Tag: church

Posted on

Brotherhood, Community, and Doxology

brown wooden church bench near white painted wall

Communities are composed of people trying awkwardly to understand the extent of our responsibility for those around us. It does not flow as neatly as we often expect. Communities are filled with sinful people whose aim is often between glorifying God and themselves. Pride and doxology are conflicting visions within, but the true community works through these conflicting visions, seeking the Triune God’s glory above all.

Community life is the life lived out throughout the week; the response of God’s people to one another. It’s not our response to self, but to one another pursuing one another in the ordinary life of the Church.

This theme was abundantly illustrated in the temple in the Old Testament, which was considered a place of feasting. In I Kings 9, when Solomon’s temple was completed, the people rejoiced. They dedicated the temple to God by feasting for several days.

After Sabbath worship, the people went out and gave thanks to God together as a body. They celebrated with one another with feasts, hospitality, and charity. Then, they went home, joyful and glad in heart for all the good things Yahweh had done for Israel (I Kings 8:66).

The life of community was summarized by feasting. They worked together and then they rejoiced together. It was all covered under the virtue of love expressed in Leviticus 19 and we may even argue that the dominion mandate was a mandate of love as well. The laws of love in the community are not a New Testament invention; they were established long ago.

The language Paul uses to describe community in I Corinthians refers to the Church as a community of brothers and sisters. He uses “adelphos” which appears 28 times; a term used for blood relatives in the first century. Paul puts us in one house together.

He goes on to command us to “edify” one another. To edify is an architectural term. It comes from “edifice.” Everything goes back to God’s building work on earth. God is building his temple/house, so you build/edify one another.

Communities are formed in the working and loving, and living together. It is often fractured amid the work, but faithfulness pursues the glory of God above earthly disputes and differences. It sees brotherhood as more central in the building of the edifice than the differences in the building strategies of the edifice.

Posted on

Why Paedocommunion?

Unlike some traditions, Providence Church practices paedocommunion—which means that every baptized child in this congregation is welcomed to the table of Jesus Christ. We do this because the Bible says that discerning the body is the prerequisite to coming to this table. And we do not mean that by such an imperative, the requirement is a dissertation on the various atonement theories or the capability of understanding everything that happened on Good Friday, but rather to “discern the body” is to act in such a way that unites the body. If you are a divider of the body, you are not discerning the body, and I beg you to stay away, but children—as in the days of Jesus—are welcomed to the table because their presence is unifying. They—many times unlike many grown-ups—have little to no problem wanting the good and unity of the assembly. Today, we welcomed all baptized, especially the little children for unto such belongs the kingdom of heaven.

Posted on

John Frame on Theological Definitions

One of the greatest joys of my life was spending four years under Prof. John Frame at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, FL. Those four years also included an independent study with him on Abraham Kuyper. It was that one semester that cemented my affection for the Dutch theologian. Since then, I have not looked back. I started a website named Kuyperian Commentary, wrote articles on Kuyper, lectured on Kuyper, and most recently wrote a new introduction to a reprint of his classic work, “Lectures on Calvinism.”

The impetus for such pursuits always goes back to my old mentor, John Frame. He taught me what it meant to pursue biblical fidelity. As he states in his Systematic Theology, he taught me that theological definitions must measure up to Scripture, not the other way around.” ((Systematic Theology, 4)” Frame sealed my love for the Bible as more than one revelation, or one authority among many, but as the ultimate authority over other legitimate authorities. Further, he instilled the sense that biblical definitions are given as the grammar of heaven. It is not merely sufficient to see the Scripture as a place for safety from heresies but to look to it as the source of safety itself for the Christian.

Frame adds that while some may differ in their definitions from us, it does not necessarily mean that we are at odds but may be approaching things from a different perspective. We may even share distinct ideas on the application, but we may be in harmony regarding the nature of the task. Therefore, we have to seek points of commonality first and foremost before engaging in the task of polemics.

Posted on

Overview of Stephen Wolfe’s “The Case for Christian Nationalism,” Introduction

flag of the usa on a pole

Stephen Wolfe’s work attempts to place God in his rightful, public place in a nation. The question is not whether we should contemplate such a proposition but in what way such a proposition needs to be installed. The absence of God in the public square is the de facto law of the land (2). Wolfe argues in his introduction that the leaders of our Christian society function as passive participants in the public square giving room for Rousseau’s disciples to rule over us while we bask in our pietism.

The book’s purpose is to “enliven in the hearts of Christians a sense of home and hearth and a love of people and country out of which springs action for their good” (5). This rekindling of the oikos receives even more precision when he defines a particular kind of nationalism. He sets the stage for what will be developed through the leviathan of 476 pages:

Christian nationalism is a totality of national action, consisting of civil laws and social customs, conducted by a Christian nation as a Christian nation to procure for itself both earthly and heavenly good in Christ (9).

He delves even deeper in his precision by arguing for a particular brand of Christian nationalism. He makes it clear in a footnote that he is “advancing a more Presbyterian form of Christian nationalism” (9). Nevertheless, he is at ease with a pan-Protestant vision where other traditions can incorporate their distinct contributions to the overall project. Such nationalism seeks to obtain the heavenly good, namely in Christ (11). This distinctly Christian platform provides the impetus for a totality of national action, which ranges from acts of sacrifice to mundane affairs (12). Christian nationalism functions consciously of its Christian status, working to define itself based on that fundamental identity.

The nation, then, serves to protect the administration of Word and Sacrament and to encourage society to partake of these things and “be saved unto eternal life” (15). The complete good of the nation is at the forefront of such endeavor and the only good is that which derives its meaning in Christ.

Evangelical and Reformed readers may become somewhat skeptical of Wolfe’s work when they note that he makes “little effort to exegete the text” (16) since he is not a theologian or biblical scholar. Nevertheless, he assumes a Reformed theological tradition and believes that such conclusions are drawn from the text. Further, he grounded his labors in 16th-17th centuries Thomistic premises, which he affirms comes from catholic Reformed tradition (18). This is made even more apparent when he concludes that “revealed theology serves to complete politics, but it is not the foundation of politics.” (19). In Wolfe’s apologetic, natural law takes a preeminent role in forming a Christianized nation.

While there are many different versions of Christian nationalism, Wolfe offers a stirring introduction and argues for a nationalism framed around scholastic theology rooted in Reformational history. The heavily footnoted introduction sets the stage for his case. We will consider in chapter one whether his anthropology provides the foundation for such a noble pursuit.

Posted on

Doug Wilson and Clerical Vestments

Doug Wilson’s episode discussing clergy attire is quite good, and we, high-church Presbyterians, should take a listen and consider a few of his thoughts. Here are some general responses to the interview: To Vest or Sweater Vest? https://www.gottesdienst.org/podcast/2022/11/9/tgc-234-to-vest-or-sweater-vest

The discussion with a Missouri-Synod Lutheran minister was also an interesting look into the wild diversity of worship practices among Lutherans and a special interest in the Gottesdienst Crowd who wish to return to the high-liturgical Lutheran model of the 16th century.

It is fascinating just how far the influence of @_Theopolis goes. I’ve heard of Lutheran, Anglican, Orthodox, & other high church traditions that have been deeply affected by the work of Peter Leithart and, as a result, become aware of our labors in the CREC and man like Wilson.

Wilson’s concern with clerical vestments stems from a fundamental question: “What is the direction of this act?” He directs his concerns toward low-church evangelicals who want to play dress-up. Such “liturgical” trends come with a side of postmodernism.

He argues that context is crucial in such discussions. He does not oppose traditional Lutherans wearing albs and stoles, but he finds it distressing that low-church evangelicals are dressing up in “ecclesiastical bling” as a way of calling attention and often end with effeminacy.

He is not opposed to ecclesiastical vestments, but he ponders the question, “what is the motive?” “what is it saying” and “what is the vestment highlighting?” It should highlight the office and not the man. We should avoid “showboating.”

“Clothing is rhetoric,” and it is crucial to understand the connotation of this rhetoric wherever you are ministering. Doug’s concern is that people may trip over robes if they attend one of our churches, especially in the South, where the Southern Baptist world is dominant.

Wilson’s concern is that the pastor conveys a masculine voice. He says that a white robe is a robe of a bride, not a groom. I’d note that the Transfigured glory of Jesus (Mat. 17) clothed him in white, and the pastors sitting around the throne were also robed in white (Rev. 4).

I also disagree with the perception of folks here in SBC land. In all my 14 years in Pensacola, wearing a white robe, only 2-3 times have someone inquired about the robe. They have asked more about using the word “catholic” in the Nicene Creed than anything else.

These are questions that can easily be overcome with a few conversations. And, indeed, any concerns that they may have is usually dealt with right after the service in brief exchanges.

This leads to my general observation that the culture of any congregation leaves a more powerful impression at first than the liturgical interests. Establish the culture, and the white robes are an easy sell.

Wilson’s general argument is quite moderate and straightforward. He even refers to it as “adiaphora.” He intends to do away with the tendency towards an egalitarian spirit, and the vestments can lead and have led to such abuses. This is a fair critique.

On the other hand, the suit/tie combo has provided its fair share of egalitarianism. Clothing matters and I could probably find the “business model” of attire equally troubling in mainstream evangelicalism. Postmodernism impacts the robe and the suit.

Wilson’s regulative principle argument is quite good, and he even notes that robes may be more suitable for certain environments and that there ought to be a deliberation in what direction you should go. The entire argument is very pastoral. There needs to be a goal in mind.

But Lutheran history is also a fine example. In the 70s, the high-church Lutherans were the liberals, but today the Gottesdienst Crowd (high-church Lutherans) are the ones seeking to restore 16th-century Lutheran conservative ideals.

Wilson’s general concern is that the liturgy/vestment does not stand on its own but that it is accompanied by instruction. There is an agreement between our two sides of the liturgical aisle & if there was any concern about where the liturgical side stands in the CREC, COVID demonstrated that our robes are symbols of the transfigured Christ who asserted his authority over earthly powers.

Posted on

All Saints: God’s Benediction Upon Martyrs

We celebrate —together with a vast majority of Christian Churches in the world–the feast of All Saints. On this day, we honor and remember the saints gone before us. Traditionally, All Saints Day is the day after All Hallowed Eve on October 31st, and the Church celebrates it on the closest Sunday to the first of November.

All Saints Day is also known as the day when we celebrate the hallowed ones, those who have been honored by God because of their faithful lives. The Bible does this frequently when it says that we must give honor to whom honor is due (Prov. 3:27) and when it lists the great heroes of the faith and praises them for their mighty actions in the face of grave danger (Heb. 11). All Saints’ Day is the benediction of God upon martyrs, the “well done” upon the faithful, and the clothing in white robes on all those who, from their labors rest.

By celebrating the life of the saints, ultimately, we are celebrating the death of death. We celebrate that in the death of the faithful ones, Satan has been mocked. In fact, All Saints testify to the humiliation of the devil and evil throughout history. The Christian Church rejoices over evil by mocking death. The third-century theologian Athanasius gives a good example of the early church’s attitude toward death:

“Death has become like a tyrant who has been completely conquered by the legitimate monarch; bound hand and foot the passers-by jeer at him, hitting him and abusing him, no longer afraid of his cruelty and rage, because of the king who has conquered him. So has death been conquered and branded for what it is by the Saviour on the cross. It is bound hand and foot, all who are in Christ trample it as they pass and as witnesses to Him deride it, scoffing and saying, “O Death, where is thy victory? O Grave, where is thy sting?” (1 Cor. 15: 55).”

Only the Gospel gave people hope that death could be defeated and reversed. Only the Gospel promised people glory at death and even more glorious resurrection life at the end of history. The reality is paganism cannot compete with All Saints’ Day because paganism cannot offer hope after death. The Christian message can offer a definitive answer to death. Jesus is the answer to death’s grip because Jesus overcame the grip of death.
#allsaints 

Posted on

Charge to Athanasius Presbytery

The life of the ministry is a life of theological self-giving. The minister gives away wisdom, learning, and life in everything he does. The very clerical collar he wears is a sign of that sacrificial life.

Paul’s words to Timothy fit this profile:

…give yourself entirely to them, that your progress may be evident to all. 16 Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.

A minister must rightly divide the word of truth. He must be a compelling interpreter, a respecter of the Word’s purity, internal logic, and redemptive flow. This is the standard for ministers as they come to be examined, and it is the expectation of those must give an account to our Great Shepherd.

Among the pastoral candidates who came for ordination in Geneva under the tutelage of the Company of Pastors, the vast majority were properly equipped theologically; they were not ashamed of the Word and their calling. However, some of them lacked theological gravitas prompting pastor Antoine de La Faye to say that a few were not even “qualified to watch goats.” Those were often sent home to study for a season or encouraged to find other professions. It reminds me of the advice my old professor Steve Brown gave to a young man after hearing him preach: “Young man, can you do anything else?” This is far from a harsh assessment; indeed, not many should be teachers.

Calvin viewed ministerial preparation as essential to developing a healthy city; thus, putting into place learning academies and offering opportunities for theological growth became an essential component of the city’s learning revolution. Calvin’s zeal for proper training of pastoral candidates came from what he viewed as a lack of equipped pastors in the day. Further, there were some clear signs that “vagabond ministers” traveling around Europe were causing dissension and assuming leadership positions “without oversight.”

The impetus for pastoral training was an outworking of the general premise Calvin had for regular Christian living. One could say that for Calvin, the process of doing theology was to adore God, and one could only adore God rightly by learning theology.

The training process equipped candidates to endure the lengthy but careful ordination process, which included examining piety and theology. “The Venerable Company” had a disposition towards candidates whose training included the liberal arts, biblical exegesis, theology, and practical experience. The preparatory season occurred in community settings where candidates were encouraged to attend Hebrew and Greek lectures and sharpen their rhetorical and dialectic skills.

Certain days were set aside for pastoral candidates to deliver sermons in the presence of members of the Venerable Company and test their abilities to debate issues confronting the civil and ecclesiastical scene of the day. With the learning process completed, Calvin and Beza, and other members of the Company of Pastors led the ordination process. Biblical knowledge took a central focus in the examining process under the assumption that if a candidate did not know his Bible well, his ministry would not prosper under God’s guidance.

The ordination examination had three sections. First, there was an examination for the candidates, which lasted for about two hours on various theological issues about the biblical text. Second, following the principles laid in I Timothy 3 and Titus 1, the pastoral candidate underwent examination concerning his moral standing in his familial and public life. Finally, there were trial sermons where the candidate provided an astute presentation of a text to reveal his ability to properly divide the word of truth and his skills to handle the text. The process was long and tedious, but Calvin believed that if a new reformation was to inundate the land, ministers should be men of learning committed to the authority of the Bible and pious servants of the great Shepherd, Jesus Christ.

It is our privilege today to continue with the next three candidates for pastoral ministry. The examining committees have affirmed that these men have shown enough knowledge in all these fields to come before the presbytery. And they have assured me that they are equipped to enter into Gospel ministry. We hope that these examinations will serve more as additional confirmation of their call, and we are eager to rejoice that God has called these brothers to share in the life of theological self-giving for the sake of the flock.

Let us pray: O God of eternal praise, you have equipped and called these your servants to the frontlines of Gospel activity in your holy church. Remind them of the gracious call to serve your flock, and give them the wisdom to remember, rejoice, and reflect on your kindness through Jesus Christ, the Great Shepherd, Amen.

Posted on

The Heaven of Hospitality: Our Noble Excuses, Part 2

Hospitality was a distinctive mark of the early church. Consider these words written in 96 AD by Clement of Rome, writing from the church in Rome to the church in Corinth:

“Indeed, was there ever a visitor in your midst that did not approve of your excellent and steadfast faith…or did not proclaim the magnificent character of your hospitality?”

What does it look for a Church to be known for its hospitality in the community? We often forget that one of the greatest displays of true religion which catapulted the Christian faith in the ancient world was the gift of hospitality. The Church constantly intermingled in this world of eating and drinking together (Acts 2:42). The result of such experiences was that the Lord’s Day became a day of exceeding joy, even amidst persecution.

The Christian’s most important day is doubled in communion and blessings when members have already tasted moments of worship around a table, singing with friends, and laughing with our children through the week. Indeed, hospitality throughout the week becomes the preparatory means to feast and prepare our hearts for Sunday. In fact, the more it is practiced, the richer will the Sabbath event be amidst the congregation.

Because this is so crucial in the life of the Church, and precisely because the Church’s imperative is so clear biblically and historically, I do not accept any psychological description that sounds like an apologetic for not doing it. Such may vary from, “But I don’t make enough money for hospitality,” or “I don’t know how to cook for large groups,” or “I am not comfortable entertaining people,” or “my house is too small,” or “I live alone,” or “life is too hectic right now,” and a host of self-defeating propositions (see Randy Booth’s article in the comment section).

We shall address some of these in the future, but suffice to say, the kind of hospitality I advocate is the incremental type that begins by inviting a family or a couple or an individual over at least once a month. In fact, the kindest hosts I know are people who don’t make much money and live in small homes but determined long ago that this is a gift of immeasurable worth that cannot be set aside because of fears or uncertainties.

Ultimately, we have to ask ourselves whether we have allowed our apathy to dictate our imperative instead of shutting our apathy with God’s imperatives. The impact hospitality has on a family will endure to a thousand generations. If we linger, we are missing out on the benediction bestowed on others through hospitality, but more importantly, the benediction God would love to bestow on us.

#hospitality

#earlychurch

Posted on

The Heaven of Hospitality, Part 1

Many years ago, shortly after we were married, we decided to invest in this hospitality business. We had heard the tapes, knew our biblical imperatives and came across some really dangerous authors who told us that hospitality was not an option. I regret ever having served my neighbor with food and laughter…said no one ever!

I remember inviting over a fairly wealthy family. The father was a gentle soul who was very successful in his labors. They accepted our invitation, and when we returned home from church to get everything ready, it dawned on us that our table could only fit four people, but they were a family of 6. Our apartment was slightly over 700 square feet, and we only had four chairs.

After some deliberation, we decided to sit on the floor and eat, to which they happily agreed. I remember being slightly embarrassed, but our concerns faded when we started eating and laughing. It was one of the most memorable Sundays in my life!

Here is the truth, as black as Amazonian coffee: those who do not practice hospitality fail to taste the goodness of God. It’s plain and simple. When Paul said, “do hospitality” (διώκοντες (Rom. 12:13; root word engages the concept of “persecution;” think of happily persecuting hospitality), he said that we are to be zealous for this gift.

For Paul and many other biblical authors, hospitality was a visible demonstration of our baptism into Christ. Christ hosts us in his body, and we host others in our abode. We improve our baptisms by baptizing others into our baptized life around a table.

We shall deal with practicalities throughout, but we must begin this conversation with an important principle found in Solomon. Proverbs 15:17 says: “Better is a dinner of herbs where love is than a fattened ox and hatred with it.” The Bible uses the image of a “fattened ox” to represent the finest foods available. The contrast is significant in this text because love is preferred over the best foods. Abundance and hatred do not go hand in hand. Abundance and hatred produce an un-godly environment–an environment where people do not want to be. Wealth and hatred only lead to disaster, but wealth of love is the secret ingredient to hospitality.

In one of my favorite Johnny Cash songs, he writes:

It’s not the barley or the wheat

It’s not the oven or the heat

That makes this bread so good to eat

It’s the needing and the sharing that makes the meal complete.

What makes a meal complete is the sense of sharing and passing and needing oneness in the context of a table, even if that table comes from the meager earnings of a college student or a widow. At that moment, when we are joined, something mystical occurs: we are imitating a table of kings and queens. Whether with herbs or the finest meal, the very presence of image-bearers partaking of food and drink forms a sacred bond that affirms our love for God and one another.

And for this entire thing to run as good as a hot cup of ramen noodles in a cold college dorm, we need the recipe of love. We don’t need abundance; we need only a few grateful saints around a table sharing stories and affirming the image-bearing status of one another; for where two or three are gathered around a table, God is in their midst.

Posted on

The Heaven of Hospitality, An Introduction

We are fond of sharing our humble home with fellow humans. It’s a common practice in our household. But we didn’t just wake up one morning and, for the first time, decide to invite all those fine people for a meal. Over the years, my wife and I have surrounded ourselves with people seasoned in the art of hospitality. They invited us over when we were young in our married life, then when we only had one child, and they continued to do it as our family increased in numbers. They have refreshed my family and me.

Let’s face it: hosting a family of seven is not for wimps! But yet, they have gone out of their way to make us feel comfortable and satisfied. And it takes a whole lot of food to satisfy a family of five hearty men.

It is hard to express the level of gratitude I have for the hundreds of meals prepared out of love and devotion. In turn, we have worked hard at imitating those who practice hospitality so generously. So many times, we didn’t have the mood or energy, but in the end, we all looked with amazement at how God transformed us through the ritual of hosting.

Yet, I am grieved by how the apostles’ imperatives (Heb. 13:2; I Pet. 4:9) are so often overlooked in the evangelical community. I often hear visitors to our congregation and outside our community state with some level of sadness that they have never or rarely been invited by a Christian to someone’s home for a simple meal. Yes, they have probably experienced what we call in the South “Potluck meals,” but that is different from the experience of particularized hospitality the Bible has in mind (general hospitality falls into a different category).

The Church and the individual family miss a genuine opportunity to serve one another, to hear each others’ stories, and give out of the abundance given to us in Christ Jesus. Indeed, hospitality is the overflow of God’s love for us. We host because God has hosted us in his house (Ps. 23). I love the way Lauren Winner describes this in her book, “Mudhouse Sabbath:”

“We are not meant simply to invite people into our homes, but also to invite them into our lives. Having guests and visitors, if we do it right, is not an imposition, because we are not meant to rearrange our lives for our guests – we are meant to invite our guests to enter into our lives as they are.”

What I wish to do in this short series is to encourage you to see how practical and pleasing it is to do hospitality. It doesn’t demand the most expensive wine bottle, nor does it demand the most extroverted host; it only demands a willing heart to see the Gospel made known amid unfolded laundry and wildly active children.

Who can host? The family of seven, the newlywed couple, the single young man, and anyone who can spare some change for a noble cause. For many of you who have never practiced this Christian gift, you can begin small and inexpensively, but what you can’t do is leave it up for the right opportunity. The right opportunity comes when you make it. Begin small, and you will see the joy and celebration that overtakes a house known for its hospitality.