Reflections on... Free Churches (FTS_MC500)

For our last class we took up the topic of the ecclesiological grouping known as the Free Churches, which includes everything from Baptist to Assembly of God, from Nazarene to Quaker. For the sake of ease of discussion, we covered the beginning of the Free Church from at the time of the Reformation, the Anabaptists. Their movement was referred to as the Radical Reformation, because not only did they take up the reforms of Luther and Calvin, but they also went even further to deconstruct the entire structure of the church as it existed. Whereas the Reformation continued to maintain the symbiotic partnership between church and state and the expression of the church as one visible institution, the Radical Reformation broke ties with both the government structures and the visible institution of the church. This movement began with a Bible study led by Ulrich Zwingli, from which many left to form independant communities of re-baptized adults. Zwingli, one of the leading Reformers, distanced himself from these Anabaptists ("ana" meaning "again"). Charactersitc of the Anabaptist and most Free Church movements is, of course, adult baptism, an emphasis on holiness, a central focus on the Scriptures, an understanding of the church as against the world, a more thorough emphasis on the priesthood of all believers, and an understanding of sacraments as merely symbols.

We finished the discussion on Free Churches with a brief overview of the modern global Pentecostal movement. Most Pentecostals would trace their roots to the Azusa street revival of 1906 in Los Angeles, and since then, according to Dr. Bolger, the Pentecostal movement has become the fastest growing social movement anywhere in the world and at any time of history. Pentecostalism is more appropriately described as a movement, since there are many different denominations within Pentecostalism, not to mention all the independant churches scattered throughout the world. The two striking characteristics of the early Pentecostal movement were, of course, the phenomena of speaking in tongues, but also, and perhaps more significantly, the radical racial and gender diversity within the same movement. From the very beginning the poor and rich, men and women, and people from all ethnicities and nationalities were in together in fellowship, in leadership even. According to Dr. Bolger, one could sum up the basic Gospel message of the Pentecostals as: Jesus is your savior, he will baptize you in the Spirit, God heals, and Jesus is coming again. With this basic foundation, Pentecostalism has swept the globe and become the second largest Christian movement next to Roman Catholicism.

This ends my reflection on lectures from my class, Church in Mission. This next week I will be starting a class called, Encountering the City. I plan on blogging through the daily lectures there as well. I hope it proves helpful for all of us!

Reflections on... Calvin and the Reformed Church (FTS_MC500)

Here's a few little interesting background bits about John Calvin: he studied law and philosophy before getting into theology, he was mild-mannered in contrast to Luther's hot-tempered nature, he wrote his first edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion before he was 30 and with no theological education, and he like to sing the Psalms.

What Calvin did in Geneva during his time there was to help create a fully Christian society where the government, society, and the church lived symbiotically together. Laws were in place such that everyone was required to go to church, take communion (provided they were not excommunicated), etc. To some it would seem that Calvin was a controlling and domineering religious figure. But, with respect to his context there's a few things to note.

Calvin did not view laws as producing Christians directly. He did not seek to legislate morality in that sense. Laws were in place because they expressed God's will for society, but the Gospel was preached because people could not keep the laws. The function of the law in Geneva was not to make people holy, it was to make them repentant. Calvin believed that in the context of law and the preaching of the Gospel, people would repent and believe Christ for salvation from the penalty and power of sin.

Calvin also emphasized that each person is endowed by God with something special, some gift, to be developed and employed for the worship of God. Among the many other ways in which Calvin impacted the Reformation, this was a unique contribution of his.

Where Calvin and Luther differed with respect to church traditions, Calvin moved away from Catholic teaching on the Eucharist by clarifying that it is not the "real presence" but the "true presence" of Christ that is mediated in Communion. By this he meant that Christ is not brought down to indwell the bread and wine but that by the bread and wine we are brought up into the presence of Christ at the right hand of the Father.

Reflections on... The Reformation and Luther's Eccelesiology (FTS_MC500)

Making our way through the centuries of the church in mission, we finished our general discussion of the church after Constantine. We noted that ecclesial authority and civil authority functioned more and more symbiotically until at last, under the new kings after the fall of Rome, the church and state were one and the same. The new kings, after having conquered and destroyed the Roman empire, had no civil structure for authority except for the institution of the church. The bishops became mayors and governors, so to speak, and the state effectively appropriated the church for civil, as well as, religious authority. The sacraments, as a result, become the property of the state, baptism, for example, being the entry into not only the kingdom of God, but also the entry into the kingdom of whichever king was ruling at the time. The church continues to serve as the social service arm of the government. The only true witness to the kingdom of God and the Gospel of Christ was the monastery, which became the primary educator in the empire. This mixture of empire and church created the cocktail in which Martin Luther and the Reformation would explode across Europe in the 16th century.

Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk and Bible teacher, reacted against the corruption and control of the Roman Church's hierarchy and doctrine, responding with two major themes: justification by grace through faith and the priesthood of all believers. For Luther, every single doctrine and practice of the church was reinterpreted and refashioned according to this doctrine of justification by grace through faith. Although many things changed in this reconstituting of the church around the doctrine of justification by grace, ecclesiology remained largely the same. Baptism was still the way by which infants were joined to the church and society, and the partnership between church and state remained central to society.

As we reflected on the work of Luther and the Reformation, especially with regards to ecclesiology, I was reminded of a few observations made by Luther in his The German Mass and Order of Divine Service (thanks to Alan Knox for the reference). It seems that there were both "seeker-sensitive" and "incarnational/organic church" models in Luther's mind as well! I will quote at length. First, Luther's "seeker-sensitive" model:

Next, there is the German Mass and Divine Service, of which we are now treating. This ought to be set up for the sake of the simple laymen. Both these kinds of Service then we must have held and publicly celebrated in church for the people in general. They are not yet believers or Christians. But the greater part stand there and gape, simply to see something new: and it is just as if we held Divine Service in an open square or field amongst Turks or heathen. So far it is no question yet of a regularly fixed assembly wherein to train Christians according to the Gospel: but rather of a public allurement to faith and Christianity.

But Luther would have preferred a more organic/incarnational model, had he had the leaders for it.

But the third sort [of Divine Service], which the true type of Evangelical Order should embrace, must not be celebrated so publicly in the square amongst all and sundry. Those, however, who are desirous of being Christians in earnest, and are ready to profess the Gospel with hand and mouth, should register their names and assemble by themselves in some house to pray, to read, to baptize and to receive the sacrament and practise other Christian works. In this Order, those whose conduct was not such as befits Christians could be recognized, reproved, reformed, rejected, or excommunicated, according to the rule of Christ in Matt. xviii. Here, too, a general giving of alms could be imposed on Christians, to be willingly given and divided among the poor, after the example of St. Paul in 2 Cor. ix. Here there would not be need of much fine singing. Here we could have baptism and the sacrament in short and simple fashion: and direct everything towards the Word and prayer and love. Here we should have a good short Catechism about the Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Lord's Prayer. In one word, if we only had people who longed to be Christians in earnest, Form and Order would soon shape itself. But I cannot and would not order or arrange such a community or congregation at present. I have not the requisite persons for it, nor do I see many who are urgent for it.

From the rest of his writings on the mass, it is clear that Luther was aware of issues of contextualization as well as some of ecumenism. How far he went with these is apparent in the history, but it is interesting, even encouraging, to see them in writing.

Reflections on... St. Patrick (FTS_MC500)

Today in class we discussed the church after Constantine in preparation for our next class on the Reformation. In lieu of the discussion we watched a short video about the life of St. Patrick and his mission to the Irish. We started the class by reading the Lorica, the prayer of St. Patrick also known as the Breastplate of St. Patrick.

St. Patrick was the son of wealthy landowners who was taken as a slave by the invading Irish. After receiving his freedom God called him in a dream to come back to Ireland with the Gospel (cf. Paul and the Macedonians). After 12 years of study and preparation, Patrick went to Ireland (cf. Paul and his time in the wilderness as referred to in Galatians). Patrick would camp with tribe after tribe of Irishmen, witnessing to the power of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. By the time of Patrick's death, all of Ireland was Christian.

It seems significant to me that Patrick spent 12 years preparing after receiving such a clear call from God to go to Ireland. It seems that the expectation nowadays is that obedience to a call should look like immediate action, whereas for St. Patrick, it took preparation, 12 years of it. Also, Patrick's method, of going tribe by tribe and implanting the Gospel and the church into the Irish culture was healthy and effective. It was the Irish Christians who saved Western civilization through their scholarship during the Dark Ages. Education was important. Finally, Patrick was known for confronting the evil powers of the Irish tribal religions. Power encounters were not uncommon.

In light of all of the conversion that occurred during the years following Constantine, the conversion of Ireland under St. Patrick stands out as a shining example of mission gone well.

Reflections on... The Pre-Constantinian Era (FTS_MC500)

Today we finished our discussion on the the era after the first century and before Constantine. Some of the changes during this era included the re-institutionalizing of religion after Jesus had deconstructed it during the first century. Whereas Jesus deconstructed the power structures and religious perspectives of Judaism, after the first century the church began to re-implement similar values of power in hierarchy and professionalism of a special clergy-class. Whereas Jesus said, "where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am among them," the pre-Constantinian church said, "where they are gathered around a rightly consecrated bishop rightly administering the the Eucharist, there is the church, the presence of Christ. Where there is no bishop, there is no church." The reasons for this may have been practical as well as theological: the church grew from roughly 10,000 in AD 100 to around 6,000,000 in AD 300. It took quite a bit more effort to care for a maintain the church at the end of the third century than it did at the end of the first.

One observation that Dr. Bolger made was that even though such growth over the second two centuries of the church seems massively exponentional, spaced out over the course of 200 years, it is more of a consistently steady growth over a long period of time. This brings home the reality that in the first few centuries, just as in the last few centuries, the backbone of church evangelism and growth has been through slow, steady conversion of friends and family members. Though there have been missionaries to new locations and mass revival type meetings, the long-lasting growth of the church has occurred as friends and family members are drawn into the church through exposure to life transformation and honest witness.

Finally, another interesting historical fact was a reference to a statement by one of the early church fathers, Tertullian, around AD 200. He made some comments to the effect that when people come to worship they should bring their own contributions, such as hymns. Over the course of the next few centuries, the church gathering went from being more active/participatory to more passive/receptive. It reminds me of something I've said before, that if you can still have the meeting with no one in attendance, then you're really not having a meeting, you're putting on a show. Shows have their place, but not in a family gathering.

Reflections on... The Church before Constantine (FTS_MC500)

Today we covered the church before Constantine. I should have known this, but only today did I realize that the structure of our lectures follows the "church worksheet" that we have for the class. Over the course of the class we will discuss the church in light of its mission at several different stages and in many of its forms. For each stage or tradition we will discuss it with respect to that particular church tradition's understanding of the nature of the church, its liturgy and sacraments, community and service, mission and witness, and organization and leadership. Today we discussed the church prior to Constantine and the "officializing" of Christianity in the empire. (I didn't say what I have commonly heard said concerning Constantine, that he "Christianized" the empire. Though that could be said, and I stand to be corrected, from what we discussed in class, it seems more that Constantine appropriated the already massive and well-organized institution of the fourth century church. Yep, I don't think we can blame the setbacks of Christendom on Constantine alone. If the picture of the Jewish religious leaders in the Gospels are of any help here, it seems that the tendency towards over-institutionalizing and professionalizing religion runs deep.)

We discussed how understanding of the sacraments changed over the next few centuries before Constantine. As the sacraments gained theological weight, so did the regulations and requirements surrounding them. The combination of high salvific effectiveness attributed to baptism, the high infant mortality rate, and the growing belief in original sin led to increasing practice of infant baptism. This of course, necessitated something like confirmation, to ensure the conversion of the baptised. So, how do you have a high theology of the sacraments while avoiding the high control that resulted? The priesthood of all believers. The sacraments belong to the church, not to a certain group within the church. That is why I think it is good to practice the "you catch 'em, you clean 'em" approach to baptism. (Though that's such a weird way to put it.) My former pastor once told me that he though we para-church campus ministers should be baptizing our new believers. I think he's right, given that we do so in view of the church - the church on campus or the church in the community, it does not matter which. The lines between Church universal, local church, and para-church are not so sharp as we imagine them. The important thing is that we remain aware that we all represent the Church, regardless whether that shows up on our business card or in our email address or not.

Similarly, with the Lord's Supper, teachers began to attribute more and more signifance to the physical bread and wine in response to the Docetists who downplayed the physical and material nature of Christian faith. Because of the growing significance of the Lord's Supper, and the growth of groups within the church whose practices were less than orthodox, bishops had to exercise more and more control. Though I'm sure that the motivation wasn't merely for power and control, over the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries, the divide between the clergy and laity grew so that the clergy became spiritual "providers" instead of one gifted believer among many. Just in case it's not clear, I think that was not the most helpful development...

We watched another video in class, this time from PBS Frontline, "From Jesus to Christ." In the video we were shown a piece of paper that one would receive for sacrificing to the emperor. This "receipt" was necessary for avoiding persecution for not worshiping the emperor at the appointed times. Though they didn't mention it in the video, I suspect that punishmet for not having the ticket ranged from fines to imprisonment to beatings to death. It's not hard to imagine that some of the 3rd century Christians found in this a direct fulfillment of the "mark of the beast" in John's Revelation.

Reflections on... First Century Churches (FTS_MC500)

Today we wrapped up our discussion on First Century Discussion, beginning with a small group discussion time centered on Acts 2:42-47. It's always interesting to discuss passages that we in Campus Crusade for Christ focus on so heavily. Not that we own any of these passages, far from it, but discussions outside of a CCC context always bear out how we selectively read passages, for good and ill. We call this one the Transformational Community passage, because it is the first example of a transformational community where people are being won to Christ, built up in their faith, and sent out to reach others. We emphasize well the reality of "biblical teaching, prayer, and real koininia (fellowship)" present in the "Acts 2" church. At the center of our hope for the college campus is the vision of seeing students embody this kind of community where they and the surrounding community will be awe of the ways in which God is at work, seeing others added to the community of believers with great regularity, until "everyone knows someone that truly follows Jesus," as we say. Of course, our reading of Acts 2 is selective, as are others'. The problem is that in our standard schema of a "transformational community" for the campus we leave out some of the most prominent characterizations of this Acts 2 community: celebrating the Eucharist (if that is indeed what "breaking bread" refers to; if not then at least true table fellowship should be practiced on campus), "signs and wonders" (which here was done by the apostles but seems to have spread throughout the church in the New Testament [Phillip in Acts 8:4-8, many in Corinth in 1 Corinthians 12:4-11, 27-31), observance of regular prayer times, radical hospitality and generosity for the common good, finding favor with outsiders, and daily interaction with each other and those outside such that there could be daily entrance into the new community of "the saved." I see some of these things changing on a grassroots level, but I hope that we as leaders and campus workers will promote it and not resist it in the eyars to come.

We also discussed Christian Worship in the First Century, Christian Mission in the First Century, and Leadership in the First Century church. It was interesting to note that the "order of worship" in mostly Jewish churches was inherited from the synagogue: opening prayer and praise, creedal confession and benedictions, reading from the Scriptures, and a homily. According to Dr. Bolger, many of these first Jewish churches, the house in which the synagogue met became the house in which the church met. The order of worship in those churches which had little to no Jewish influence were much more fluid and varied, cf. the letters to the Corinthians and the Thessalonians. As we were discussing, I was reminded of stories Dr. Jay Travis told about Muslims who begin to believe in Isa (Jesus) and meet to read the Quran and the Injil (New Testament), pray for each other, and apply the teachings of Jesus to their lives. The form of their meetings remain the same, but the content and the resulting community changes.

One last bit of interest: it was observed that there is little evidence that collecting money was a regular (certainly not weekly) part of the meeting together of the first churches. As Ravi Zacharias has wryly asked in this regard, what does it say about us that we hold tightly to a weekly offering but with reluctance institute a monthly Lord's Supper of stale crackers and a thimble of grape juice? It betrays our financial and dogmatic fears at worst, and our troublesome professionalizing of the clergy at best. Rather, it would seem, we should celebrate communion weekly in smaller setting where people are know and food can be enjoyed, and congregational giving should be generous and according to needs.

Reflections on... Jesus, the Kingdom, and the Church (FTS_MC500)

The following reflections will be regarding the lectures from MC500: Church in Mission, in which I am currently enrolled at Fuller Theological Seminary and for which I am publicly reflecting in at least 50 words in fulfillment of my class participation assignment.

Today, much of what we covered was as an orientation to the class: context for its development, overview of its content and aims, details about the assignments, etc. Before this first day, I have considered the reading list to be worth the price of admission (though, of course, I could have found the list and read the books apart from the class). I'll add onto these benefits received the assignments that are required for the class, lots of interactive writing: these daily entries in response to class discussion, notes from the readings in view of the final paper, participation in a local church of a different culture/tradition/ethnic background with an accompanying 2000 word paper, and the final paper, 3000 words considering my church tradition and what it might learn from other traditions in terms of "nature, liturgy, community, mission, and organization". One of the main reasons I've been excited about going "back to school", believe it or not, is the task of writing papers. We'll see how long that holds up... ;)

The second half of our class time was given to the first unit of discussion: Jesus, the Kingdom, and the Church. Dr. Bolger led us through a discussion around certain parts of an ABC News special series with Peter Jennings called The Search for Jesus, which is essentially a documentary through much of the recent research surrounding the Quest(s) for the Historical Jesus. We discussed how the idea of the Kingdom of God was not original to Jesus, but instead it was a conversation and an expectation that Jesus entered into, albeit uniquely, but not originally. The Kingdom of God (or Kingdom of Heaven as Matthew emphasizes it in his gospel), was the hope of a Jewish people who were still in exile from the fullness of what YHWH had promised to them, not limited merely to the promised land, but also to full human flourishing within the nation under YHWH, which necessarily meant that Roman occupation was not all that God had intended for them. The occupation, in fact, reminded that they were still in exile and under YHWH's discipline. Jesus came to announce the end of exile, and to usher in the Kingdom of God, not over and against the Roman occupation, but under and within the Roman occupation, to subvert the reigning paradigm and transform the people of God into one that would be a "blessing to the nations" as was intended. So, in light of this, the question comes to mind, if Jesus' ushered in the 'end of exile' for the nation of Israel, to enable them to fulfill their calling to be a light to the Gentiles and a blessing to the nations, then what do we make of 'exile' language in the New Testament after the Gospels? If Israel was in exile from God's presence among them in the temple, which brought about full national flourishing, then how in fact was exile ended if the temple was destroyed just 40 years after Jesus' ascension?
So then, it seem the 'end of exile' rather refers to YHWH's return to his people in Jesus, followed by the opening up of and expansion of the kingdom to include the entire earth, with YHWH's presence not in the Temple in Jerusalem but in the temple of the church. This begs the question, why then do the NT authors refer to the church as still in exile, as aliens and strangers? Is there some sense in which humanity is still in exile from the Garden of Eden to which we will return in the New Heavens/New Earth? Or is the hope more specific, that New Humanity (the church) awaiting full return from exile in the descent of the New Heavens/New Earth? Hmmm... Maybe I'll find out in the next class.

One last thing from class that was interesting was to think about was that, with respect Jesus' actions - his offering forgiveness outside the temple, his healing on the Sabbath, his sharing table fellowship with sinners and Gentiles, his valuing of women, his teaching in the sermon on the mount - Jesus was a destabilizing force in the religious, political, economic, and social structure of the time. How might our teaching, working, serving, relating be a kingdom-centered destabilizing force in our current contexts?

Christian spirituality

In the context of speaking about 21st century spiritual trends in the Church that have dislocated spirituality from that of the ancient church, Webber notes how the experiential spirituality of pietism and revivalism have turned into narcissism. He says,

Evangelism's focus on God's story taking experiential root in our lives is in itself not narcissistic. It only becomes narcissistic when one becomes fascinated with his or her own journey and gives priority to self-reflection. Our contemplative wonder and awe is not to focus on the spiritual journey of the self but on the journey of God who creates and became incarnate in his own creation to re-create. And our participation in the spiritual life is not a continuous search for a transcendent experience but the transfiguration of this life through a life lived in the continual pattern of baptism - dying to sin and rising to the life of the Spirit.
-Robert Webber, The Divine Embrace

"The Christian way of knowing [the truth about God]," Webber says, "is reflection on Scripture [God's revelation about himself] within community [that lives God's revelation]."

And "spiritual theology," says Eugene Peterson, "is the attention we give to lived theology - prayed and lived, for if it is not prayed, sooner or later it will not be lived from the inside out and in continuity with the Lord of life."

According to Webber, the problem with much contemporary spirituality, Christian or otherwise, is that it is focused on and preoccupied with the self. In Christianity this is manifest in spiritualities of legalism, intellectualism, and experientialism. True spirituality is not only centered on God revealed in Christ, but proceeds from God's story of creation, incarnation-Christ's birth, life, death, and resurrection, and re-creation through the Spirit.

These differing perspectives will manifest themselves in how we interact over issues from worship styles and environmentalism, to ethical discrepancies, doctrinal disagreements, and relational conflict of all kinds. In short, what is at stake is the Gospel, which is the "power of God for salvation to all who believe, the Jew first and to the Greek."

Prayer for the Church

Let your continual mercy, O Lord, cleanse and defend your Church; and, because it cannot continue in safety without your help, protect and govern it always by your goodness; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

HT: Scot McKnight @ JesusCreed.org

Communities of the Kingdom

N. T. Wright on the Gospel and Empire (read: "the man") in today's world:

Somehow, the gospel of Jesus has to be announced as the good news over against all the self-serving power-broking of our day. This won’t be easy. But the start for us, as it was for Paul, is without a doubt the creation of communities, cells of people under Caesar’s nose but loyal to Jesus as Lord and committed to living by faith, hope and love. The call to worship and prayer, to invoking the powerful name of Jesus and to applying his victory to the sometimes dehumanizing structures and power games of our day, remains at the top of the list of Christian priorities, of gospel priorities.

Irish Theological Quarterly
72 (2007) 131–146
Paul as Preacher: The Gospel Then and Now, p.145
N. T. Wright
© 2007 Irish Theological Quarterly

It's a strong vision for the creation of and building up of close-knit, deeply-impacting, far-reaching Christian communities, churches.

JESUS and CHANGE

Mars Hill Church's 10th anniversary video. (This year is now their 11th year, and the two things they say have remained constant are JESUS and CHANGE.)

God, would you continue
and increase
this same work of
transforming lives
by the Gospel of Jesus
in cities all over America
and beyond.
Make us true disciples and disciple-makers,
for your glory
and for the good of the world around us.

A Poetic Prayer from Down Under

God of Eternity, Lord of the Ages,
Father and Spirit and Saviour of men!
Thine is the glory of time’s numbered pages;
Thine is the power to revive us again.
Pardon our sinfulness, God of all pity,
Call to remembrance Thy mercies of old;
Strengthen Thy Church to abide as a city
Set on a hill for a light to Thy fold.
Head of the Church on earth, risen, ascended!
Thine is the honour that dwells in this place:
As Thou hast blessed us through years that have ended,
Still lift upon us the light of Thy face. Amen.

-Australian Presbyterian, Ernest Northcroft Merrington

On Institutions, Western Culture, and Spirituality

Speaking about lay movements in the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict's addressing of the spiritual state of Western Europe, Russell Shorto of the New York Times said in his article, "Keeping the Faith",

According to many observers, the lay movements substantially accounted for the unimagined numbers of mourners who poured into Rome. Data on declining church attendance obscure the fact that there is a good deal of spiritual hunger in Europe, but it is largely outside institutional religion, a phenomenon that the British sociologist Grace Davie calls “believing without belonging.” The Vatican is aware of this and says that the lay Catholic movements may represent a bridge, a way to bring the aimless, searching, largely secular Europeans back into the fold.

Msgr. Donald Bolen, an official with the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, told me that the lay movements “are movements of the Holy Spirit. The temptation in the church has long been to try to keep the parishes filled, to spend energy on maintenance. These movements are not about maintenance of old structures. But this isn’t a new thing. When Francis of Assisi started with his little band of disciples, some were confused. Movements within the church are not new.” The pope’s media spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, made much the same point to me: “The lay movements are a sign of life. The Vatican is not the whole church.”

But the problem is that the spiritual hunger that exists in Europe seems to be precisely for what the church can’t provide. Polls show that Europeans distrust institutions of all kinds. For an institution that is practically synonymous with hierarchy and control, the lay movements may represent as much a threat as a promise...

Benedict may be right that the Catholic Church has a world-historic chance to transform Europe and bring about change. But the church’s own strictures could work against that... “Think of the silencing of theologians in recent decades,” said Father Reese, the former editor of the Jesuit journal America. “The suppression of discussion and debate. How certain issues become litmus tests for orthodoxy and loyalty. All of these make it very difficult to do the very thing Benedict wants. I wish him well. I want him to succeed. But it seems everything he has done in the past makes it much more difficult to do it.”

A friend of mine living in Italy said that she felt like she has seen the possible future of Christianity and culture in the U.S. I saw some strikingly similar parallels as I read this article in the New York Times, confirming where it is that we are now in a post-Christian Western culture. Like mentioned in the quotes above, there is hope in the Spirit's work in the people, but there will be tension with the power structures of the institutional church to the extent that there are conflicting interests, both in the RCC and other denominations of the Christian church. It's really sad to me to see such power struggles. Though we must contend for the faith, it seems that many, once established as authorities on "the faith", contend for much more than that.

Like the last guy said, I really do want the Pope to succeed in helping Europe to move past postmodern secularism. I really do want the institutional church to succeed so far as it makes disciples of Jesus, but it seems that, like the Jews of Jesus' day, there are some systemic "logs" that will prevent the institutional church from being all that, in Christ, it could be.

Maranatha. Come Lord Jesus, make all things new.

"I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me." (Jn 17:20)

Power of Percentages

"If Christians had given a 10 percent tithe to their churches in 2004, instead of the actual 2.56 percent, there would have been an extra $164 billion. And of churches spend $70 to $80 billion of that on missions and humanitarian works, the basic needs of every person on the globe would be provided."
- Relevant, Nov./Dec. 2006, p. 30

"Personal wealth is distributed so unevenly across the world that the riches two percent of adults won more than 50 percent of the world's assets. The poorest half of the world hold only 1 percent of the wealth."
- Financial Times, www.ft.com, Dec. 5, 2006


As quoted in Campus Crusade for Christ's March 2007 issue of Connection.

some words on The Word

Excerpts from the Edwardian Homilies of the English Reformation as issued by Edward VI of England and composed by Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1547. Cranmer was martyred 9 years later after the Pope regained control of England.

Taken from Creeds of the Churches, edited by John Leith, gifted to me by my friend Kat as bathroom reading material... :)

A Fruitful Exhoration to the Reading and Knowledge of Holy Scripture

Unto a Christian man (or woman) there can be nothing either more necessary or profitable, than the knowledge of holy scripture, forasmuch as in it is contained God's true word, setting forth his glory, and also man's duty. And there is no truth nor doctrine necessary for our justification and everlasting salvation, but that is, or may be drawn out of that fountain and well of truth.

Therefore as many as be sesirous to enter into the right and perfect way unto God, must apply thier minds to know holy scritpure; without the which, they can neither sufficiently know God and his will, neither their office and duty. And as drink is pleasant to them that be dry, and meat to them that be hungry; so is the reading, heargin, searching, and studying of holy scripture, to them that be desirous to know God, or themselves, and to do his will.

And their stomachs only do loathe and abhor the heavenly knowledge and food of God's word, that be so drowned in worldly vanities, that they neither savour God, nor any godliness: for that is the cause why they desire such vanities, rather than the true knowledge of God.

And in reading of God's word, he most profiteth not always that is most ready in turning of the book, or in saying of it without the book; but he that is most turned into it, that is most inspiried with the Holy Ghost, most in his heart and life altered and changed into that thing which he readeth; he that is daily less and less proud, less wrathful, less covetous, and less desirous of worldly and vain pleasures; he that daily (forsaking his old vicious life) increaseth in virtue more and more.

And, to be short, there is nothing that more maintaineth godliness of the mind, and driveth away ungodliness, than doth the continual reading or hearing of God's word, if it be joined with a godly mind, and a good affection to know and follow God's will. For without a single eye, pure intent, and good mind, nothing is allowed for good before God. And, on the other side, nothing more darkeneth Christ and the glory of God, nor bringeth in more blindness and all kinds of vices, than doth the ignorance of God's word.

it came upon a midnight clear

Emperors and Angels

Isaiah 9.2–7; Luke 2.1–20

a sermon at the Midnight Eucharist, Christmas Eve 2006

by the Bishop of Durham, Dr N. T. Wright

The following is from the Christmas hymn, "It Came Upon a Midnight Clear", but with a few of the lines changed a bit in order to more accurately represent the heart of the prophets and the meaning of Christmas, which, as Bishop Tom Wright said this is Christmas eve, is a "summons to us, as it was to his first followers, to sign on under his authority, to celebrate the birth of the Wonderful Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace, and to work under that authority for the growth of his promised kingdom of endless peace, of justice and righteousness."

For lo, the days are hastening on,
by prophets seen of old,
When, by the Spirit’s mighty power
Arrives the time foretold:
When Peace shall over all the earth
Its promised splendours fling,
And the whole world give back the song
Which now the angels sing.
-Edmund Sears and N.T. Wright

A song and a Prayer

You are so high among the highest, and I am low among the lowest, a mean thing. You never go away from us. Yet we have difficulty in returning to you. Come Lord, stir us up and call us back, kindle and seize us, be our fire and our sweetness. Let us love, let us run (to you).
-St. Augustine

Since from His bounty I receive
Such proofs of love divine
Had I a thousand hearts to give
Lord, they should all be Thine
A thousand men could not compose
A worthy song to bring
Yet Your love is a melody
Our hearts can’t help but sing!
-To Christ the Lord Let Every Tongue,
Samuel Stennet and Laura Taylor

so, what do you do?

Here's an article from the New York Times about the brew-ha-ha that's going on with the American Episcopal church. With the ordination of the first openly gay priest a few years back, and the following installment of the first woman bishop of the entire Episcopal church in America, many of the more conservative churches and dioceses have felt jilted, and now they are leaving.

Not too long ago, several other members of the Anglican communion in some of the poorer parts of the world including Bolivia, Rwanda, and Nigeria got together to send missionaries over to help save the day. Now, many of the conservative Episcopal churches and dioceses are leaving the Episcopal church and joining up with these foreign branches of the Anglican communion because of irreconcilable differences.

So, what do you do? The Anglican communion has historically been very broad as far as the scope of doctrine professed, but for many it seems that now a line has been crossed. For me, of course, I think a line has definitely been crossed, at least with regards to homosexuality, if not also with the ordination of women. Is that cause for secession? What is cause for the breaking of fellowship? From what Paul the apostle said, and maybe Jesus too, it seems to be unrepenant sin is cause for breaking fellowship. But of course, that begs the questions, what kind of sin, who defines it, is it possible to really let the Scripture settle the issue, etc. I think so. I want to believe that it is, or we might as well just go in any old direction we want.

Several years ago J.I. Packer commented in Christianity Today about why he walked out of the meeting in which a decision was made to bless same-sex unions by saying that

"this decision, taken in its context, falsifies the gospel of Christ, abandons the authority of Scripture, jeopardizes the salvation of fellow human beings, and betrays the church in its God-appointed role as the bastion and bulwark of divine truth. My primary authority is a Bible writer named Paul. For many decades now, I have asked myself at every turn of my theological road: Would Paul be with me in this? What would he say if he were in my shoes? I have never dared to offer a view on anything that I did not have good reason to think he would endorse."

It's not an uncomplicated situation, and it won't be a quick fix, but someone somewhere at some point in time has to draw the line. And this time it might just be time for a change. I pray that it would not include division, but if it must, then let it be for the truth of Christ and the Scriptures and the glory of God, the only foundation for Christian love.

para-church phase out response

This is a response to this blog entry about a proposal to phase out the campus ministry of CCC. Neither the original blog nor my response are the opinions of CCC or the expression of anything bad or mean or disrespectful towards the past, present, or future of CCC. It's just some thoughts, theories, and desires for how things might be, hopefully in a way that is faithful to the heart of Jesus and the teaching of the New Testament.

Here's the original blog post: Parachurch Phase-out

Here's my response:

Kristie, you are thinking in a very good direction. Along with Melinda, I am also on staff in the Red River Region. I was involved with Crusade in limited fashion during college through my church's partnership with WSN and some relationships with staff and cru folk. I was on STINT for two years in East Asia with a team made up only from my church, and have since returned to be part of the Oklahoma Catalytic team.
Since my long term involvement with Crusade happened as a result of my church's partnership with WSN, I have always felt the need for a closer relationship between the campus ministry and the local church. So, like I said, you're thinking in a very good direction.
It's always precarious to make sweeping generalizations about things that are beyond one's ability to comprehensively evaluate, but I'm going to try anyway (I guess I just did...). There's an unhealthy split between the campus ministry and the local church. I say that because most Crusade students I know have very limited connection to any local church, if they have any at all. Most only attend a Sunday service weekly at best. I keep hearing from students the line that "In crusade I get fellowship, mission, Bible teaching, worship. Why should I go to church? Isn't that what it's for?"
Well, it seems to me that many Crusade students, and others probably, don't know what church is, and we may in fact need better definitions. I think most everyone realizes that the church is not the building; it is the people of God. But, if that is it, then when we plant movements, are we not then planting churches?
Recently at a Growing and Planting Movements conference, I asked this question during a Q&A time, "What's the difference between building movements and planting churches?" The answer was several minutes of silence. I think this was in part due to the fact that people using the language of building movements is new and very similar to the rapidly mulitplying church planting movements going on around the world. (We were even given the IMB's guide to planting Rapidly Multiplying Church Planting movements at our regional time at this last CSU conference.) It seems that this is a question that we are still working on.
From what one of the national team said, Campus Crusade for Christ as an organization has had a really good track record in working with local churches and denominations. Just read _Come Help Change the World_ and you can see that, but the campus ministry has not always been as successful in partnering with local churches and denominations. There are pockets where this is not the case, but until recently in Catalytic, it has not been something we have pursued with much conviction. I pray this continues to change.
In honor of Justin Timberlake with respect to para-church ministry, I would like to bring "para" back. Parachurch was meant to come along side the local church to strengthen it and reach out in ways that it couldn't (and many times wouldn't). But when it comes to campus ministry, it is not good enough simply that "we do our thing, they do theirs, and hopefully some crossover will happen when students graduate and join a church or someone from the church joins staff or supports us."
Like you Kristie, I would love to see the day when we work ourselves out of a job when it comes to doing all of the evangelism and discipleship on campus. If we are really going to reach all of the students of the world, it's going to happen through the ministry of local churches who stay there year after year and continue to train and disciple college students in large numbers as they pass through college. It will take a movement of "volunteers", plain and simple. Churches in their very nature are much more stable than campus ministries and much less dependent on the coming and going student leaders.
And I say this much not even having mentioned the question "what is church?" If a proper, God-ordained, apostolically proclaimed visible church body includes things like baptism, eucharist, elders, deacons, discipline, and social justice then we've got a problem when students feel that Crusade is their church because the worship, evangelize, fellowship, and learn the Word in that community. Because, in reality, many campus ministries (to overgeneralize again) function like churches on campus with staff as elders, student leaders as deacons, focusing on evangelism and discipleship without much concern for social justice and no baptisms or eucharist. (My pastor even remarked to me one day that he thought it would be great if orgs like CCC started baptizing and serving communion...) If all that students of a campus ministry see church for is getting baptized and occasional sunday mornings with communion if they come on the right day, then we have done a terrible injustice to them and to the church, and we have not set them up with a good ecclesiology to live from before and after they graduate.
I do think the catalytic style is heading in the right direction on this, but it must keep adapting. Reproducing staffed campus models on unstaffed campuses is not what we should aim for. This is, I believe, what Movements Everywhere and Mulitple Movements are all about, and without local church involvement and ownership, it will not succeed. (Unless of course God decides to reject the local church in this and work outside of it, but I don't think that is the case, and we would still continue to run into the same problems down the road and find that we would need to start planting churches anyway.) The campus ministry is not in the business of planting churches and shouldn't be, the freshman to senior cycle is too fast and volatile. But, if we do not work closely with local churches in building movements everywhere in every group on campus, then we will be planting churches, lopsided and unhealthy ones at that. And I don't know anyone in the campus ministry that wants to start planting CCC churches.
So, all that to say I like your proposal, but I would tweak a few things. I do think it will be necessary for Crusade staff to remain intimately involved on campus, but in a different way. My vision of the staff of the future would be that a majority of the campus staff would be catalytic and forerunners. The primary goals of the staff would be to network and build partnerships with local churches to reach campuses near them and to train church volunteers and student leaders in building and sustaining mulitplying movements of evangelism and discipleship. Bible studies and weekly meetings and such for the different movements on campus would be the responsibility of the students under the guidance and support of church volunteers and in line with the vision of CCC as communicated through the staff.
Staff would be the ones that keep expanding things, taking on new campuses and partnerships, both locally and with WSN, and giving vision and training for the volunteers and student leaders. There will certainly be room for continued one-to-one discipleship with students (because the staff still need to be intimately connected to the student world), but it will be limited.
One area in which I see great potential in this is in a CCC strategy called No Boundaries (www.nobounds.org) in which staff seek to plant churches in hard to reach countries through college students. Students who have been involved in campus ministry within the context of a chruch would be very prepared to enter into this kind of effort.
So, that's quite a comment, I know. I always seem to post long comments... But, please take it as a complement to the thought-provokingness of your post. I hope this discussion continues and even moves up the chain, which I'm sure it has in some fashion already. We probably just don't know about it yet.