On Leadership

Here are a couple of articles I’ve read lately on leadership. Well written and insightful, both.

Tim Keller on Calvin, Farel and Viret – two kinds of popularity.

When fear of man produces hypocrisy.

On Church Covenants and Membership

Here’s an excellent piece on the use of Church Covenants in Baptist Churches. Well worth the read.

Thoughts on the Great Commission

Peter Leithart, in his book The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church (pp. 188-194), makes some observations concerning the Great Commission as it relates to the Cultural Mandate. I found this to be compelling (it takes a few minutes to read, but well worth it!):

Like the original cultural mandate to Adam and Eve, the commission of the Last Adam is hard to take in. Jesus, the resurrected Son of David, commissioned His twelve timid disciples to go out from Jerusalem into Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth, not merely to proclaim the message of the kingdom, but to make disciples of the nations, to bring all the nations under the easy yoke of Christ. We can take this commission seriously only because the One who has been given all authority in heaven and on earth has promised to be with us to the end of the age (Matt. 28:18-20).

Transforming the World

Those early Christians were a small minority, often situated on the periphery of public life, but they did not regard their mission as a private affair—it had to do with the transformation of the world.

-John W. de Gruchy, Christianity and Democracy: A Theology for a Just World Order

Paradoxical Conduct

From the unknown author of the “Epistola ad Diognetum” in the early part of the second century:

The Christians are not distinguished from other men by country, by language, nor by civil institutions. For they neither dwell in cities by themselves, nor use a peculiar tongue, nor lead a singular mode of life. They dwell in the Grecian or barbarian cities, as the case may be; they follow the usage of the country in dress, food, and the other affairs of life. Yet they present a wonderful and confessedly paradoxical conduct. They dwell in their own native lands, but as strangers. They take part in all things as citizens; and they suffer all things, as foreigners. Every foreign country is a fatherland to them, and every native land is a foreign. They marry, like all others; they have children; but they do not cast away their offspring. They have the table in common, but not wives. They are in the flesh, but do not live after the flesh. They live upon the earth, but are citizens of heaven. They obey the existing laws, and excel the laws by their lives. They love all, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown, and yet they are condemned. They are killed and are made alive. They are poor and make many rich. They lack all things, and in all things abound. They are reproached, and glory in their reproaches. They are calumniated, and are justified. They are cursed, and they bless. They receive scorn, and they give honor. They do good, and are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice, as being made alive. By the Jews they are attacked as aliens, and by the Greeks persecuted; and the cause of the enmity their enemies cannot tell. In short, what the soul is in the body, the Christians are in the world. The soul is diffused through all the members of the body, and the Christians are spread through the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, but it is not of the body; so the Christians dwell in the world, but are not of the world. The soul, invisible, keeps watch in the visible body; so also the Christians are seen to live in the world, but their piety is invisible. The flesh hates and wars against the soul, suffering no wrong from it, but because it resists fleshly pleasures; and the world hates the Christians with no reason, but that they resist its pleasures. The soul loves the flesh and members, by which it is hated; so the Christians love their haters. The soul is enclosed in the body, but holds the body together; so the Christians are detained in the world as in a prison; but they contain the world. Immortal, the soul dwells in the mortal body; so the Christians dwell in the corruptible, but look for incorruption in heaven. The soul is the better for restriction in food and drink; and the Christians increase, though daily punished. This lot God has assigned to the Christians in the world; and it cannot be taken from them.

Taken from Phillip Schaff’s History of the Christian Church

Derek Webb on the Gospel and Community

Derek Webb, on his CD The House Show, introduces the song Nobody Loves Me with a statement on the gospel and community. 

He talks about the risk that we run as we enter into community with each other

…which we necessarily are. We are called into community together. If you divorce the people of God, the local community, from the gospel, then it ceases to be the gospel. There is no other context for your faith as a Christian than to be in community with other people. I’ve heard a lot of people say to me over the years, “It’s just me and Jesus, and that’s all I need.” Well, that’s not the gospel in Scripture. If you’re going to be those who claim to love Jesus, then you’ll be compelled, and I’ll be compelled to love the things that he loved. And he not only loved, but came and gave himself up for the church. And that makes it our concern as well.

War at Play

On Wednesday morning a group of young men get together to discuss the book Future Men by Doug Wilson. Pastor Dan suggested this morning that the following be posted somewhere. Here seems like a good spot for such posting.

What about playing at war? More than a few adults have been concerned about boys playing at war with stick guns and swords. But boys who play at war are training at something men are called to do. It is as honorable as a young girl mothering a baby doll. But just as we do not want the young girl abusing the doll, neither do we want young boys pretending to do evil in war. Among the essential things that boys must learn here are honor and restraint. They should only learn what they need to learn, and they should not learn that which thy must reject later. [emphasis added]

This means that a boy who is playing with a toy gun should be trained to never use it more freely simply because it is not real. A small boy who is playing war with his brothers should be pointing and blasting away with the best of them. But if a lady from church comes over to visit the young boy’s mother, and is standing in the foyer, and the boy comes up and tries to blow her away, the young warrior’s mother should haul him off to the bedroom to be tried for war crimes. The visitor was a civilian and non-combatant, and Mother should be schooled in the principles of just war theory, and she should enforce the rules.

Heh.

Individualism and Gay Marriage

In an interesting article in Christianity Today magazine, Mark Galli points to the problem of individualism that exists among evangelicals. He argues that this is at the root of the reason for the widespread acceptance of gay marriage in our culture. We must confront this root problem within ourselves if we want to see changes in the culture at large. He writes:

“Marriage is inescapably connected to children and thus family, and family is inescapably connected to society.

In a highly individualistic culture, this argument swims upstream, but conservative Christians recognize that it corresponds to their basic theological instincts. The narcissism of mutual self-fulfillment will never be a solid foundation for a particular marriage, let alone for the most fundamental institution in society. This is an argument we can press publicly as the opportunity arises.

We’ll have to press it humbly, however, because as it turns out, we are very much complicit in the unrighteousness we decry.

The thrust of the pro-gay-marriage argument rests on the assumption that the happiness of the individual is paramount, and that the state’s responsibility is to protect the rights of individuals to pursue whatever they think will make them happy, as long as no one gets hurt. The irony of radical individualism is that it will eventually hurt somebody. In practice, the happiness of one individual always runs into the happiness of another, and then only the strong survive. The weaker individual is no longer treated as fully human, and thus his or her right to happiness is compromised. In our nation, we see this in the way we treat individuals at both ends of life, in how expendable they are if they interrupt the happiness of the fully functioning—take the increasing acceptance of euthanasia, and the on-the-ground fact of abortions in the thousands every day.

Evangelicals are sensitive to this reality, but are less aware of how much we proactively participate in the culture of individualism. While stopping short of abortion, we have not given much thought to our easy acceptance of artificial contraception. I’m not arguing for or against contraception here, only pointing to the reality that contraception has separated sex from procreation. That, in turn, has prompted most couples, evangelicals included, to think that sex is first and foremost a fulfilling psychological and physical experience, that a couple has a right to enjoy themselves for a few years before they settle down to family life.

In essence, we have already redefined marriage as an institution designed for personal happiness. We see ancillary evidence of this at the other end of marriage: Though it is a difficult thing to measure, the rate at which evangelicals divorce is hard to distinguish from the larger culture’s, and the list of reasons for divorce seems no different: “We grew apart.” “We no longer met each other’s needs.” “Irreconcilable differences.” The language of divorce is usually about the lack of self-fulfillment.

Add to that our penchant for changing churches, usually because “I just wasn’t being fed,” as well as our need to test every church and pastor against our personal reading of the Bible—well, you can see why Protestants have managed in 500 years to create out of two traditions (Orthodox and Catholic) some 30,000 denominations. While the Baptists are known for their doctrine of “soul competency,” a version of the doctrine is woven into the fabric of broader evangelicalism, though it has morphed into sole competency. Thus, the death of mutual accountability and church discipline in our movement. Thus, the exaltation of worship in which the personal experience of the worshiper so often becomes more important than the object of worship. Thus, the continual proliferation of churches, parachurches, and movements because the group we belong to just doesn’t do it the way we think “the Lord is leading me” to do it.

We are, of all Christian traditions, the most individualistic. This individual emphasis has flourished in different ways and in different settings, and often for the good. It has challenged moribund religion (Reformation), prompted revival (Great Awakenings), ministered to the urban poor (Salvation Army), abolished slavery (William Wilberforce), and led to explosive worldwide church growth (Pentecostalism). But it is individualism nonetheless, and it cuts right to the heart of one of our best arguments against gay marriage.

We cannot very well argue for the sanctity of marriage as a crucial social institution while we blithely go about divorcing and approving of remarriage at a rate that destabilizes marriage. We cannot say that an institution, like the state, has a perfect right to insist on certain values and behavior from its citizens while we refuse to submit to denominational or local church authority. We cannot tell gay couples that marriage is about something much larger than self-fulfillment when we, like the rest of heterosexual culture, delay marriage until we can experience life, and delay having children until we can enjoy each other for a few years.

In short, we have been perfect hypocrites on this issue. Until we admit that, and take steps to amend our ways, our cries of alarm about gay marriage will echo off into oblivion.”

Read the whole article here.

HT: Denny Burk

Why There Are No Perfect Pastors

John Piper writes:

On his birthday, let John Newton (author of “Amazing Grace”) tell us why there aren’t any perfect pastors.

In my imagination, I sometimes fancy I could [create] a perfect minister. I take the eloquence of ______, the knowledge of ______, the zeal of ______, and the pastoral meekness, tenderness, and piety of ______. Then, putting them all together into one man, I say to myself, “This would be a perfect minister.”

Now there is One, who, if he chose to, could actually do this; but he never did it. He has seen fit to do otherwise, and to divide these gifts to every man severally as he will. (Richard Cecil, Memoirs of the Rev. John Newton, p. 107.)

Caring About the Anglicans

From Michael Haykin, Professor of Church History at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:

“Why should Baptists care about the vile mess of US Episcopalianism? Because our forebears came out of that denomination and our arguments for Baptist polity were shaped in fighting Episcopalians (like the Quakers and Methodists and Congregationalists). And as Baptists we have a tradition: a tradition that involves in part arguments within and without. And some of the arguments in the 17th c were with the Anglicans outside of our forebears’ communities.

Nor can we stand back and gloat about the Episcopalian loss of gospel witness: it should make us WEEP! Think of the worthies in that Body: Cranmer, Hooper, Ridley, Latimer, Richard Greenham (that fount of Puritan pastoral theology), Perkins, holy Sibbes, Gurnall, the Wesleys, Romaine, the Venns, Newton (the mentor of one of my favourite Baptists, John Ryland Jr.), Whitefield, the holy John Fletcher, Grimshaw (my hero who was such a help to my Baptist forebear John Fawcett), Samuel Walker, George Thomson, William Cowper, Octavius Winslow (he became an Anglican after years as a Baptist! This is an historical mystery that needs unravelling), Simeon, Ryle. What we owe the Anglicans!

God have mercy on the denomination now! And God keep us from travelling the same path: much of their episcopal leadership has degraded the Lord Jesus and he has degraded them!”