weaver visiting South Carolina remarks that even though the African slaves were allowed to attend the church (or at least the upper galleries of the church) it was as if they did not even exist, “I was sorry to observe that the minister never turned his eye to the galleries…one would not have known there was an ignorant negro in the house, although there were five or six times as many black skins as white.”[2]

Fredrick Douglass spoke on several occasions of how white preachers would twist any gospel passage in order to condone slavery and to throw out any passage that seems to oppose slavery. At one speech in Boston Douglass said, “It has been said here at the North, that the slaves have the gospel preached to them. But you will see what sort of a gospel it is: – a gospel which more than chains, or whips, or thumbscrews, gives perpetuity to this horrible system.”[3]

In contrast, however, there were many advocates of slavery who believed that even slaves needed to be treated humanely. James Henley Thornwell of South Carolina was one such believer. Thornwell notes that the apostle Paul recognized that slaves possess conscience, reason and will and therefore have a moral character just as any slave owner has a moral character. However Thornwell does not draw this to conclude that slavery is immoral; on the contrary Thornwell notes that Paul also viewed slavery as normative. The thing which needed to be focused on, according to Thornwell, was the treatment of slaves by their masters. Though, by the providence of God, a man is born into slavery, that man still deserves to be treated with certain rights as a human. However, Thornwell would go on to say, that God places specific and unique duties on different individuals, if God chooses to place the duties of a slave on someone then that person should be the best slave they can be and their master should treat them as one of God’s children.[4]

As can be seen from these examples churches had gone from shaping the culture to being shaped by the culture. The Bible was not the resource to which one went when trying to determine if slavery was right or wrong; rather, the Bible was the resource used (by both sides) to confirm previously held opinions.

On the abolitionist front a young printer from New England named William Lloyd Garrison was so opposed to slavery that he was willing to give up certain aspects of the Christianity if they could be construed as supporting slavery. Garrison believed that an individual should search out the scriptures and discard any parts which were judged to be untrue. He held truth to be the highest virtue when he wrote, “To discard a portion of scripture is not necessarily to reject the truth, but may be the highest evidence that one can give of his love of truth.”[5]

This view that scripture could be subjectively divided into the portions that are true and the portions that are false was ultimately self-defeating. If a person can decided for him or her self what parts of scripture to follow, then that person can construct an argument to support practically anything. Those who supported slavery could choose which scriptures to accept as true just as easily as those who opposed slavery.

Ultimately, the disagreement over slavery resulted in the American Civil War (1860-1865). The result of this war was the end of slavery in the United States; although it must be noted that the end of slavery did not mark the beginning of equal rights to persons of all colors. The Civil War was not wholly driven by the moral issues of slavery and the question of its morality. To a certain extent the Civil War can be seen as the natural growing pains of a young nation. Horace Bushnell, a Connecticut pastor spoke the following words at the Yale commencement exercises of 1865:

“in this blood our unity is cemented and forever sanctified. Something was gained for us here, at the beginning, by our sacrifices in the fields of our Revolution, – something, but not all. Had it not been for this common bleeding of the States in their common cause, it is doubtful whether our Constitution could ever have been carried…[yet we] had not bled enough , as yet, to merge our colonial distinctions and make us a proper nation.”[6]

Bushnell believed that the nation could not have survived as a United body had it not been for this shedding of blood to bind her together.

Regardless of whether the war was necessary to bind the nation together it is disturbing to note how commonly both abolitionists and slavery advocates attempted to make religion heel to their social agenda. Each side sought to shape the religious morals of the day to match their agenda. Perhaps no statement so eloquently captured the futility of these actions than did Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address.

“Both [parties] read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes his aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces; but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered – that of neither has been answered fully.”[7]

Ultimately one wonders whether Protestantism had a greater influence on the American culture or American culture had a greater influence on Protestantism. In any era culture and religion will pull on one another trying to shape the world at large. It seems that in pre-Civil War America that tug-of-war ended in a draw with neither force overcoming the other.

« Hide it

Read more… »

It does not appear that we can easily define social justice in any broader context. To this end, I will take a moment to define the author. I am a 21st century white protestant male living in the rural Midwest of the United States.

The theme of social justice first occurs in the preamble of the Gospel of John. John 1:12-13 makes it readily apparent that the gospel message of Jesus Christ is an inclusive message. By inclusive I mean that it was meant for all people at all times who are willing to receive “the word” (Christ). Within my Quaker context there has been an ongoing debate about what it means for the gospel to be inclusive. Many have argued that the inclusive nature of the gospel message means that God is working through Jesus to redeem every human regardless of whether that human has rejected or accepted the gospel message. This introductory statement in John 1 seems to suggest that the gospel message is inclusive because it is available to all who choose to receive Christ; those who receive Christ become the children of God.

It seems that we are not all “equal” before God; rather, there are two kinds of people: those who have become God’s children and those who have not. The church is to be inclusive to all who have become a child of God and work to reveal God to all those who have not yet received the word.
Jesus exemplifies this calling in John 4:7-30 when he speaks with a Samaritan woman. The woman appears to be well versed in theology and is seeking out the truth of God. Jesus recognizes that this woman is spiritually seeking and initiates a conversation with her.

There are many people that I would rather not be in heaven. There are many people that I feel do not deserve the opportunity to know and worship God. However, it is not my choice who God calls. I do not get to choose who I share Jesus with. It is my responsibility to listen to God’s leading and be aware of the spiritual needs of the individuals and the community around me. Who was the last person that my friends were “amazed” that I was speaking with them about God?

Jesus placed the needs of people ahead of religious piety. In John 5:8-16 and John 9:14-16, Jesus heals individuals on the Sabbath. The religious elite are outraged by this behavior, but it appears that Jesus felt that people were more important than piety. However, Jesus does not just randomly dismiss religious tradition; rather Jesus breaks the traditional Sabbath rest because an opportunity existed for people to have faith and believe. The act of healing was not just to heal, but to bring the individuals to a point of becoming children of God.

As a church community we do not engage in social justice merely for the sake of social justice. Rather, there is a motivation to reveal the gospel of Christ to all people. This can create conflict in the lives of those reaching out to the downtrodden; are we reaching out because we care or are we reaching out with some ulterior motive? Did Jesus reach out to these people just because they were in need or because he felt that they were ready to turn to God? It would seem to me that the latter is more clearly evident in the texts.

Between these two Sabbath healing accounts Jesus says to his followers, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.”

Jesus recognizes that people turn to God not out of thoughtful philosophy, but out of met needs. We as a church need to reach out to those in need because that is how they will most easily experience the love of God. If the church fills a void in someone’s life than the church has brought that person closer to God. It is not the job of the church to choose whose needs it meets, rather it should seek to meet as many of it’s communities needs as is possible, and let God work as God chooses in that community.

Some of the last recorded words of Jesus (in John 21:15-17) are his instructions to Peter to feed his sheep. Who are Jesus sheep? Often times Christians interpret Jesus sheep to be the church, those who have already become children of God. But throughout the Gospel the sheep does not seem to be an allusion to just those who have found God, but rather to all of humanity. In John 10:15, Jesus says that he lays down his life for his sheep; a reference to his eventual crucifixion. It would seem that this is a reference to all humanity. Jesus is commanding Peter to take over as shepherd and feed the world in the absence of Christ. It would seem that this command extends beyond Peter to all believers. We are called to feed Christ’s sheep. We are called to care for the poor, the naked, the weak, the downtrodden. We are not called to build temples, or clubs, or palaces, but to feed Christ’s sheep.

« Hide it

Read more… »

Mark’s gospel begins with two mystical experiences. The first occurs during the baptism of Jesus. “As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove.” (1:10) The Gospel mentions that Jesus saw the Spirit, but gives no implication that anyone else saw the Spirit descend; it seems this moment was for Jesus alone. Then a voice from heaven, presumable God, declares, “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”(1:11) If it is possible for Jesus to have a sudden glimpse of the reality of God this would be that moment. It is interesting that immediately after this moment Jesus is sent by the Spirit out into the desert to be tempted (1:12-13).

Shortly thereafter Jesus begins his ministry. After calling his first disciples and performing a few miracles Jesus goes to a solitary place to pray (1:35). This is the first of three times that Mark specifically notes that Jesus goes off by himself to pray. These incidents are equally spaced throughout the gospel. The second instance Jesus goes up into a mountain (6:46) and the third time is in the Garden of Gethsemane. It could be argued that prayer is always a mystical experience.

Prayer is a time of seeking out the will of God; regardless of the result, earnest prayer brings the person praying into the presence of God. Worthy of note is that Jesus allowed three disciples to come close to where he was praying at the garden of Gethsemane; however, he still prayed in solitude.

The first half of Mark’s gospel presents three more instances of mysticism. Each of these moments occurs around the performance of a miracle by Jesus. The first of these moments occurs after Jesus heals a paralyzed man who had been lowered through the roof of a house by his four friends (2:1-12). The people “were all amazed and were glorifying God”. This is an instance when the healing act of Jesus forced those witnessing the act to recognize God at work around them.

The second and third instances are moments when demons proclaim Jesus to be God. In 3:11 the author writes, “Whenever the unclean spirits saw Him, they would fall down before Him and shout, ‘You are the Son of God!’” and in 5:7 a demon possessed man says, “What business do we have with each other, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I implore you by God, do not torment me!” In each of these cases those witnessing the events would have the opportunity to have a glimpse of the reality of God.

However, it could not be argued that just because the opportunity for mysticism presented itself, those witnessing the moment were necessarily able to experience the moment. Twice in chapter 8 the disciples have the opportunity to gain a new insight into the reality of God, but they fail. In 8:14-21 Jesus warns the disciples about the “yeast of the Pharisees” but the disciples mistakenly think that Jesus is talking about bread. Then in verses 31-33 Jesus begins to teach the disciples that the Son of Man must be killed and rise again. However, rather than gaining insight, Peter begins to rebuke Jesus. Both of these examples are times when a mystical experience could have occurred but did not. It is interesting that sandwiched between these two passages is Peter’s confession of faith (8:27-30). Jesus asks Peter “who do you say I am?” and Peter answers, “You are the Christ.” It seems to be doubtful that Peter had a true grasp on what this proclamation would mean.

The ultimate mystical even in Mark occurs at the half way point of the gospel; this event is the Transfiguration (9:2-13). Just after Peter rebuked Jesus for saying that the Son of man must die, Jesus takes Peter, James and John up a high mountain. On the mountaintop Peter, James, and John see Jesus, Moses and Elijah talking with one another; and Jesus transfigured into dazzling white clothing. It seems that Peter, James, and John did not understand what was going on at the time, but this would surely be an event they would look back on as witnessing the glory of God.

Two mystical events surround the crucifixion of Jesus in Mark’s gospel. The first is the realization by Peter that he has indeed denied Jesus just as Jesus predicted he would (14:72). The text says that Peter began to weep when he realized what he had done. In this moment Peter fully saw the truth of what Jesus had said. The second mystical occurrence comes upon the death of Jesus (15:39). The centurion overseeing the execution says, “truly this man was the Son of God!” In this moment the centurion fully saw the truth of what Jesus had been.

Finally, in Mark 16:5-8 there is an unidentified young man dressed in white who delivers the news to Mary, Mary and Salome that Jesus is not dead, rather he is risen. In this moment these three women experienced a new reality of who God was. It is this new reality that the author of Mark tells his readers he is trying to share in 1:1; “the Gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.”

Throughout the gospel of Mark the author is painting pictures of moments when Jesus is revealed as the son of God. In these moments the original witnesses were given a glimpse of the reality of God. It is not insignificant that the first person the author presents as having glimpsed God is Jesus himself. It would seem that the revelation to Jesus that he was God’s son was necessary before Jesus could serve as the Son of God to the world.

Revelation of who God is seems to prepare people for future events. The baptism prepares Jesus for his temptation in the desert. Peter was prepared for the transfiguration by his pronouncement that Jesus is the Christ. This would seem to suggest that glimpsing the reality of who God is allows a person to build their faith in God. It would seem that God builds up an individual’s faith prior to allowing their faith to be attacked.

Ultimately, the author of Mark is trying to present Jesus as the Son of God. In order to do this he must, to some extent, establish who God is. Through brief glimpses by witnesses we are given an account of the reality of God so that we might believe in God’s son.

Throughout my life there will be times when I will be given a glimpse of the reality of God. During these times I need to praise and glorify God as the paralytic man and his friends did in 2:1-12. When those opportunities come I need to be aware that this is a time for God to strengthen my faith, and I also need to prepare for that strengthened faith to be tested. When I fail a test I need to weep as Peter wept and return to Jesus.

Mystical events are times for me to recognize that Jesus is the Son of God and that God is being revealed to me so that I might worship God all the better. However, I do not have to wait for a mystical moment to happen. I have the opportunity to go and earnestly pray any time I choose. Through times of prayer I can enter into the presence of God and fortify my faith.

There will times that I will look back on and realize that God had revealed himself to me. I should treasure those moments up and glorify God for them, even if they occurred long ago. To recognize the reality of God is a special event that will sustain the soul.

« Hide it

Read more… »

As we look at the debates over science in the late 19^th and early 20^th century it is easy to see that many of the warring factions clung to one corner of the quadrilateral. Many of these groups were unwilling to explore how the other three points of the quadrilateral would affect their theology.

In the early 20^th century there were two extreme camps and (as usual) the majority in the middle. The first extreme was the group that believed that the end of religion was in sight. This group, inspired by the enlightenment, believed that humanity was moving out of an age of religion and into an age of reason. Inspired by Darwinian evolution, scientists such as John Wesley Powell believed that religion was a necessary step in the evolution of ethics. Humanity needed to go through the process of creating and living out religion in order to develop morality; now that this morality had developed religion would be allowed to fade away and it could be replaced by science. Powell called this “the metamorphosis wrought on religion by science.”[3]

The other extreme is exemplified by characters such as T. DeWitt Talmage (a popular preacher) and William Jennings Bryan (a lawyer and politician). Talmage spoke vehemently against evolution because he believed the Bible contradicted evolutionary theory. He said, “I do not care so much where I came from as where I am going to.”[4]

Bryan, in his written out but undelivered closing statement at the Scopes trial, spoke eloquently of the evils science has wrought upon the world. He then got to the heart of his message:

“The world needs a saviour more than it ever did before, and there is only one name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. It is this name that evolution degrades, for, carried to its logical conclusion, it robs Christ of the glory of a Virgin birth, of the majesty of His deity and mission, and of the triumph of His resurrection.”[5]

Both Talmage and Bryant felt that science was not only wrong, but was a danger to the gospel message of Jesus Christ.

Many people stood between these two poles; among them James Cardinal Gibbons (a Roman Catholic Cardinal), Joseph Le Conte (a professor of geology), and James McCosh (a Presbyterian clergyman). Each of these individuals believed that science, rather than being a threat to Christianity, was in fact a blessing. Le Conte wrote, “In every case Christianity has risen from the contest stronger and purer”[6]. Cardinal Gibbons wrote:

“Science and Religion…are sisters, because they are daughters of the same Father…Now since reason and revelation aid each other in leading us to god, the Author of both, it is manifest that the Catholic Church, so far from being opposed to the cultivation of reason, encourages and fosters science of every kind.”[7]

This group was enabled to see scientific advance as a blessing because they were not trying to defend the Bible. They felt that the Bible could defend herself. Rather this middle group of people was attempting to understand the truths God was speaking to them through the Bible by first understanding a little better the world around them.

Can a conclusion for today’s young scientists be made? What are the lessons we can learn from our past? I would suggest that we need to stay rooted in the biblical revelation, our ecclesial traditions, human understanding, and the experiences which we and the spiritual community around us live out. At the same time we need to allow ourselves to explore ideas that make us uncomfortable. Evolution was a very uncomfortable idea for many in the early 20^th century because it forced a drastic shift in worldview. It changed completely the way they thought the world worked.

As we move forward into this young 21^st century we need to be prepared for the day when we realize that we are wrong. We need to prepare for a time when our worldview, our personal paradigm, is forced to shift and completely rearrange our perception of how the world works. When this happens, we can remain grounded in our faith by recognizing that God has not changed; it is only our perception that has changed.

« Hide it

Read more… »

The Holy Spirit is the person of God who is the active agent in this world through whom all of mankind is directed toward God. Even this basic statement creates a number of questions by which my reader may be distracted; questions regarding the nature of the trinity, God’s involvement in this world, and God’s interaction with non-Christian persons. I cannot begin to explore these questions in this paper, but I do acknowledge that these are reasonable lines of inquiry.

As an active agent, the Holy Spirit works in at least four distinct ways. First the Holy Spirit works to draw the pre-repentant individual toward God. The Holy Spirit works to diversify the kingdom of God through individual giftings. The Holy Spirit works to bond the Church together through baptism and communion with God. Finally, the Holy Spirit works to reveal the will of God to the seeking post-repentant individual and community.

Drawing man toward God

There is debate as to whether God the Holy Spirit can interact with a pre-repentant individual. I would argue that it is impossible for the pre-repentant individual to find salvation in Christ without the urging of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works to draw the pre-repentant individual toward God. I would further argue that God does not give up on anyone and the Holy Spirit will continue to knock on the door of the hearts of all those who have not turned toward God until their hearts cease beating.

Rick Richardson does an excellent job of presenting several theologies of evangelism in his book Evangelism Outside the Box. In one section, Richardson focuses on John Wesley’s four steps into the Kingdom of God. The first step and the step that is the focus of this section is the awakening of the soul. After the soul has been awakened to the concept of and desire for God, the individual can move on to experiencing Wesley’s final three steps: community, conversion and transformation (pp. 54-55).

In his book, The Supremacy of God in Preaching, John Piper argues that the soul is awakened through the human act of preaching (p 62). Piper seems to imply that the Holy Spirit may work through the preacher, but the Holy Spirit does not work directly on the pre-repentant individual; there must be an intermediary step.

On the contrary, I would argue that the Holy Spirit is perfectly capable of working on a pre-repentant individual’s heart in order to awaken them to a desire to search out God. There seem to be many cases of this presented throughout history and two mammoth cases presented in the Bible, one in each testament. In the Old Testament, there is the case of God hardening pharaoh’s heart in regards to the release of the Israelites from Egyptian captivity (Exodus 7-14). The second obvious case is Saul on the road to Damascus when God worked directly in awakening Saul to the Gospel of Christ (Acts 9).

The Holy Spirit seems to be at work in awakening the pre-repentant individual and drawing them toward God. The Holy Spirit is free to do this in any way that God (the trinity) deems appropriate. Often times the Holy Spirit will gift a post-repentant Christian ahead of time to be ready to play a role in the awakening of a pre-repentant individual’s soul. This gifting is the role of the Holy Spirit which is the next topic for our discussion.

Diversifying the Kingdom on earth

In The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, Vladimir Lossky writes: “The work of Christ concerns human nature…[t]he work of the Holy Spirit, on the other hand, concerns persons, being applied to each one differently.” Lossky goes on to say, “the work of Christ unifies; the work of the Holy Spirit diversifies. Yet the one is impossible without the other.” (pp 166-167)

The Holy Spirit diversifies the Kingdom of God on earth through the bestowment of spiritual gifts. I believe that God gifts every Christian to best minister to the community that God has placed him or her in. We do not get to choose our gifting, nor do we get to limit God in what he is able to gift. God gifts to meet His needs. It is our responsibility to be in constant communion with God, searching out how we can best use these giftings to minister to our small slice of the world.

In the modern culture that has existed for the last two hundred years, with its emphasis on science and logic, there has not been as much need for God to gift his children with the gift of tongues or healing or exorcism. To a modern culture, these are not effective means of ministry. Therefore, it does not surprise me at all that we see a limited gifting in these areas. I suspect that as we move into a post-enlightenment society, a society that focuses more on spirituality and dichotomous truths, God will begin to gift people more and more with the gift of tongues, healing or exorcism, as these giftings will once again become useful for ministry.

Karkkainen, in his work on Pneumatology, suggests that the Eastern Church (and Lossky in particular) put too much emphasis on the idea of a twofold divine economy: the work of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit (pp 17, 109). I agree to the extent that the ultimate power residing in these two economies comes from the same place. I would suggest that viewing the works of Christ and of the Holy Spirit separately is merely a tool that fallible human beings can use to begin to understand the infinite infallibility of God.

Bonding the Church together

The Holy Spirit bonds the church together through baptism and through both individual and corporate communion with God. It is at this point that we, as Quakers, differentiate ourselves from other Christian denominations. The other denominations will agree that there is a spiritual aspect to both baptism and communion, but they will not place such an emphasis on the Holy Spirit’s work in both baptism and communion as to reject all physical ceremony that goes these works.

The thirteenth proposition in Robert Barclay’s Apology For the True Christian Divinity reads:

“The communion of the body and blood of Christ is inward and spiritual, which is the participation of his flesh and blood, by which the inward man is daily nourished in the hearts of those in whom Christ dwells; of which things the breaking of bread by Christ with his disciples was a figure, which they even used in the church for a time, who had received the substance, for the cause of the weak; even as “abstaining from things strangled, and from blood;” the washing one another’s feet, and the anointing of the sick with oil; all which are commanded with no less authority and solemnity than the former; yet seeing they are but the shadows of better things, they cease in such as have obtained the substance.”

Communion is fellowship with God. This can and should occur at both an individual and a corporate level. Centering upon the Holy Spirit is the means by which we have this fellowship with God.

Baptism is also an inward and spiritual event performed by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” (John 3:5-6) It is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit that Christ left us after his ascension to heaven, that births us into a new life.

These acts of communion and baptism bond the church together into unity under the banner of God. Lossky drives this point home when he writes, “the spirit is present with everyone who receives Him as if there were but one receiver, but bestows sufficient and complete grace on all” (p. 166). Few Christians would disagree with this statement or the idea that the Holy Spirit is actively involved in each of these events. The only disagreement that our heritage brings to the table, is the question of the necessity of physical elements. Even this disagreement can be viewed as minor. Leonard J. Vander Zee, the reformed author of Christ, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper wrote, “[t]he sacraments have no capacity to affect us in any way apart from the work of the Holy Spirit in awakening and assuring our faith through them.” (p. 55)

Revealing the will of God

Finally, the Holy Spirit works to reveal the will of God to the seeking post-repentant believer and to the seeking Church. In Acts 6, a dispute came up over how to distribute food to the widows. The Apostles needed to do other ministries so they appointed others to oversee the distribution of food. When these men were selected, the Apostles prayed and laid their hands on them. A problem came up that needed to be dealt with carefully. The church prayed and the Holy Spirit provided a solution. The best way to deal with the controversy was given to the Apostles because they kept their focus on God and his will.

The post-repentant believer can ignore the leading of the Holy Spirit just as easily as the pre-repentant individual. When we ignore the leading of the Holy Spirit, we attempt to accomplish what we believe is best for God. When we keep our focus on the leading of the Holy Spirit, we can accomplish what God thinks is best.

The root of most sin is the attempt to supplant God’s will with our own. When the believer stays centered on the leading of the Holy Spirit we lessen the frequency of our sinfulness. The less sinful we are, the more God is able to accomplish through us. This does not limit what God is capable of accomplishing, it just limits how useful we can be to accomplishing God’s will.

The individual or community that is not actively seeking the will of God can never be a success for God. The only way we can measure our success is against the ruler of what God wanted us to accomplish. God communicates this standard to us via the Holy Spirit. When we seek out guidance from the Holy Spirit, we are able to understand where we are trying to go, how we can get there, and whether or not we eventually arrive.

This brief position paper cannot begin to touch on the other roles the person of the Holy Spirit has played over the centuries or will possibly play in the future. It is important to consider the roles the Holy Spirit played in creation, the various covenants, Jesus’ birth, death and resurrection, the early church, and church history up to modern times.

I would argue that the Holy Spirit has played many roles over the course of human existence. The four roles I have touched on here are the roles that I believe the Holy Spirit plays most prominently in our contemporary age. How the Holy Spirit fulfills these roles, and even the roles themselves, may change over time. I believe that at any time and/or place, the Holy Spirit functions in the way that will best allow God’s children to minister to the communities around them.

In our contemporary society, the Holy Spirit draws, diversifies, bonds and reveals in ways that are very specific to our culture. As we go out and share the Gospel of Christ with the world, I would suggest that we pay particular attention to how the Holy Spirit wishes us to engage with different cultures. Different cultures have different needs, but the Holy Spirit is big enough to meet all of our divergent needs.

Works Cited and Consulted

Barclay, Robert. Apology for the True Christian Divinity. Public Domain: 1675.

Copeland, Mark A. “The Leading of the Holy Spirit”. Sermon series. http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/hs/hs_09.htm.

Karkkainen, Veli-Matti. Pneumatology. Baker Academy, MI: 2002

Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, NY: 1976.

Piper, John. The Supremacy of God in Preaching. BakerBooks, MI: 1990

Richardson, Rick. Evangelism Outside the Box. InterVarsity, IL: 2000

Vander Zee. Christ, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. InterVarsity, IL: 2004.

Wright, J. Robert. “Holy Spirit in Holy Church: From Experience to Doctrine”. Angelican Theological Review. Summer 01, Vol. 83 Issue 3, p443, 12p.

« Hide it