Mark D Wallace

Big Block of Cheese Day

2012-01-04T19:20:00.001Z

Today has been an interesting experiment.

Those familiar with the West Wing will remember Leo McGarry's insistence that his staff took a day out to give attention to those fringe special interest groups that otherwise would never get attention from the White House. Those not familiar with the West Wing will have no idea what I'm talking about - start here.

Anyway, six weeks ago I blocked out this Wednesday in my diary. I wrote the words 'Big Block of Cheese Day' across it. Three people who saw my diary had no idea what I was on about. Two smiled knowingly.

And I spent the day on the kind of work-tasks that I would never normally get round to. I half-emptied the filing cabinet. I restructured the folders on my desktop so I can find files again. I actually wrote two letters. And I got some traction on a couple of huge-but-timeless tasks.

And it's been a great day. Stress levels: low. Satisfaction levels: high. And the completion of eight tasks that have been staring at me on OmniFocus for over a year. I recommend BBoCD. I might try it again. But probably not until 2013.

On the Incarnation

2012-01-01T16:53:00.000Z

Some favourite moments from a recent re-read of 'De Incarnatione Verbi Dei'...

as straw is combustible unless wrapped in asbestos, so the body - unless it is wrapped in Christ - would be consumed by corruption (ch. 44)
as a deceiver may falsely impersonate an emperor who lives in seclusion until the latter appears and convicts him, so the deceit of idols paraded as gods and demanded divine honour until the true Word of God appeared and exposed them (ch. 55)
a wrestler does not choose his own opponents, lest he be thought weak - he lets his opponents choose them; Christ did not devise his own mode of death, letting his enemies choose it for him, proving his superiority over every form of death (ch. 24)
as the sight of a downtrodden serpent, or of a child being able to play with a lion, proves that it either powerless or dead, so the fact of Christians sporting with Death proves Death's impotence (ch. 29)

Trust Him for His grace

2011-12-31T14:52:00.000Z

Whatever storms may come in 2012, here is a confident reminder from William Cowper, a C18th tortured soul...

God moves in a mysterious way
His wonders to perform;
He plants His footsteps in the sea,
And rides upon the storm.

Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take;
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy and shall break
In blessings on your head.

Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,
But trust Him for His grace;
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.

His purposes will ripen fast,
Unfolding every hour;
The bud may have a bitter taste,
But sweet will be the flower.

God willing, tomorrow morning I shall be preaching on Mark 4:35-41. As we face another New Year, let us remember that being disciples of Jesus Christ does not mean we are exempt from storms or that we are triumphant over them. But being a disciple of Jesus Christ does mean that we can trust the Creator who cares and controls...

From the Curate's Desk

2011-12-31T14:37:00.000Z

Here's what the good citizens of Trull will find in their Parish Magazine for January...

2012 should be a momentous year.

In February, on the 6th, we celebrate 60 years since our Queen’s accession to the throne. In July and August, London will become the first city to host the Olympic Games for a third time. And in December, on the 21st, if the ancient Mayan calendar is to be believed, the world will come to a cataclysmic end.

Actually, I’m pretty confident about the first two - and reasonably sceptical about the third.

Will 2012 be a momentous year for you? Do you have plans, or dreams, or hopes, or aspirations for these next twelve months? Or does the prospect of another year fill you with dread? For some of us, our personalities determine our expectations (are you a glass-half-full or glass-half-empty person?). For many of us, though, we think we’ve got a pretty good idea of what life will be like in this New Year - however optimistic or pessimistic we may feel, the cold reality of everyday life will determine how the year goes.

But, during the Christmas season, many of us will have sung these words:
    The hopes and fears of all the years
    are met in Thee tonight.

Maybe you were sceptical as you sang them. How can the hopes and fears of 2012 be met in Jesus? Perhaps you regard this as wishful thinking. But the Bible insists it is reality.

For some of us, our key fear is death and our great hope is life. Jesus claims to be Lord of both. For others, our hopes and fears revolve around family, or finances, or the future. Jesus claims to have them all covered. And so, on the first three Sundays this month, we will be addressing three key themes - assuring us that Jesus is in control over the storms of life (Sunday 1st), over the forces of evil (8th), and over sickness and death (15th). Perhaps you believe it, perhaps you don’t. But why not resolve in this new year to come and re-consider the evidence?

So get involved in the celebrations of the Diamond Jubilee! Enjoy the London Olympics (or flee from them, according to preference!). But don’t worry about the ancient Mayan calendar, or anyone else predicting cataclysmic ends. Whatever happens this year, Jesus is in charge. And He’s got it covered.

With best wishes for a momentous 2012,

Mark

the peace of Jesus Christ

2011-01-03T15:00:00.002Z

According to Ephesians 2,

Jesus is our peace (2:14),
Jesus makes peace (2:15), and
Jesus preached peace (2:17).

Sentences, not slogans

2011-01-03T11:18:00.002Z

I'm not great at New Year resolutions, but here's one for 2011...

Don't use Bible slogans. Instead, use Bible sentences.

Slogans can be misleading and dangerous, even when apparently taken from the Bible. Slogans like 'grace' or 'power' carry a veneer of authenticity, but can be easily twisted. Even slogans like 'once saved, always saved' can be dangerous. Bible slogans are Bible ideas ripped from their Bible context.

On the other hand, Bible sentences tie in to a specific context. A direct quotation makes it clear where people are coming from in a debate. Sentences also give greater depth to understanding. So quote a Bible sentence instead, and let's talk...

A Prayer for a New Year

2011-01-01T19:17:00.004Z

O Lord,

Length of days does not profit me

except the days are passed in thy presence,

in thy service,

to thy glory.

Give me a grace that precedes, follows, guides,

sustains, sanctifies, aids every hour,

that I may not be one moment apart from thee,

but may rely on thy Spirit

to supply every thought,

speak in every word,

direct in every step,

prosper every work,

build up every mote of faith,

and give me a desire

to show forth thy praise

testify thy love,

advance thy kingdom.

I launch my bark on the unknown waters of this year,

with thee, O Father, as my harbour,

thee, O Son, at my helm,

thee, O Holy Spirit, filling my sails.

Guide me to heaven with my loins girt,

my lamp burning,

my ear open to thy calls,

my heart full of love,

my soul free.

Give me thy grace to sanctify me,

thy comforts to cheer,

thy wisdom to guide,

thy counsel to instruct,

thy law to judge,

thy presence to stabilize.

May thy fear be my awe, thy triumphs my joy.

from 'The Valley of Vision', p.206-7)

From the Curate's Desk

2011-01-01T19:13:00.004Z

Happy New Year! Whatever resolutions you have made for 2011, I hope you have a joyful and peaceful year ahead. But I wonder if I could encourage you to consider one more resolution...

2011 will be the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. Most of us will have a copy of an English Bible at home, but it is easy to forget how unusual this would have been in earlier times. For centuries, the Bible had only been available in Latin, and so remained in effect ‘a closed book’. But, as the translators of the King James Bible wrote, “Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light, that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel.”

There are many more modern translations around today. Yet, as Andrew Motion, until recently Poet Laureate, has commented, “to read [the King James Bible] is to feel simultaneously at home, a citizen of the world, and a traveller through eternity.” Many phrases from it will be 400 years old this year:

salt of the earth

the powers that be

the straight and narrow

a time and a place for everything

all the days of my life

But I wonder when you last read it? Maybe it was only yesterday, but maybe it has become ‘a closed book’ to you again in recent times. Perhaps, therefore, I could encourage you to make a resolution to find again your copy of the King James Bible (or, if you prefer, a more modern version), and to open it, and to read it...

Yes, reading the Bible is often difficult - but perhaps not as difficult as you may fear. Yes, it is easy to think of it as irrelevant - and yet it has a surprisingly timeless message. Yes, it is difficult to find the time - but surely we could find just ten minutes each day? Perhaps start with your favourite Gospel or with the Psalms, or maybe even join in with the e100 challenge at church (ask in the Church Office, or check online, for further details).

For, as the KJB puts it, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” May it be so for you in 2011.

with best wishes,

Mark

What sets you free?

2010-01-27T13:49:00.002Z

Today is the 65th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.

Arbeit macht frei. Work sets you free.

Auschwitz was also in the news last month after the (in-)famous sign over the gate was stolen. The sign has apparently been recovered, and will be replaced once improved security has been installed. What I hadn't appreciated until today was that the 'B' in 'ARBEIT' appears to be upside-down. The story goes that the political prisoners constructing the sign did this deliberately, to indicate the reality of what went on inside.

Of course it's upside down. Work doesn't set you free. Nor, for that matter, does play. Sadly, not even liberation sets you free. Those living under Soviet rule soon found that out. Only the truth sets you free...

'If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.' (John 8:31b-32)

From the Curate's Desk

2010-01-02T14:18:00.002Z

In case anyone is interested in what the good citizens of Trull found in the January edition of the Parish Magazine...

What’s your passion?

What makes you tick? What excites you? Where does your energy and drive come from? What will be motivating you through this New Year?

Perhaps it is family and friends. Perhaps the house, or garden. Maybe it is a desire for self-improvement, or to make a difference in our world. Maybe your passion is a person. Or perhaps a pleasure.

Over the next few weeks, the church in Trull would like to share its passion with you. It is a passion that motivates and excites us. It is a passion that gives us energy and drive. It is a passion for life.

To that end, we are planning of series of events with, we hope, something for everyone: a Tea Dance, a Black Tie Dinner, a visit from the Bishop of Bath & Wells, coffee mornings, and much, much more besides. This will all be part of what we are calling A Passion for Life, and we hope to drop round soon to give you further information about what will be happening in and around the village.

A Passion for Life is a nationwide initiative, with involvement from people and churches all over the country. There will be a number of events throughout the south-west and beyond, not just in Trull! The central theme of A Passion for Life is God’s passion for the world: his passionate desire that we should enjoy life to the very full.

And this is what we would like to share with you. We believe it is great news, so please bear with us as we try to explain it as clearly as we can. And we hope you might even consider sharing this passion with us.

Meanwhile, whatever your passion in 2010, may I wish you a very happy, joyful, and peaceful New Year.

with best wishes,

Mark

A Prayer at Year's End

2009-12-31T16:28:00.005Z

O Love beyond compare,
Thou art good when thou givest,
when thou takest away,
when the sun shines upon me,
when night gathers over me.
Thou hast loved me before the foundation of the world,
and in love didst redeem my soul;
Thou dost love me still,
in spite of my hard heart, ingratitude, distrust.
Thy goodness has been with me during another year,
leading me through a twisting wilderness,
in retreat helping me to advance,
when beaten back making sure headway.
Thy goodness will be with me in the year ahead;
I hoist sail and draw up anchor,
With thee as the blessed Pilot of my future as of my past.
I bless thee that thou hast veiled my eyes to the waters ahead.
If thou hast appointed storms of tribulation,
thou wilt be with me in them;
If I have to pass through tempests of persecution and temptation,
I shall not drown;
If I am to die,
I shall see thy face the sooner;
If a painful end is to be my lot,
grant me grace that my faith fail not;
If I am to be cast aside from the service I love,
I can make no stipulation;
Only glorify thyself in me whether in comfort or trial,
as a chosen vessel meet always
for thy use.

from 'The Valley of Vision' (Puritan Prayers and Devotions), p 204-5.

Ten top tips for making a mess of a Bible Study

2009-08-05T14:55:00.003+01:00

Having just returned from camp, here's a summary (from personal experience)...

forget to pray
try to embarrass everyone as often as possible: put people on the spot, ask people to pray without warning, tell jokes at other people's expense...
pretend the Members have spent as long as you in preparing for the Study
deluge the Members with an unrelenting flood of background information
ask questions that don't make any sense, don't involve any thinking, or can't be answered from the passage
try to avoid interacting with the Members' answers to your questions
run out of time for application
be as critical as possible
be as hypocritical as possible
take so long over the Study that the Members lose the will to live...

Loving each other amidst differences

2009-04-24T12:23:00.004+01:00

Bearing in mind the fragmentation and factionalism to which evangelicalism is (increasingly) prone, I think this brief article from John Piper is a timely one that should be staple-gunned to every evangelical keyboard and telephone in the land. For those who prefer a summary, the gist of it is as follows...

We should be eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
So:
(1) Let's avoid gossiping.
(2) Let's identify evidences of grace in each other and speak them to each other and about each other.
(3) Let's speak criticism directly to each other if we feel the need to speak to others about it.
(4) Let's look for, and assume, the best motive in the other's viewpoint, especially when we disagree.
(5) Think often of the magnificent things we have in common.
(6) Let's be more amazed that we forgiven than that we are right. And in that way, let's shape our relationships by the gospel.
And leaders must work talk/write/argue/debate/refine together.

The Big Lunch - Sunday 19th July

2009-04-20T15:25:00.003+01:00

This looks interesting. It's an idea from Tim Smit (of Eden Project fame) and others - to get neighbours sitting down to eat together in the street. I'm thinking it could be a great way for Christians to get to know their neighbours better. Or something.

Anyway, we're pondering whether to encourage our church to get involved. A street party in every street in Trull?

'anxious about the validity of their prayers...'

2009-04-08T17:09:00.004+01:00

There's something about this story that causes me to give thanks for Hebrews 10 v 22: 'let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith...'

Ideas for 'A Passion for Life'

2009-02-02T19:35:00.003Z

With A Passion for Life looming, we've been encouraging people to come up with ideas. In other words, to brainstorm. Here's the list so far...

a holiday club for older people in/around Trull
a performance of the Messiah from scratch
talk/s on Christian parenting, with examples of difficult situations when raising young children/teens and solutions - we can invite non-Christian friends to come
a church service at Exmouth beach or Sidmouth beach
a local walk
Songs of Praise in the park
provide an All Saints minibus to ferry people around to church or to functions
six nations rugby event on a big screen with a half-time talk
young people Ball (with after dinner mini-talk)
a golf day (or series of golf days), with speaker in bar afterwards
tea at the Castle Hotel, with speaker
produce a passion play-type thing
holiday club for whole families
Question Time - with a Bishop, a scientist, a politician, and a musician or artist
a comedy event
Christmas Day lunch for all in village who will be on their own for lunch
Men’s Breakfast
youth Alpha?
a Ladies’ night or lunch @ Buff - pamper session
adverts in the Somerset Gazette
Gardeners Question Time
to use BCP’s ‘A Commination’ at one of our services
family fun day
a passion for football: a football match or five-a-side tournament
something on local history
see if Starbucks in Taunton (or wherever) could be booked for a ‘Christianity Explored’ course

Some of them may happen. Some of them probably won't. But it's been hugely encouraging to see people getting enthused about the different ideas...

From the Curate's Desk

2009-02-02T16:47:00.003Z

In case anyone is interested in what the good citizens of Trull found in their February edition of the Parish Magazine...

What will make this month special for you? Do you have plans, or hopes, or resolutions still left unbroken? Is there anything this February you hope to look back on with pleasure and pride? After the celebrations in December and the resolutions of January, February can seem like a month in search of an identity. Lent this year does not begin until right at the end of the month (Ash Wednesday is on the 25th). For many, the key date not to forget is the 14th - but the ﬂowers, chocolates and cards are quickly gone.

Once upon a time, so the story goes, an Eastern prince challenged his wise men to come up with a sentence that would always be true and always be appropriate. After much thought, their response was: “And this, too, shall pass away”.

Commenting on this story, Abraham Lincoln wrote, “How much it expresses! How chastening in the hour of pride! How consoling in the depths of afﬂiction!” It is in the nature of things that they shall pass away: wealth and pleasure, pain and grief, companions and fame, even life itself.

For some this will be a comforting reminder. Present sorrows and worries will come to an end, and time is indeed a great healer. For others, perhaps this is a chastening challenge. Time is an ever-rolling stream, and there truly is no time like the present.

February, too, shall pass away. 2009, so recently begun, shall also surely pass away.

Yet the wise men weren’t quite right. As Jesus put it in Matthew 24:35, “heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words will never pass away”. Amidst the shifting sands of time and fortune, his words are a solid foundation on which the wise will build. Everything else shall pass away, but our response to Jesus’ words will echo in eternity.

So give your life for something that shall last. And spend this month building for eternity.

Perhaps you would permit me to ﬁnish by making three suggestions. First, the service themes at All Saints this month are about prayer - perhaps resolve to come along one Sunday and reﬂect again on the God who listens. Secondly, there is a programme of Lent Courses beginning soon - is there something there that catches your eye, that might be special for you? And, thirdly, perhaps this Valentine’s Day, amidst the chocolate hearts and the big red envelopes, you might spend ﬁve minutes reading a Bible, reﬂecting on the enduring message of the love of God.

May this February be safe, splendid and special. And may it not pass away too quickly.

with best wishes,

Mark

Texts to pray for our children

2009-01-15T17:30:00.003Z

Courtesy of John Piper's blog, here are some things to pray for the children in our churches. If you don't have any children, feel free to join Lizzie and I in praying for ours...

from Matthew 19:13-15...

That Jesus will call them and no one will hinder them from coming.

from 2 Peter 3:9...

That they will respond in faith to Jesus' faithful, persistent call.

from Matthew 22:37-39...

That they will experience sanctification through the transforming work of the Holy Spirit and will increasingly desire to fulfil the greatest commandments.

from 2 Corinthians 6:14...

That they will not be unequally yoked in intimate relationships, especially marriage.

from Philippians 4:8...

That their thoughts will be pure.

from Exodus 35:39...

That their hearts will be stirred to give generously to the Lord's work.

from Matthew 28:18-20...

That when the time is right, they will GO!

The original post is here.

U=EV/ID

2008-12-08T12:09:00.002Z

Academics have invented a mathematical equation for why people procrastinate.

Apparently, U=EV/ID...

U: the utility, or the desire to complete a given task

E: the expectation of success

V: the value of completion

I: the immediacy of the task

D: the personal sensitivity to delay

It must be true. I read it in the Telegraph.

How to talk to an angel

2008-12-06T12:11:00.002Z

Preparing for preaching on Luke 1 tomorrow morning, I'm struck by the contrast between Zechariah's response and that of Mary.

Gabriel appears to both with an improbable message of good news. Zechariah (1:18) demands evidence - "How can I be sure of this?". Mary, meanwhile, humbly seeks an explanation - "How will this be ... since I am a virgin?" (1:34) before submitting to God's plan - "May it be to me as you have said" (1:38).

Zechariah is disciplined for disbelieving the angel's message (1:20). Mary goes down in history as the one who got it right...

Yes we can

2008-11-05T23:33:00.002Z

As President-Elect Obama made his victory speech, with its repeated "Yes we can" refrain, was anybody else thinking of Bob the Builder's "Can we fix it?" line...?

The Way, the Truth, and the Life

2008-10-23T17:21:00.005+01:00

I'm working on John 14 for two sermons on Sunday. While reading around, I came across this again in Don Carson's Pillar Commentary on John (p 492-3). It is, I think, his...

I am the way to God: I did not come

To light a path, to blaze a trail, that you

May simply follow in my tracks, pursue

My shadow like a prize that’s cheaply won.
My life reveals the life of God, the sum

Of all he is and does. So how can you,

The sons of night, look on me and construe

My way as just the road for you to run?

My path takes in Gethsemane, the Cross,

And stark rejection draped in agony.

My way to God embraces utmost loss:

Your way to God is not my way, but me.

Each other way is dismal swamp, or fraud.

I stand alone: I am the way to God.

I am the truth of God: I do not claim

I merely speak the truth, as though I were

A prophet (but no more), a channel, stirred

By Spirit power, of purely human frame.

Nor do I say that when I take his name

Upon my lips, my teaching cannot err

(Though that is true). A mere interpreter

I’m not, some prophet-voice of special fame.

In timeless reaches of eternity

The Triune God decided that the Word,

The self-expression of the Deity,

Would put on flesh and blood -and thus be heard.

The claim to speak the truth good men applaud.

I claim much more: I am the truth of God.

I am the resurrection life. It’s not

As though I merely bear life-giving drink,

A magic elixir which (men might think)

Is cheap because though lavish it’s not bought.

The price of life was fully paid: I fought

With death and black despair; for I’m the drink

Of life. The resurrection morn’s the link

Between my death and endless life long sought.

I am the firstborn from the dead; and by

My triumph, I deal death to lusts and hates.

My life I now extend to men, and ply

Them with the draught that ever satiates.

Religion’s page with empty boasts is rife:

But I’m the resurrection and the life.

A Passion for Life

2008-10-23T13:20:00.002+01:00

News of this 'vision for mission' initiative has reached this tiny village in the south west. It looks very interesting, although Trull is distant enough from our closest Gospel Partnerships that being involved in that way may be difficult.

Nonetheless, it has recommendations from many of the great and good, looks theologically sound-as-a-pound, has a reassuring stress on relationships within communities, and has an exciting vision for a post-2010 legacy.

Mark Driscoll in Sydney

2008-10-17T17:11:00.009+01:00

My summary notes on 'Reaching the Next Generation' are below. Jam helpfully references a brief response from Phillip Jensen.

I'm particularly struck by (4), (8) and (14). But that may just be because I didn't fully understand the other 15 points...

18 obstacles to effective evangelism (in Australia!)

not about deciding to do more, but asking what you’re doing wrong

to an extent, this is a call to repentance for us

cf. 1 Corinthians 9:19 - are you doing all things, to all people, by all means, to save some?

The Bible guys are not the missional guys, which leads to irrelevance. Not enough just to be faithful, must also be fruitful.
The culture struggles with a lack of entrepreneurialism. Socialism and influence of GB means playing by the rules. Not moving out of established boundaries and rules. Influence of socialism results in sending resources to reinforce failing ministries, in interests of equality, rather than pruning for effectiveness.
There is a lack of merit-based reward amongst the denominations. US has far more entrepreneurs. Reward is for tenure, not fruit. Needs to be accountability resulting in ineffective ministers/ministries being pruned. Some churches are not being led by the best men.
Australian young men are immature. Very immature masculine culture. Denominational systems encourage immaturity with years on training and apprenticeships. Delaying responsibility means delaying maturity.
Church planting is not widespread or welcome. Denominational system set up to train men to run pre-existing churches.
Tall poppy syndrome. Need to work tps into preaching until people see it as a sin. In particular, many don’t want to rise up - that would be pride. Culture chops down those who rise up, same in church.
Preaching lacks apologetics, mission and application. Not just enough to give doctrine.
Many of you are afraid of the Holy Spirit. Hence, Trinity as Father, Son and Holy Bible. HS does much more than write Bible and convict of sin! He calls and empowers. Do you love and understand the HS?
Many of you are Anglican. The parish system works for some but not all. In particular, works where people belong to a geographical community. Parish system makes evangelism in socially mobile network society very difficult. Parish system also makes church planting very hard.
Denominations are built on control. Young men operate through influence. So young men and denominations are working in different paradigms. Old culture meets new economy.
There is a propensity to call the trained rather than train the called. HS determines church leaders. 4 years of residential training only works for some. Danger of idealism, self-righteousness and a critical spirit from those being trained in isolation from ministry experience.
Misunderstanding of prophet-priest-king balance. Cultural emphasis on priest over and above prophet and king. Not many prophets and only a handful of kings in church leadership.
Lack of missiologists. Little evaluation of culture at large, so that churches can effectively deploy missionaries. Theologians are not missiologists.
There is a proclivity to raise ministers before making them husbands and fathers. Problem of delaying marriage and children. If not being trained to be husbands/fathers, then not going to be good pastors. Being a husband and a father is better training for ministry than college. Putting training before family chronologically puts ministry before family conceptually.
There is the doing of evangelism that is not doing missions. Telling individual people about Jesus is right, but do we consider the church as means of reaching the city? Ask what would a faithful missionary (not minister) look like here?
There’s a lot of number 2 guys in number 1 slots. Tenure prevents meritocracy. Number 2 guys in number 1 slots need to step back with humility, lest church survive but not multiply.
There is not a great sense of urgency.
Movements become organisations, become institutions, become museums. Great sense of urgency in a movement (eg. Puritans) gives way to institutionalised behaviour (supporting organisations such as printing presses, record labels, conferences, etc). Study patterns of movements in church and business to see patterns. Museums exist to talk about the good old days. How did things get off track? (a) doctrinally - too much and too little control (b) relationships - people sometimes get too close (c) control - too much or too little control (d) pride - ‘not-invented-here syndrome’ (e) movement’s failure to honour both its founders/fathers and its future

The importance of the '1'

2008-10-16T17:37:00.007+01:00

O joy! It has finally happened. After all the anecdotal tales, I have now witnessed it at first hand...

The reading should have been 1 John 4:7-21. All about God's love and ours. Instead, what was read was actually John 4:7-21. All about the Samaritan woman at the well. Woops.

It brings to mind all those tales of weddings at which 1 John 4:18 should have been the text ('perfect love drives out fear'), but instead the wedding text became: 'the fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband' (John 4:18).

Anyway, what was most impressive was the way my boss managed seamlessly to integrate the John 4 passage into the theme for the morning's service...

So who IS the Bishop of Pittsburgh?

2008-09-29T18:35:00.003+01:00

Now then. The Episcopal Church has decided to depose the Bishop of Pittsburgh.

Six senior C of E bishops (Winchester, Blackburn, Chester, Chichester, Exeter and Rochester) have publicly supported the 'defrocked' Bob Duncan. Thank goodness.

But what about the other C of E bishops? Presumably, their lack of support for Duncan implies (explicitly or implicitly) agreement with TEC's actions. So will they support the consecration of the new Bishop of Pittsburgh? To be consistent, presumably so.

And so the C of E will acknowledge two Bishops of Pittsburgh...

Out of sight

2008-09-24T23:01:00.002+01:00

The peculiar layout of Taunton Crematorium is such that, from where you stand as the minister, you can't see the coffin. It's a very visual reminder of the inevitable reality that you can't minister to the deceased at their funeral. They're out of sight.

the new Marriage Regulations

2008-09-17T21:25:00.004+01:00

Can be found here. Apparently the idea is (as someone put it in the General Synod debate) that we want to be the church that likes to say 'yes'...

Reflections on my first Clergy Conference

2008-09-17T20:49:00.004+01:00

I appear to have survived my first Clergy Conference. The very nice surroundings at the Hayes Centre have helped. As has their wireless internet access. Initial reflections focus on relief at the absence of anything too traumatic, and appreciation that there was plenty in the main addresses to talk about (even if not to agree with).

A highlight was that three main sessions were Bible Studies (on Isaiah 40, 2 Corinthians 5 and Luke 24) with genuine textual engagement. They were led by Paula Gooder, who was both engaging and interesting. Much of her emphasis was on specific academic nuances, however, and the overall thrust of the passages was overlooked - partly through a lack of context, but also (I suspect) from a desire not to offend any particular 'grouping' within the Diocese.

The keynote address yesterday was from John Abbott, who outlined some excellent material on approached to learning, to which I shall return, and it was a shame he was not given more time.

Mark Williams, meanwhile, spent a long time this morning trying to convince us of the role of psychology and psychotherapy in the process of religious knowing. To my mind, however, he failed to deal with the spiritual blindness texts (John 9:39, 2 Cor 4:4 etc), and, while I appreciate there is much to be learnt from understanding how people's minds think, I can't see how he allows for the illuminating work of the Spirit in his analysis. Plus, he asked me to shut my eyes and breathe slowly, which was fatal.

My greatest surprise is that there has been no attempt to 'rally the troops'. While our Diocese isn't particularly disunited, I'm pretty sure we reflect the overall fragmentation of the C of E. In my naivety, I imagined the Bishops would look to bring us together to work out a way to go forwards together and (unless it has happened in darkened rooms when I wasn't looking) there seems to have been very little of this. The buzz word has been 'morale'. I can't help but think that's just a short term fix.

Meanwhile, I'm appreciating my new-found minority status. I'm young and male. I'm a firm believer in penal substitution. I'm not particularly wedded to unity expressed in solely Anglican terms. I'm keen on clarity. And I'm sympathetic to Reform and GAFCON. There don't seem to be many of us...

O the irony...

2008-09-16T14:29:00.004+01:00

I'm currently on the Diocesan Clergy Conference. There has been a notice (I kid you not) saying:

'The seminar on Unity and Disunity in the Church of England has been cancelled due to a lack of interest.'

Sin messes you up...

2008-09-12T22:02:00.008+01:00

One of the joys of tidying up is rediscovering that which was lost/forgotten/mislaid. Including this...

Sin messes you up through and through.

God's choice rests on nothing in you.

Christ bears his sheep's sins,

God's grace always wins;

And the saints, by Christ's power, will stay true.

TULIP, in verse.

A number of changes

2008-07-04T17:12:00.006+01:00

Since the beginning of June, the following has changed...

We no longer live in suburban Southgate, but in semi-rural Trull.
I have stopped being an Oak Hill student and am now a C of E Curate.
We have left one church in London and joined another in Somerset.
I am no longer enslaved to the PC, but am now a MacUser once more.
And I now fully appreciate how uncomfortable a dog collar can be...

1 Corinthians 13

2008-06-03T12:23:00.002+01:00

My final assignment at Oak Hill - appropriately - was to write 3000 words on 1 Corinthians 13. For those wanting to better understand the epistle with a view to preaching and teaching, I highly recommend Dick Lucas' lectures (see Bibliography). Apologies also that I can't crack how to blog in Greek. Anyway, here it is...

1 Corinthians 13

Much controversy surrounds this chapter. Grammatically, Garland comments that “much attention has been paid to the genre of this chapter, with no consensus emerging.”[1] Textually, Thiselton outline the serious attacks that have been made on the integrity of the chapter.[2] However, as Craig comments, “On closer examination it is seen that almost every word in the chapter has been chosen with this particular situation at Corinth in mind.”[3] Given the contemporary fascination with the Corinthian corpus, as witnessed by the plethora of publications over the past 20 years, this chapter deserves and, as we shall see, rewards serious attention.

I. contextualisation

1. the immediate context
The immediate context of chapter 13 is 12:1-14:40. This section is dominated by Paul’s desire that spiritual gifts should be used in the most appropriate manner – that is, for the edification of the whole church.[4] In this discussion about spiritual gifts in the life of the church, during which Paul is largely criticising them for their misunderstandings, Paul breaks off for a brief interlude concerning love.

The change in topic has led some commentators to suggest that chapter 13 is an interpolation. However, such theories are only sustainable if it cannot be shown that 13:1-13 is relevant in the argument of 12:1-14:40. It is the contention of this essay that as Paul’s love argument is integral to his discussion about spiritual gifts, this passage should not be deemed an interpolation.

Paul’s approach here is similar to 7:17-24 and 9:1-10:22. In these passages, as in chapter 13, he breaks off from a criticism and/or correction of the Corinthians’ understanding[5] to give a theologically-based outline of the positive approach to the relevant issue, before then resuming his criticism/rebuke. Garland observes this phenomena, but his argument[6] underestimates the significance of this central passage: 7:17-27, 9:1-10:22, and 13:1-13 are more than amplifications or illustrations; they are the theological basis that the Corinthians must understand if they are to successfully revise their perspective on the issue at hand.

A clear understanding of Paul’s device here leads to a clarification of Paul’s argument in 12:1-14:40. The big picture is that the Corinthians have been putting their desires for self ahead of the priority of edifying others, and it is only as the Corinthians grasp the significance and nature of love that they will reconsider their desires with relation to spiritual gifts.

2. the wider context
The clearest passage for a demonstration of the problems in the Corinthian church is 4:8-13. Here Paul analyses the difference between two ‘parties’: one being foolish and weak, and held in disrepute; the other considered wise and strong, and held in honour. This dichotomy is worked out in the different sections of 1 Corinthians 5 – 15, with Paul sometimes addressing the foolish-weak and at other times addressing the wise-strong.

While it is superficially easy to break down this section of 1 Corinthians into a series of smaller sections,[7] the effect can be to break the flow of Paul’s argument. Instead, it may be helpful to consider chapter 13 as presenting a central theme running through the whole epistle. Not only are there a number of linguistic parallels, of which more later,[8] but the overall thrust of much of the letter is that Paul condemns selfish desires and commends a way of love involving serving others and putting them first.

Thus detailed analysis is clearly central to discussion concerning the nature of the Corinthian problem. Paul does not intend this section to serve as an exposition of the nature of Christian love, but as an incisive correction to the Corinthian errors.

II. textual analysis

13:1-13 easily divides into three distinct parts,[9] but independent of this structure there are two preliminary textual issues to consider.

1. 12:31 and 13:13
Although outside the parameters of this essay, consideration of 12:31 is significant for a full appreciation of Paul’s argument in chapter 13. Paul concludes his rhetorical questions[10] by suggesting an alternative approach – desiring the higher gifts (12:31a) and following Paul’s more excellent way (12:31b).

Clarity is obscured due to translation inconsistency in 12:31 and 13:13, where the same adjective is used.[11] Awareness of this inclusio helps clarify that, in contrast to the lesser gifts of 12:29-30, faith, hope and love are greater gifts – and, of these three, the greatest is love. In other words, as the Corinthians seek what is greatest, they should look not to the gifts being dealt with in chapters 12 and 14, but to the faith-hope-love triad – and especially the love which Paul shall now expound in chapter 13.

2. variant readings for the verb following i[na
The GNT notes four possible readings for this verb. Garland helpfully observes that: “The problem arose either from a confusion between the q and the c or from a scribe’s making a deliberate change. The external evidence supporting kauch,swamai (boast) as the reading is strong… The argument, however, turns on the evaluation of intrinsic probability.”[12] In other words, while it is possible that a scribe might substitute ‘burn’ for ‘boast’, it is unlikely that the reverse would happen. However, arguments in favour of ‘burn’ suffer on investigation: there is little evidence of Christian burnings at this stage, nor of a Corinthian tendency to make such sacrifices. Arguments that the burning might refer to the branding involved when giving oneself up into slavery do justice neither to the foolish-weak and wise-strong divisions within Corinth[13] nor to the text of 7:21-24.

Instead, in the light of the strong ‘boasting’ theme throughout the letter – and especially in the context of spiritual gifts – this themes the more likely meaning. As Garland concludes: “The motivation to gain prestige vitiates the religious value of any self-sacrifice.”[14] In any case, the main point is clear – to which we now turn.

III. exegesis of chapter 13

1. 13:1-3
Chapter 13 begins with a three-fold repetition of a three-part structure, emphasising that an absence of love makes great spiritual powers meaningless.[15] Thus – 13:1 – even remarkable and impressive worship, if it is not accompanied and governed by love, is merely calling attention to oneself. Likewise – 13:2 – great knowledge and wonderful giftedness is meaningless unless it is accompanied by love. Finally – 13:3 – even great ardour and self-sacrifice,[16] such that there can be no doubt about one’s sincerity, gains nothing if there is no love.

This remarkable paragraph therefore takes all that the Corinthians hold dear and significant and argues that, apart from love, they are worthless. Paul’s argument is not that the Corinthians are not gifted, impressive, and committed; his complaint (cf. 4:8-13) is that they place too much emphasis on their spiritual gifts, prioritising and commending individuals who attempt to exercise such gifts in the church without love for their brothers. 13:1-3 stands as a demolition of this immature approach.

2. 13:4-8a
Most English versions conceal the verbal structure of this passage in the Greek. As Thiselton comments: “Most English translations render the Greek as if it used adjectives to declare the nature of love ‘timelessly’… But the nature of love is expressed by Paul in a series of verbs, the active nature of which may not be fully indicated by… adjectives.”[17] In an attempt to more accurately preserve the original meaning, Paul’s points shall be summarised under paraphrases of Thiselton’s translations.[18]

a) love waits patiently
In contrast to the Corinthians who have blundered into early judgment over the ministry of Paul,[19] Paul emphasises the importance of right timing in loving relationships. Hastiness is as harmful in the church as it can be in individual relationships, and Paul commends the importance of being forbearing until the most appropriate juncture.

b) love shows kindness
Christian love should involve warmth, generosity, and magnanimity. Sadly, this has been lacking in the Corinthian spirit as portrayed by the epistle, and Paul desires that they may display this more to one another. Interestingly, there is a hint of this again in 2 Corinthians 8:1-7 when, in the light of the kindness of the Macedonian churches, Paul challenges them “as you excel in everything – in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in our love for you – see that you excel in this act of grace also.”[20]

c) love does not burn with envy
It is easy to imagine how envy could tear a church apart, and thus how important it was for the Corinthians to be characterised by love not envy. It could realistically be speculated that perhaps the foolish-weak were envious of the gifts of the wise-strong, in that the wise-strong’s gifts had been deemed by the church to be of greater importance. The fact that the wise-strong were therefore held in greater honour could easily have provoked envy amongst those held in disrepute.

d) love does not brag
It is a common-place in Corinthian studies that the church was full of status-seeking and triumphalism:[21] because they boast in a different gospel-church-ministry understanding, Paul has to remind them “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”[22] 2 Corinthians 10-13 would suggest that the Paul’s lessons in love were not completely taken to heart.

e) love is not inflating its own importance
Many Corinthians were doubtless puffed up.[23] This goes to the very heart of the Corinthian problem: they had been arrogant in inflating their own importance in the face of other Christians, specifically on the basis of spiritual giftedness.

f) love does not behave with ill-mannered impropriety
Translating as ‘not rude’ obscures the linguistic similarities between this passage and 7:36 and 14:40. Individual relational impropriety and congregational indecency and disorder are both symptoms of a lack of love. Paul condemns this ‘rudeness’.

g) love is not preoccupied with its own interests
Even if Christian freedom means that a particular activity is lawful,[24] it may not be edifying for others. The Corinthians, therefore, should not seek their own way[25] but model themselves on Paul as he imitates Christ:[26] not seeking their own advantage, “but that of many, that they may be saved.”[27]

h) love does not become exasperated into pique
Although speculative, it is not impossible that the foolish-weak were driven to this by the wise-strong. As Thiselton comments:

At Corinth, one group paraded their gifts and status with ill-mannered impropriety because they thoughtlessly ignored the well-being and feelings of others; the less gifted or status-endowed group allowed themselves to become exasperated into pique at the aggressive triumphalism and ostentation of the others because they were more wrapped up in their own feelings than in sharing the sense of joy or liberation of others.[28]

i) love does not reckon up evil
The imagery here is of an accountant keeping records, that everything might be paid back in the fullness of time. Paul insists that loving behaviour involves foregoing such attitudes and actions. There may even be a hint of 2 Corinthians 5:19 here: God does not do it towards the church, so neither should you Corinthians!

j) love does not rejoice at wrongdoing
Paul emphasises how incongruous it is for a Christian to rejoice in the sinfulness of a fellow Christian – cf. 5:1-2. The perversion of the Corinthians’ morality in such significant areas as have been touched on by the letter is not something in which any Christian should take pleasure.

k) love joyfully celebrates the truth
Instead, in contrast to rejoicing at error, love rejoices with the truth. The presence of the definite article suggests, although does not demand, reference to the revealed truth of scripture (or, for the Corinthians, the apostolic message they have so derided). In any case, the effect will be that love “does not use manipulative devices and subtexts to protect itself from truth or the truth. It is honest and open, not defensive, for it has placed the good of the other above the good of the self.”[29]

l) love never tires of support
In this final section, the four-fold repetition of, and emphasis on, pa,nta emphasises that love no limits, and that nothing lies outside its parameters. Paul has already commended enduring anything for the gospel:[30] however hard it may be, and however long it may take, Christians must not give up being supportive to one another.

m) love never loses faith
Likewise, anticipating 15:11, Christian love never gets to the point of giving up on what it believes. The message of the gospel – in which the shameful cross, the resurrection glory, and the pre-eminence of love are all intertwined – is to be believed, and true love means persevering in faith. This will involve trusting the apostolic message and not being selective about what parts to believe.

n) love never exhausts hope
Furthermore, hope is an integral part of love. Just as Paul shall later rejoice in the hope Christians have in Christ on the basis of his resurrection,[31] so too hope should cause the Corinthians to rejoice in each other. The hope for the church is the hope for the believer, and thus all in the church should continue to hope for each believer in the same way as persevering in hope for the church as a whole.

o) love never gives up
The linguistic parallel here is to 10:12, where Paul warns also against presumption. Just as the Corinthians must not give up on their Christian faith, they should not give up on their love for one another. Perhaps the greatest danger here was again presumption: that the Corinthians were paying no attention to the possibility that they might fall. In any case, Paul warns them not to give up on each other.

Garland describes a chiasm in this short section,[32] emphasising the faith and hope at the centre of chiasm (which Garland links in to 13:13). While this helpfully addresses the relationship between love and both faith and hope, it does not adequately address the dilemma of 13:13, to which we shall return below.

p) love never ends
Finally, unlike prophecies, tongues, knowledge – and so much else on which the Corinthians are placing such emphasis – love never ends. Its permanence declares its pre-eminence.[33]

Finally, it is important to note in passing the debate about the extent to which Paul describes himself and his values in this chapter.[34] This is certainly true, although his emphasis on the truth[35] demonstrates that this is about more than power politics. The suggestion that Paul is being manipulative here should be rejected: he has already outlined his methodology – “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.”[36]

3. 13:8b-13
This final section has produced a variety of different understandings, largely on the basis of different interpretations of 13:11-12. Those of a cessationist persuasion[37] take this passage in support of their viewpoint, arguing that maturity represents the completion of the canon as revelation. However, as Thiselton comments, “The one important point to make here is that few or none of the serious ‘cessationist’ arguments depends on a specific exegesis of 1 Cor 13:8-11… These verses should not be used as a polemic for either side in this debate.”[38]

An alternative interpretation is that the language of maturity refers to the difference between the Corinthian immaturity and Pauline maturity. This argument is given weight by reference to 14:20, which is clearly about the need for maturity in thinking, and by appeal to the general thrust of Paul’s argument in the letter about the importance of the mature use of gifts.

Although this second interpretation fits the wider context of 1 Corinthians, it is argued here that is does not do justice to the immediate context of 13:8b-12. The reference in 13:8b-10, in particular, seems a clear reference to the eschaton, implying that there is a difference between life in this age and life in the age to come. The implicit reference to Numbers 12:8 supports this view: that the contrast is between the dim vision of life through a mediator (ie. through Moses, or through the apostolic message) and the glory of life lived face-to-face with the Lord.

Thus the imperfect nature of prophecies, tongues and knowledge are again emphasised.[39] Paul’s key point about prophecies, tongues and knowledge is that they shall all cease[40] – for they are all less great[41] than faith, hope and love, and all need to be governed by love.

This third interpretation also has the significant advantage of combating the over-realised eschatology of the Corinthian church, by reminding them both of the inherent disjunction between life on either side of the eschaton and also of the way in which the much-treasured gifts of tongues et al will not endure into the age to come and are therefore not good indicators for this life of status in the life to come.

As these spiritual gifts, which are the topic of chapters 12 and 14, will come to a dead end, they are neither the appearing of the eternal in the temporal nor a route to heaven. They are less great than the traditional Pauline triad of faith, hope and love, with which the chapter concludes.

The final issue is why love should be considered the greatest. The argument that only love lasts into eternity[42] misses the point that all three are being contrasted with the eschatological impermanence of prophecies et al. A second understanding, that love is greatest because God loves whereas he does not have faith or hope, is also unpersuasive in the context of the passage: faith, hope, and love are all clearly described as ‘gifts’[43] and therefore the importance of love in the believer is based on this gift-recipient status, which places it on an equal footing with faith and hope.

Instead, perhaps the best understanding is that the unique greatness of love lies in its ability to reveal the church to the world – “by this shall all men know that you are my disciples.”[44] For so long as the Corinthian church does not display such love, its evangelistic efforts will always be thwarted. However, a rededication to this life of love would enable the world to see the church for what it really is, and enable the church – then and now – to fulfil its God-given role.

Bibliography

Carson, D. A. Showing the Spirit. A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.
Fee, Gordon. 1 Corinthians. NIC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.
Garland, David E. 1 Corinthians. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003.
Thiselton, Anthony C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. NIGTC. Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000.
Winter, B.W. When Paul Left Corinth. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
CD Research: Lucas, R., with M. Teutsch and P. Gardner. Travelling to Corinth – Expository Lectures on 1 Corinthians. London: The Proclamation Trust, 2004.

[1] David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians. (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 606.
[2] Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians. (NIGTC; Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000), 1027-28.
[3] Quoted in Thiselton, Corinthians, 1029.
[4] See, for example, 1 Corinthians 14:12. All Bible references, unless otherwise stated, are from the ESV.
[5] Concerning, respectively, marriage issues (1 Corinthians 7:1-16 and 25-40), food offered to idols (8:1-13 and 10:23-33), and spiritual gifts (12:1-31 and 14:1-40).
[6] That it is a digression which “which does not wander away from the main theme but amplifies or illustrates it.” Garland, 1 Corinthians, 605.
[7] Thus: chapters 5 – 6 (on discipline issues), chapter 7 (on marriage and sexual morality), chapters 8 – 10 (on food and idolatry), chapter 11 (on worship), and chapters 12 – 14 (on spiritual gifts).
[8] But see, for example, parallels re arrogance in 1 Corinthians 4:6 and 8:1, re rudeness in 7:36 and 14:40, re insisting on own way in 6:12 and 10:24, and so on.
[9] See ‘Section III. Exegesis of Chapter 13.’
[10] 1 Corinthians 12:29-30.
[11] The ESV, for example, has “But earnestly desire the higher gifts” and “but the greatest of these is love.”
[12] Garland, 1 Corinthians, 627.
[13] Why would the wise-strong want to give themselves over the dishonour of slavery?
[14] Garland, 1 Corinthians, 628.
[15] This structure can be demonstrated thus:
A If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels,
B but do not have love,
C I am a noisy gong or a clashing cymbal.
A And if I have prophetic powers…if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains,
B but have not love,
C I am nothing.
A If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned,
B but have not love,
C I gain nothing.
[16] Notwithstanding the debate above concerning the burning/boasting textual variation.
[17] Thiselton, Corinthians, 1046.
[18] Thiselton, Corinthians, 1046-60.
[19] 1 Corinthians 4:5
[20] 2 Corinthians 8:7.
[21] For example, the early section of 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:5 is concerned with Paul’s fear for the church that they no longer boast in the gospel message he proclaimed (1:18-25) or boast in the church that gospel message brought about (1:26-31), or boast in the ministry within which that message came to them (2:1-5).
[22] 1 Corinthians 1:31.
[23] See, for example, 1 Corinthians 4:6 and 8:1.
[24] 1 Corinthians 6:12 and 10:24.
[25] 1 Corinthians 10:25.
[26] 1 Corinthians 11:1.
[27] 1 Corinthians 10:33.
[28] Thiselton, Corinthians, 1052.
[29] Thiselton, Corinthians, 1056.
[30] 1 Corinthians 9:12.
[31] 1 Corinthians 15:19-20.
[32] Garland, 1 Corinthians, 619-20.
[33] 1 Corinthians 13:13.
[34] Thiselton gives a brief but helpful overview of this debate, especially concerning Stuart v Walters “Love is… Paul.” Thiselton, Corinthians, 1058-9.
[35] 1 Corinthians 13:6.
[36] 1 Corinthians 11:1.
[37] For example, Thomas Aquinas and Charles Hodge.
[38] Thiselton, Corinthians, 1064. His italics.
[39] 1 Corinthians 13:8b-10.
[40] Arguments that prophecy and knowledge will pass away, while tongues shall merely cease, miss this overall point. All are partial and will pass away (1 Corinthians 13:10).
[41] 1 Corinthians 12:31 and 13:13.
[42] This is on the basis that faith gives way to sight and hope gives way to realisation.
[43] 1 Corinthians 12:31.
[44] John 13:35.

Not up to the job

2008-06-03T12:15:00.001+01:00

Reports yesterday about Bishops being concerned that vicars are not up to the job.

Is anybody else thinking what I'm thinking?

You know you're maturing...

2008-05-22T15:11:00.002+01:00

... when the time interval between

the joyful glee when a Chelsea player misses a crucial penalty against Man Utd, and
the regret that such misfortune could befall such a whole-hearted competitor

is reduced from days to minutes.

Poor John Terry.
Lucky Man Utd.

1968, 1999, 2008. 2009?

1 Corinthians 14:1-40

2008-05-20T14:15:00.002+01:00

And a final offering. Chapter 13 was the subject of my 3000 word essay, which may or may not be posted here sometime...

After a prolonged argument concerning the nature of prophecy and tongues,[1] Paul argues that the use of spiritual gifts should be restrained in favour of order and submission to authority.[2]

Paul’s concern is not the practice of tongue-speaking, but the priority afforded to it. The gifts of prophecy and tongues are contrasted:[3] tongue-speaking edifies only the speaker,[4] prophecy edifies the church.[5] The edification principle means that prophesier is greater than the tongue-speaker,[6] since intelligibility is vital.[7] The Corinthians should strive to excel in edification[8] and be mature in their thinking[9] concerning their conduct in church.[10]

Furthermore, tongue-speaking is a sign for judgment (cf Isaiah 28) on the unbeliever.[11] Prophecy, meanwhile, can cause the unbeliever to acknowledge the truth.[12]

Public worship should therefore be governed by the edification principle,[13] which also involve self-restraint: tongue-speakers without interpreters,[14] previously speaking prophets,[15] and women[16] should keep silent – even if they might otherwise be permitted to speak (cf., respectively, 14:27, 14:29, and 11:5). Peace[17] should predominate, not confusion,[18] as the church submits itself to the Law[19] and to Paul’s apostolic authority.[20]

Thus prophecy should be desired and tongue-speaking permitted,[21] with decency and order.[22]

[1] 14:1-19.
[2] 14:20-40.
[3] 14:1-19, and again in 14:20-25.
[4] 14:2, 4a.
[5] 14:3, 4b.
[6] 14:5.
[7] 14:6-11.
[8] 14:12.
[9] 14:20.
[10] 14:13-19.
[11] 14:21-23.
[12] 14:24-25.
[13] 14:26.
[14] 14:28.
[15] 14:30.
[16] 14:34.
[17] 14:33.
[18] Cf. 14:33.
[19] 14:34.
[20] 14:36-38.
[21] 14:39.
[22] 14:40.
[23] That is, “speaking in unlearned human languages.” Carson, 79.
[24] That is, “speaking in verbal patterns that cannot be identified with any human language.” Carson, 79.

1 Corinthians 12:1-31

2008-05-20T14:13:00.001+01:00

Another 200 word summary. See here for explanation...

In his introduction,[1] Paul emphasises that the Spirit leads people to speak accurately about Christ. This is in contrast to the Corinthian emphasis on Christ bringing people to speak ecstatically in the Spirit.

Each believer has a manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.[2] The lists of gifts[3] are not definitional, but illustrative of their purpose: edification[4] through mutual love.[5] God’s sovereignty over the arranging of the gifts within the body is emphasised,[6] as is the essential unity of that body.[7]

To those who say ‘I do not belong,’ he argues that they remain an integral part of the body, vital for its proper functioning.[8] To those saying ‘you do not belong,’ he argues that all are needed – and even that the weak and dishonourable parts are given greater honour by God.[9]

The ordering of the appointments emphasises Paul’s priorities: the first three are all gifts the Corinthians despise,[10] while those they covet come last.[11] The rhetorical questions of 11:29-30 emphasise that while not all are apostles/prophets/teachers/miracle-workers/etc, all can desire ‘the higher gifts’ – cf. chapter 13 (esp 13:13).

[1] 12:2-3.
[2] 12:7.
[3] 12:8-10 and 12:28-30.
[4] 12:7, 25-26.
[5] 13:1-13.
[6] 12:6, 11, 18, 24, 28.
[7] 12:12-13, 20, 27.
[8] 12:14-19.
[9] 12:21-26.
[10] They have despised the apostolic ministry (cf. chapters 2 – 4), and prefer the gift of tongues to the gift of prophecy and teaching (cf. chapter 14).
[11] In particular, it is the Corinthians’ prioritising of the ‘various kinds of tongues’ that is causing the problem. Paul downplays them in importance by putting them last on his list.
[12] 12:10.
[13] 12:28, 29.

Dispatches: In God's Name

2008-05-18T14:19:00.002+01:00

David Modell's film, Dispatches: In God's Name, will be broadcast tomorrow (Monday 19 May) at 8pm on Channel 4. But, if the taster in the Sunday Telegraph is anything to go by, it may not be entirely objective...

1 Corinthians 11:17-34

2008-05-17T19:50:00.001+01:00

Paul cannot commend the Corinthians’ approach to the Lord’s Supper.[1] The reception-transmission formula[2] denotes the seriousness.

There are divisions,[3] with some despising and humiliating others.[4] These factions could be on socio-economic lines, although the problem is not necessarily poverty.[5] Presumably, because some Corinthians viewed others as weak and dishonourable,[6] factions emerged keen to dissociate themselves from others to prove their genuineness.[7]

Paul’s concern is that such a two-tiered, unworthy, Supper profanes the body and blood,[8] and denies the purposes of the Lord who died. Such a Supper is for the worse,[9] not the better.

The emphasis on remembering the body[10] and blood[11] emphasises the very cross the Corinthians have scorned.[12] The Lord’s weak death, not any other ministry,[13] is to be thus proclaimed until he comes.[14]

They need to discern the body[15] and wait for one another,[16] lest they drink judgment on themselves.[17] The judgment – weakness and death – is presumably God’s fit punishment for the crime of despising the weak (see chapter 4) and disdaining death (see chapter 15). All for whom Christ died must be recognised as equal.

[1] 11:17, 22.
[2] 11:23 – cf 11:2 and 15:3.
[3] 11:18, 19.
[4] 11:22.
[5] Paul clearly implies they do have houses to eat and drink in (11:22).
[6] See especially 4:8-13.
[7] 11:19.
[8] 11:27.
[9] 11:17.
[10] 11:24.
[11] 11:25.
[12] 1:18-25.
[13] Cf. 2:1-4.
[14] 11:26.
[15] 11:29.
[16] 11:33.
[17] 11:29.

1 Corinthians 11:2-16

2008-05-17T19:49:00.000+01:00

Despite commending them for maintaining Pauline traditions,[1] Paul needs to affirm the theological reasoning and social implications of head coverings.[2] The principle of ordered equality permeates.

Everyone has a head:[3] every man, every woman, and even Christ. The treatment of one’s head – in terms of covering – needs to be indicative of one’s position in God’s creation purposes. 11:4-6 demonstrates how social impropriety brings social and theological shame, whereas 11:7 shows how social propriety is indicative of theological glory.

Paul explains how the differences between the sexes is part of God’s purposes in creation;[4] while the creation account explains the importance of a man not covering his head,[5] and the necessity of a wife covering hers.[6] These differences, however, do not result in gender independence;[7] in fact, the nature of procreation emphasises mutual dependence.[8]

The structure of the passage emphasises 11:13 since there is no corresponding statement about men,[9] perhaps suggesting that the presenting issue was that some Corinthian women were attempting to blur distinctions. Instead, propriety should win over contentiousness.[10]

[1] 11:2.
[2] Cf 11:16.
[3] 11:3.
[4] 11:8-9.
[5] 11:7.
[6] 11:10.
[7] 11:11.
[8] 11:12.
[9] David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 507.
[10] 11:14-16.

What do I propose?

2008-05-16T15:58:00.003+01:00

Some friends with more wisdom and less impatience have asked what I propose in light of my recent post. It's a good question, and here are some thoughts. Any further suggestions gratefully received, and indeed largely what I'm hoping for...

(1) Perhaps we could be better informed.

Here is a rapidly compiled reading list ...

'The Anglican Debacle: Roots and Patterns'
'Conflict and Covenant in the Communion'
'Recent Directions in Anglican Ecclesiology'
'Evangelicals, Flying Bishops and the Future'
Andrew Atherstone article: 'Redefining Anglicanism? An Evangelical Critique of the Proposed Anglican Covenant' in Churchman, 121/4, 2007, 315-332.
Tim Bradshaw's book: 'The Olive Branch'
Colin Buchanan's book: 'Is the Church of England Biblical? An Anglican Ecclesiology'

Any additions gratefully received.

(2) Perhaps we could talk about these things more.

Discussing 'all-things-Anglican' seems quite nerdy. But let's talk about which of the options from the Manchester Report we prefer, or what we see as the difference between underlying and presenting issues in the current crisis, or how committed to Diocesan territorial integrity we want to be. Maybe people are already doing this (and just haven't invited me).

(3) Perhaps we could be more effective in our lobbying.

Here are some random suggestions:

a concerted effort to write theologically-acute letters to our Bishops
a careful attempt to write rhetorically-persuasive letters to the papers (both Church and secular)
a committed involvement in Anglican structures (deanery, diocesan, national)

(4) We could definitely pray more.

Brothers, we are not amateurs

2008-05-16T10:29:00.004+01:00

I do hope this doesn't come across as too offensive.

John Piper has written an excellent book (Brothers, we are not professionals) in which he argues against the professionalising of pastoral ministry. If you are in pastoral ministry and haven't read it, it is worth a look. However, I suspect he writes largely for the US 'market'.

I sometimes wonder if UK pastoral ministry is in danger from the opposite direction. I would love to have the time (and the brains) to write a book entitled 'Brothers, we are not amateurs' - and if I did, here would be the topic of one of the chapters...

Why is there so little serious, thorough, 'professional' strategy (or even thinking about strategy) for evangelical engagement with the problems facing the Church of England and the wider Anglican Communion?

The issues are manifold:

massive hermeneutical disagreements over sexuality issues
the rise of non-territorial approaches to episcopacy
how, if at all, church discipline should be worked out
impending divisions over the consecration of women bishops
the financial meltdown of the traditional parish system
disagreement as to the role of Bishops

Thus, as we face a possible breakup of the Anglican Communion in the aftermath of Lambeth, we don't know what to look for, because we haven't thought about it hard enough to have come to some sort of consensus.

To me, this seems amateurish.

I want to blame 'the older generation' for not having sorted this out. But, as was pointed out to me yesterday, they have already fought some the battles of 'their' generation - a few were won, many were lost. The battles of the next 20 years need to be considered, planned and fought by the 'new generation'.

Now, before people ask me if I have ever heard of Anglican Mainstream, or Reform, or Church Society, or the Latimer Trust etc, let me acknowledge that these organisations are full of people far wiser than me. But (1) how up-to-date are the discussions and 'strategies' from these organisations, given that many briefing papers etc are more than 10 years old? (2) how many of the 'new generation' are actively involved with any of the above? (3) how effective have these organisations been at winning the significant battles?

Some of us were talking about this yesterday. We came to the conclusion that:

we don't have a sufficiently developed Anglican ecclesiology
we don't know who to look to for effective leadership
we don't have much of a clue as to how to interact successfully with many of the important issues

And that, I think, makes me an amateur.

Make our case and face our detractors

2008-05-16T10:03:00.003+01:00

Further to my earlier comment arguing briefly against evangelical bishops absenting themselves from Lambeth, I am encouraged to read that both Greg Venables (PBp of Southern Cone) and Jack Iker (Bp of Forth Worth) have confirmed their plans to attend. Robert Duncan (Bp of Pittsburgh) may also go.

Bp Iker: "...with the unfolding realignment that is taking place in Anglicanism, I think it is important for me to be there to make our case and face our detractors." [ref: Church Times, 9 May 2008, p 7]

1 Corinthians 10:1-22

2008-05-15T07:52:00.002+01:00

Another 200 word summary. See here for explanation...

Paul demonstrates how the events of the Exodus generation are examples,[1] and for our instruction.[2] His argument is that the Exodus generation all received the spiritual gifts of manna and water,[3] but became proud and arrogant, abusing God’s graciousness. He itemises desiring evil,[4] idolatry,[5] an ‘eat-drink-play’ issue,[6] sexual immorality,[7] testing Christ,[8] and grumbling,[9] before concluding with a warning against presumptuousness.[10] The Corinthians have likewise received spiritual gifts, but should heed the example[11] lest they fall.[12]

Meanwhile, the presenting problem (cf 8:1-13) is potential participation in demon worship through eating food offered to idols.[13] Paul’s emphasis on sacramental theology indicates both the commonality and the exclusivity of the covenant relationship:[14] thus all Christians must choose from which table to partake.[15]

Nonetheless, the idolatry-presumptuousness theme remains dominant. Paul’s warning against presumptuousness,[16] with specific regard to idolatry,[17] has clear relevance: those who have received gifts from God – participation in the blood and body of Christ[18] – should receive such gifts with unifying thankfulness,[19] and beware provoking the Lord.[20]

[1] 10:6, 11
[2] 10:11.
[3] 10:3-4.
[4] 10:6.
[5] 10:6.
[6] 10:7.
[7] 10:8.
[8] 10:9.
[9] 10:10.
[10] 10:12.
[11] 10:1.
[12] 10:12.
[13] 10:19-21.
[14] Anthony C. Thistleton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 751.
[15] 10:21.
[16] 10:12.
[17] 10:7, 14.
[18] 10:16.
[19] 10:17-18.
[20] 10:22.
[21] 10:2.

1 Corinthians 9:1-27

2008-05-14T21:13:00.005+01:00

Another 200 word summary. See here for explanation...

Suggestions that this chapter is an interpolation can be refuted by seeing how it fits into the context of chapters 8 and 10: Paul serves as an example of what he advocates in chapters 8 and 10, that those with rights and freedom should be willing to forgo them for the edification and salvation of others.

Arguing from his apostleship[1] and from the examples of the soldier, vintner, shepherd,[2] ploughman, thresher,[3] and priest,[4] Paul makes the point that everyone has the right to benefit from their labour. Yet despite mandates from the Law,[5] Corinthian precedent,[6] and Christ’s word giving him such rights, we will make no use of them.[7] He will endure anything rather than be an obstacle, causing others to stumble (cf 8:9, 13).[8]

Furthermore, Paul (like Jeremiah)[9] preaches because that is what he was set aside to do – though he is free, [10] he is compelled to preach the gospel.[11] Though he is free, he makes himself a servant to all[12] and disciplines his body for the work.[13] This is what the Corinthians should imitate.[14]

[1] 9:1-6, 9.
[2] These three from 9:7.
[3] 9:10.
[4] 9:13.
[5] 9:9.
[6] 9:12a.
[7] 9:12b, 15.
[8] 9:12.
[9] 9:16 contains a deliberate allusion to the OT prophet.
[10] 9:1.
[11] 9:16.
[12] 9:19.
[13] 9:24-27.
[14] 11:1.
[15] 9:27.

1 Corinthians 8:1-13 & 10:23-33

2008-05-14T21:07:00.006+01:00

As part of the assessment for our 1 Corinthians module, we have had to summarise sections of the text in 200 words (max.). It has been a very helpful exercise, as well as hopefully accumulating the odd mark or two along the way. I offer them here (a) by way of general edification, and (b) in case anyone fancies improving on my understanding of the passages before the exam in two weeks time...

Turning (with the usual formula) to the question of food offered to idols,[1] Paul immediately focuses on ‘knowledge’. The abrupt change of topic is best explained thus: Paul appreciates that the Corinthian misunderstanding of ‘knowledge’ gifts is what is causing the problems about food. This ‘knowledge’ puffs up,[2] is not possessed by all,[3] and is destroying the weaker brother.[4]

Paul sides with neither the strong nor the weak: the strong must take care not to cause the weak to stumble,[5] the weak must acknowledge that the earth is the Lord’s.[6] His command is that love, not ‘knowledge’, should be determinative. Love builds up,[7] while ‘knowledge’ can become a stumbling block[8] making the brother stumble.[9] Edification should be the primary motive.[10] Paul presents himself as a case study of such an approach (cf. chapter 9).[11] Therefore imitate Paul.[12]

A key issue is the reconciliation of the permissiveness of 8:4-8 with the prohibition of 10:27-28. This is probably best explained by the interlocutor’s conscience,[13] although this leaves unresolved the question of why my liberty should be determined by someone else’s conscience?[14]

[1] 8:1.
[2] 8:1.
[3] 8:7.
[4] 8:11.
[5] 8:9.
[6] 10:26.
[7] 8:1.
[8] 8:9.
[9] 8:11.
[10] 10:23-24.
[11] 10:33.
[12] 11:1.
[13] 10:28.
[14] 10:29.
[15] 8:10

From life's first cry to final breath

2008-04-28T10:50:00.003+01:00

Yesterday morning, at 10:30, our two youngest sons were baptised. Four hours previously, at 6:30, their great-great-Aunt died in hospital after a short illness. After a day rich with the imagery of dying and rising,

we thank God for his promises to Eileen, as she now rests safe with Him
we thank God for his promises to Matthew and Joshua, as they begin their life in a covenant relationship of faith in Him
we rejoice in the truth sung in church, that 'From life's first cry to final breath, Jesus commands my destiny'
we affirm that, though we grieve, we do not grieve as those without hope

Aunt Eileen ran the race with perseverance. May the same be said in years to come of each of her great-great-nephews...

No guilt in life, no fear in death.
This is the power of Christ in me;
From life's first cry to final breath,
Jesus commands my destiny.
No power of hell, no scheme of man,
Can ever pluck me from his hand;
Till he returns or calls me home,
Here in the power of Christ I'll stand!

('In Christ alone' - Townend & Getty, 2001)

But a pen...

2008-04-09T10:22:00.004+01:00

Some favourite moments from Richard Baxter...

I was but a pen in God's hand, and what praise is due to a pen.
He preached, as never sure to preach again / And as a dying man to dying men.
I have these forty years been sensible of the sin of losing time; I could not spare an hour.
It is but the least part of a Minister's work, which is done in the Pulpit.
I had the unhappiness from my youth to be inclined to strict definition... and to abhor confused harangues: and therefore the now despised Schoolmen were my pleasant study next to the Bible and practical Divinity.

Christian freedom in 1 Corinthians 6

2008-04-08T10:31:00.002+01:00

There is a lot of kerfuffle about 1 Corinthians 6:12-20. In particular, the problem is how to relate Paul's comments about bodies and the resurrection in v13b-14 with his comments about bodies and prostitutes in v15f. What does this mean he is trying to say?

But what if there isn't a direct relation? Not only does that largely remove the problem, but it also suggests Paul might have more than one point to make in response to the Corinthians' errors in v12-13a. In fact, I think he has three.

The first is in v13b-14. Here Paul argues that the C/s have misunderstood the way the body is integral to God's purposes: just as he raised up the Lord, so too will he raise us up. In our bodies.
The second point (introduced by 'do you not know...') is in v15-18. Here Paul argues that the nature of sex is such that it unites bodies. How then can someone united to Christ in spirit become united with a prostitute (perhaps especially a temple prostitute)?
The third point (also introduced by 'do you not know...') is in v19-20. Here Paul reflects on the fact that the presence of the Holy Spirit within the Christian's body makes the body a temple. Temples matter because of what is in them.

In passing, it is perhaps worth noticing the Trinitarian nature of the argument: bodies matter because of the purposes of God, the unity with Christ, and the presence of the Holy Spirit.

In any case, bodies matter. 'So glorify God in your body'.

Les absents ont toujours tort

2008-04-07T09:39:00.003+01:00

The absent are always wrong. Or so says the French proverb, quoted in the recent 'Churchman' Editorial...

I am neither for nor against GAFCON. I have very little idea what they will discuss, and even less of a clue what they will conclude and resolve. If it is indeed to be a Conference playing a part in ensuring that there is a biblical, godly, faithful Global Anglican Future, then I am all in favour of it.

But I do worry about the approach taken by many in absenting themselves from the Lambeth Conference. It is not just that they will be absent from the debate, but that they will be absent from framing much of the debate. And it seems to be me that the framing of the debate is key: for conservatives, the debate is 'faithful Anglicanism vs heterodox sexuality issues', for liberals the debate is 'faithful Anglicanism vs heterodox territorial issues'. For conservatives to absent themselves seems to me to make it less likely that the discussions and conclusions will address the sexuality question, and more likely that they will focus on the territorial 'infringements'.

Are there arguments in favour of avoiding contact with extreme liberals who appear to deny the gospel? Of course. But you cannot contend for the truth, and refute those who oppose sound doctrine, without getting stuck in. Will it be easy or pleasant? No.

Mais les absents ont toujours tort.

Thomas Cranmer

2008-03-20T16:36:00.003Z

Tomorrow would normally be the Feast Day of Thomas Cranmer. As it will also be Good Friday, I imagine he will get 'bumped down' to somewhere else on the calendar.

Archbishop
Reformer
Martyr
Liturgist
Pastor
Theologian
Recantation recanter

From Foxe: "Then was an iron chain tied about Cranmer and fire set unto him. When the wood was kindled and the fire began to burn near him, he stretched forth his right hand, which had signed his recantation, into the flames, and there held it so the people might see it burnt to a coal before his body was touched. In short, he was so patient and constant in the midst of his tortures, that he seemed to move no more than the stake to which he was bound; his eyes were lifted up to heaven, and often he said, so long as his voice would suffer him, "this unworthy right hand!" and often using the words of Stephen, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit", till the fury of the flames putting him to silence, he gave up the ghost."

* * * * *

Father of all mercies,
who through the work of your servant Thomas Cranmer
renewed the worship of your Church
and through his death revealed your strength in human weakness:
by your grace strengthen us to worship you in spirit and in truth
and so come to the joys of your everlasting kingdom;
through Jesus Christ our Mediator and Advocate.
Amen

(Common Worship: Daily Prayer, p 460)

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 8

2008-03-20T14:28:00.002Z

And so to conclude.

At heart is a tension between an individualistic and a corporate view of the Christian life. CCOs argue that the individual's right to confidentiality is primary, and that therefore there can be no involvement of the local church in the counselling process (unless specifically desired by the counsellee). However, many churches argue that the corporate nature of the Christian life means we share one another's burdens, and that church leaders in particular need to know what is being counselled.

Without exception, CCOs seem not to have a strong theology of the local church. Although they certainly do not seem deliberately to undermine, most seemed not to recognize either the authority of local church leadership or the accountability to the local church. This seems, biblically, to be such a strong theme in what it means to be a Christian that I would suggest this is where true resolution begins.

The concept of authority and accountability 'trumping' professional accountbility is such a radical approach that it is difficult to know how this could best be done. Here are three suggestions:

perhaps a model of shared counselling: ie counsellor and church leader jointly lead the counselling sessions, each using their training and experience.
or perhaps a form of limited confidentiality: ie while the details of the counselling sessions remain confidential, it is clear to counsellor, counsellee and church leader that the conclusions agreed by the counsellor and the counsellee will be shared with the church leadership.
or perhaps a new model of confidentiality: ie a recognition that complete, 1-1 confidentiality may not biblical and that (however counter-cultural for secular, professionally trained counsellors) models of confidentiality may need to be broadened - "everything you and I say will be shared with no one except those pastorally responsible for you in your local church"

All three of these acknowledge the vital contribution to be made by CCOs, but still preserve the authority of the local church leadership and maintain accountability to the local church.

Thoughts, anyone?

that he may continue thine

2008-03-17T15:30:00.005Z

Discovered, quite by accident, that today is the anniversary of my confirmation (17 March 1991). An ideal excuse to reflect on one of my favourite BCP prayers:

Defend, O Lord, this thy servant with thy heavenly grace,
that he may continue thine for ever;
and daily increase in thy Holy Spirit, more and more,
until he come unto thy everlasting kingdom.
Amen.

(BCP: Order of Confirmation, p 299)

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 7

2008-03-17T13:41:00.003Z

It seems to me that the ultimate sticking point is that of pastoral responsibility:

CCOs view the pastoral responsibility of a counsellee as exclusive: confidentiality precludes the involvement of any third party.
Churches tend to be unhappy with this: they are nervous of being 'shut out' of important moments of a Christian's life.
I would go further: church leaders have an Acts 20:28 responsibility for the flock and must keep a Hebrews 13:17 watch over their souls. This can be shared within the context of a local church, obviously, but not delegated outside the church.

At heart is a tension between an individualistic and a corporate view of the Christian life. CCOs argue that the individual's right to confidentiality is primary. Many churches argue that the corporate nature of the Christian life means we share one another's burdens, and that church leaders in particular need to know what is being counselled. How could this be done? Three suggestions:

perhaps a model of shared counselling: ie counsellor and church leader jointly lead the counselling sessions, each using their training and experience.
or perhaps a form of limited confidentiality: ie while the details of the counselling sessions remain confidential, it is clear to counsellor, counsellee and church leader that the conclusions agreed by the counsellor and the counsellee will be shared with the church leadership.
or perhaps a new model of confidentiality: ie a recognition that complete, 1-1 confidentiality may not biblical and that (however counter-cultural for secular, professionally trained counsellors) models of confidentiality may need to be broadened - "everything you and I say will be shared with no one except those pastorally responsible for you in your local church"

More to follow.

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 6

2008-03-17T12:47:00.003Z

The problem with 'Christian Counselling' is that the phrase can mean anything and nothing - see here and here. The result is that many churches have little confidence in the concept - see here.

Several things need clearing up: (1) terminology, (2) preconceptions, (3) structures.

(1) Terminology. I would suggest the following terms. They are not ideal, but they reflect contemporary usage.

Counselling by Christians - counselling using secular concepts, by counsellors who are secularly trained but whose Christian faith is important to them and enables them to be sympathetic to issues faced by Christians. Corresponds to models (4) and (5) in my earlier post.
Christian Counselling - counselling using Christian concepts, by counsellors whose Christian faith determines the form of counselling they offer. Corresponds to models (3) and (2) in my earlier post.
Biblical Counselling - counselling using Christian concepts, governed by scriptural authority and sufficiency, based on prayerful dependence on the Holy Spirit. Typified by Proverbs 3:5 and 3:11-12. Corresponds to model (1) in my earlier post.

(2) Preconceptions. To exaggerate wildly, churches fear counsellors will teach people godless nonsense, and CCOs suspect churches of preventing people from being helped by being hostile to the very concept of counselling. Like all preconceptions, this seems to be frequently based on prejudice and ignorance. Some suggestions:

Church leaders should acquaint themselves thoroughly with what local CCOs have to offer. Things like directories of helpful individuals and organisations are essential. Here is a good example.
CCOs should be explicit about how Christian/biblical/spiritual their counselling methodologies are. Clarity of terminology will help.
Confidence and trust are best built up through personal relationships. Both church leaders and CCOs need to invest this time. For the CCOs, this is shrewd business sense. For church leaders, this is surely as important as maintaining good relationships with local funeral directors, or Diocesan officials, etc.
Accountability is perhaps best built up through structural relationships. Local needs will define these, but such structures must enable continuing confidence in one another's ministries.

(3) Structures. As well as accountability, issues such as funding, publicity, training and recruitment are all of concern to both church and CCO. Can structures be put in place to ensure that input can be heard from both sides, and decisions reached together rather than independently? SCCS seems a good example, perhaps there are others.

But this still leaves the question of Pastoral Responsibility. And the exclusiveness of it...

Getting twice what you asked for

2008-03-14T10:36:00.005Z

It is exactly a year since the seemingly-o-so-innocent question uttered by the ultrasound technician scanning Liz's stomach:

"Is there a history of twins in the family?"

Well, there is now. We had just over five months to get ready for their arrival, and now nearly seven months of getting to know them and care for them. We're still not quite used to the concept: even in an age of 'buy one get one free', getting twice what you expected still takes some getting used to.

twice the joy
twice the tears (theirs and ours)
twice the wonder
twice the mess
twice the laughter
twice the laundry
twice (or more) the prayer
twice the time taken to get out of the house
twice the time taken to get back into the house
twice the size vehicle we drive
twice the expense of going on holiday
twice the fun once we get there
twice the thankfulness and gratitude to God, who knew it and planned it all from the start...

PS It is also exactly 32 years since I was born. I don't remember it, but apparently I got Dad out of preaching at Morning Service. I still reckon he owes me...

DP

2008-03-13T20:36:00.004Z

It was suggested today that the single most significant individual in the CofE in the last 40 years is ... (drum roll) ... David Peterson.

However, the last 40 years takes us back to 1968. That includes the work of John Stott with NEAC and Lausanne, of Jim Packer robustly defending evangelical truth, of Dick Lucas with The Proclamation Trust, and more recently, of all sorts of people with 9:38. It also includes the last few years of the life of Rev E.J.H. Nash (1898-1982): known as 'Bash', and founder of the Iwerne Camps, he profoundly influenced Stott, Lucas, and Michael Green - and many, many others. Get a copy of 'A Study in Spiritual Power' and read...

But for all that, it is difficult to disagree too strongly with the first suggestion. I am personally the beneficiary of DP's work here at Oak Hill, and grateful to God for his work. Reflecting on the potential influence of Oak Hill 'Peterson Generation' graduates within the CofE, both currently and (God willing) over the next 40 years, I pray that God may do more wonderful works...

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 5

2008-03-13T08:39:00.004Z

How many different ways can the phrase 'Christian Counselling' be used? I've come across at least five, I think:

counselling by Christians, using both the Bible and prayer
counselling by Christians, using the Bible but not prayer
counselling by Christians, using Christian concepts but not the Bible
counselling by Christians, using secular concepts in a 'Christian context'
counselling by Christians, using secular concepts in a secular context

Now, here's the thing.

When churches and church leaders think of Christian counselling, they tend to think instinctively of (1) or (2), or perhaps at a stretch (3).
When Christian counsellors do the same thing, however, they tend to think of (5), (4) or (3).

There is some (3) about. It is where there is the most common ground between churches and CCOs. Most churches are happy with this approach, although with reservations that they would prefer it to be more 'Christian'. CCOs who follow (3), however, sometimes take offence at churches' reservations, feeling that they have become as 'Christian' as it possible to get and still remain 'professional'.

There is plenty of (1) and (2) about. Much of it goes on within churches and is excellent. My observation, however, is that CCOs following (1) and (2) tend to be poorly trained as counsellors. This can lead to the worst of both worlds: neither adequately trained as counsellors, nor gifted as Bible-teachers or prayer-supporters. It is some of these circumstances that have given 'Biblical Counselling' a bad name, both within the counselling profession and within many churches.

There is a lot of (4) and (5) about. However, the phrase 'Christian context' (much used by CCOs) is sufficiently nebulous that it is frequently difficult to tell the difference between the two. Counsellors are much happier with these approaches, as it is straightforward to justify professionally. Churches are more uneasy about these: it is difficult to assess the extent to which the counselling will run parallel or counter to the church's teaching ministry.

More to follow.

The end of an era. Of sorts.

2008-03-12T20:15:00.002Z

Harmison, dropped.
Hoggard, dropped.
Flintoff, injured.
Jones, injured.
Giles, retired.

The bowling heroes of 2005 - at Lord's, Edgbaston, Old Trafford, Trent Bridge, and The Oval - all now apparently fallen by the wayside...

The letter of the law

2008-03-12T20:06:00.002Z

New Yorker A J Jacobs decided to follow the Bible to the letter for 12 months - "Not just the obvious religious and moral imperatives about the Sabbath, murder and thy neighbour's ox, but the more obscure edicts like Deuteronomy 14:25 (to bind money to your hand) and Numbers 15:38 (to wear fringes on the corners of your garments)". Two stand-out moments from the article in today's Telegraph:

His initial resolve to observe them all soon turned out to be ridiculously over-optimistic so he picked some and discarded others. He later had to redefine the challenge even further, concentrating on certain rules on certain days.
By day seven, he was censoring about a fifth of his sentences before he uttered them. He was particularly shocked at how accustomed he was to gossiping - the Bible calls it "evil tongue", he says - and speaking negatively about others. "When I stopped gossiping, I stopped having negative thoughts about people. It was one of the bigger lessons of the year - how much your behaviour affects your thoughts." He insists that this even held true when it came to the challenge - for him - of praying. By the end of the year, he says he was praying so much that he was believing in God. When he stopped praying, he stopped believing. "As they say in business, fake it 'til you make it. You do it and then you start to feel it."

I wonder how he got on with the 'repent and believe' commands...

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 4

2008-03-11T13:29:00.004Z

The sticking point for many evangelical churches with regard to CCOs seems to be confidence. This is expressed in a variety of different ways.

Confidence in CCOs, conceptually. Convinced that the Bible is sufficient to equip for every good work, evangelical church ministers (as Bible-teachers) frequently express reservations about, even hostility to, the concept that the local church may be ill-equipped to cope with a particular pastoral problem. Thus evangelical ministers are uneasy about admitting that certain issues lie outside the competence of the church's pastoral care.
Confidence in CCOs, theologically. All forms of ministry are underpinned by theological convictions. Churches with strong theological convictions (such as most evangelical churches) therefore have reservations about the pastoral ministry of those with different theologies. It is rare for a CCO to maintain a defined theological position, other than 'Christian', and many CCOs have counsellors across a broad spectrum of Christian theology. Some CCOs promote their ecumenism as a selling-point, unaware that many evangelical churches will be put off by this. Thus it is difficult for churches to have confidence in the theology (and therefore forms of counselling ministry) of most CCOs.
Confidence in CCOs, pastorally. Most counsellees will have been being pastored within the local church context before any potential referral to a CCO. Once counselling starts, however, the process is bound by confidentiality and the church is excluded from the ongoing pastoring process. Churches are nervous about this confidentiality and this exclusion.

These confidence issues could be resolved through an accountabililty structure, but most CCOs think in terms of professional accountability to other counsellors, not confidence-building accountability to churches.

A Wight Wedding

2008-03-11T12:32:00.004Z

Returned this last weekend to the Isle of Wight. Our great friend (and former colleague) James Pontin was getting married to Becky, and it was a great joy to return to our former church to share in the witnessing and the celebrating. After multiple snatched conversations, a few reflections:

nothing beats a good Christian wedding
what joy to see people still perserving in Christ, despite trials and sufferings
what sadness to see people still sick, suffering, and sorrowful
how humbling (and encouraging, obviously, but that's my second point) to see how church life has continued and flourished in one's absence
how precious good friendships are, especially those forged in the fire of ministry

We go back for another wedding next month. Hurrah!

Seven more deadly sins

2008-03-11T11:28:00.004Z

Concerned that the "sins of yesteryear" - sloth, envy, gluttony, greed, lust, wrath and pride - have a "rather individualistic dimension", the Vatican has drawn up a list of seven deadly sins for our time. As reported in the Telegraph, the new seven deadly, or mortal, sins are:

genetic modification
carrying out experiments on humans
polluting the environment
causing social injustice
causing poverty
becoming obscenely wealthy
taking drugs

I would have thought sloth, envy, gluttony, greed, lust, wrath and pride summed it up pretty neatly.

Meanwhile, thankfully the Bible makes it quite clear that:

All sins are deadly, and all have sinned.
All sinners are guilty, and all are sinners.
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

Amen.

For a fuller version, try this.

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 3

2008-03-06T11:36:00.004Z

How do Christian Counselling Organisations get off the ground? And why does it matter? Thinking in UK generalisations, I think there are the following ways.

A group of churches get together and recognise a need. They agree to appoint and fund a Director, who in turn recruits other like-minded counsellors. The churches underwrite the CCO financially, hold the Director accountable for the nature and quality of counselling offered, and utilise the facility as and when appropiate for members of their congregations. Positives: close link between church and CCO; accountability; churches have confidence in the counselling. Negatives: heavily dependant on one individual (the Director), and the CCO may not manage well once they move on; fluctuating demand/take-up over time.
A bunch of Counsellors who are Christian get disenchanted with secular patterns of counselling. They leave their secular counselling organisations to set up as 'Christian counsellors', either independently or with a group of other like-minded counsellors. They recruit others who share a Christian ethos, and look to build links with churches who may refer individuals to them. Positives: a more sustainable business model from the counsellors' perspective; counsellors invariably well trained in counselling methods. Negatives: difficult to build links with churches; without a direct accountability link, churches have little involvement in what goes on in counselling sessions and are therefore uncertain (or nervous, or suspicious, or hostile) about what goes on.
Someone who has either benefitted from counselling themselves or wishes they had been able to do so (or both) decides to train as a counsellor to help others. Because they have a Christian background, they offer their services to their church and advertise more widely in Christian circles. Positives: zeal; awareness of the potential benfits of Christian counselling. Negatives: difficult to build links with churches; same problems as above re lack of accountability link; difficult business model; levels of training not always high; zeal occasionally triumphs over knowledge.
A church appoints a Christian counsellor to work on the staff team. Positives: obvious strong link between church and counselling; demonstrates that church is able/willing to care biblically for all, whatever their need. Negatives: one counsellor will be insufficiently trained to care for all types of counselling scenarios, so will still need to refer counsellees to othe counsellors; tends to be the preserve of large churches only (where does a counsellor come on the list of staff appointments - usually just between a Families Minister and a Music Director, perhaps?) because of the cost.

From what I have seen, (4) seems ideal but financially impractical in many situations, while (1) seems a good alternative for 'normal-size' churches. Meanwhile, (2) and (3) are far and away the most common.

Balham & 'The God Delusion'

2008-03-05T20:11:00.003Z

The church in Balham of which my sister is a member have recently held a series of events entitled 'The God Delusion'. Encouraging to read a review by the minister: a balanced appraisal, full of encouragement but aware of much still to be done...

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 2

2008-03-05T19:54:00.003Z

CCOs will not refer individuals back to the local church, even if the church referred the individual in the first place. The issue is more confidentiality than a lack of trust in the church's ongoing care. Nonetheless, I came across no instances of CCOs liaising with churches over the long-term care of a counsellee.
The closest equivalent is the inclusion of the church in the 'Closing Process'. This is the process at the end of a counselling course by which an individual is encouraged to think through ways in which they might be supported in the future.
Some churches pursue a deliberate policy of following-up on an individual once they have been referred to a CCO. Even a simple question such as "how did you find the last session?" can be the basis for ongoing pastoral care within the local church.
The most common phrase used to describe the liaison between churches and CCOs was ad hoc. Without exception, everybody admitted this was not ideal.
CCOs seek to build links with local churches via the following: mailings; appointing representatives in local churches; raising awareness of future training courses; websites. It is generally accepted that word-of-mouth is the most effective method.

More to follow.

Churches and Christian Counselling - part 1

2008-03-05T17:23:00.003Z

Over the past few months, I have been researching the interaction between Christian counselling organisations and local churches. What follows is an attempt to summarise some of this research in a manner that may or may not be helpful for future ministry.

There is a difference between Christian Counselling and Counselling by Christians. Most CCOs are clear that their model is CbyC. One notable exception is Burrswood, which lays great emphasis on the CC model.
Many CCOs are geographical in nature: the Cogwheel Trust in Cambridge, OCIC in Oxford, the SCCS in Sevenoaks, Exodus in north London.
Most CCOs are ecumenical. Counsellors are required to be in sympathy with a Christian ethos and, although many CCOs appear to have had evangelical roots, the spirituality spectrum is now as diverse as Quakers and Catholics.
Almost without exception, CCOs complain that churches are reluctant to refer individuals and find it difficult to embrace what counselling can offer. Instances of clergy hostility towards counselling organisations are not uncommon.
The percentage of referrals to CCOs by local churches is relatively low. 20% is a commonly mentioned figure. The majority will be self-referrals, some will come through GPs.
Counselling is expensive: £30-£40 for a session, with 6-10 sessions being the norm. This cost will normally be borne by the counsellee, but funding is sometimes available from other sources (Dioceses, local churches, charity shops, individuals).

More to follow.

A Third Province?

2008-03-05T13:23:00.002Z

I'm not advocating this. But Wallace Benn says it "is an idea whose time may well yet be upon us" and in the light of recent developments in the Communion, it is hard to disagree all that strongly with him...

Chiasm in 1 Corinthians 1-3?

2008-03-04T12:20:00.005Z

Not sure about this. But it looked good when I first thought I saw it...

A ... 1:10-17) don't boast in men
B ... 1:18-2:5) God's wisdom makes fools of the worldly-wise
C ... 2:6-3:4) don't be deceived, you may not be as wise as you think
D ... 3:5-9) God's field: God gives the growth
E ... 3:10-15) the Day will disclose the real value of ministry
D' ... 3:16-17) God's temple: God gives the value
C' ... 3:18) don't be deceived, you may not be as wise as you think
B' ... 3:19-20) God's wisdom makes fools of the worldly-wise
A' ... 3:21-23) don't boast in men

Once enough people show this to be bunk, I'll happily de-post!

Abandoning the Communion?

2008-03-04T11:27:00.004Z

Much is being said about the threatened suspension of Rev. J. I. Packer by Bishop Ingham for allegedly "abandoning the Communion". Here are some of my thoughts, neither particularly profound nor necessarily original:

Surely, surely Ingham has picked on the wrong man. Packer is well known and deeply loved throughout the Anglican Communion. He is a gentle giant. He is also 82. May this be a wonderfully extravagant own goal by the Bishop...
The issue is territorial. Packer has apparently been arguing that the model of the geographic diocese may no longer be a possibility. But that's hardly ground-breaking. AEO was introduced by General Synod in the wake of the row over women's ordination, and most potential resolutions to the current disputes in the Communion revolve around the break-up of the territorial integrity of dioceses. Pittsburgh started seeking Alternative Primatial Oversight in June 2006, and a programme of AEO has recently been endorsed by ECUSA's Presiding Bishop. So why is Ingham is such a flap? Presumably because it is his own territory...
In passing, I observe - along with everybody else - the phenomena of an extraordinary generation of Anglican Evangelical Theologians (E as the primary adjective, A as secondary): Packer, Stott and Green, as well as Lucas, Fletcher etc. And the next generation? Many of the best ETs are not A. Many AETs are more EA than AE. And too many AEs struggle with the T bit. Woe to us.
Inevitably, Anglicans have big problems defining our centre of unity. The gradual move towards definition in terms of episcopacy and sacramental presidency has been supplemented by administrative and financial changes accentuating the role of the Bishop/Diocese/cathedral at the expense of the parish. The Anglos have loved much of this. So too have the FreshExpressions/EmergentChurch consituency, with their 'worringly-close-to-Eastern-Orthodoxy' approach. The evangelicals have complained sporadically, but not comprehensively enough to make much of a difference. Now that suspensions and ejections are upon us, we find that the theological furniture has been so rearranged we hardly know where to sit when we start dialogue with our opponents.
Abandoning the Communion? Pull the other one.

From bad to worse

2008-03-03T10:53:00.004Z

Jim Packer has been threatened with suspension from the Anglican Communion by the Bishop of New Westminster - see here. I shall probably blog more about such godless nonsense threathening faithful ministry when I have calmed down a bit...

Up to fourth

2008-02-29T11:33:00.003Z

Delighted to see here that the correct order of England-Australia rankings has been restored. And all because we beat the French. In Paris. Again.

William Ames on Ministers of the Word

2008-02-28T10:46:00.003Z

Some highlights from today's reading for 'Puritan Perspectives on Ministry'...

In setting forth the truth in the text the minister should first explain it and then indicate the good which follows from it. The first part is concerned with doctrines and proofs; the latter with abdication ought derivation of profit from the doctrines... [19]
Those who invert and confuse these parts make it difficult for their hearers to remember and stand in the way of their edification. Their hearers cannot commit the chief heads of the sermon to memory so that they may afterwards repeat it privately in their families; and when this cannot be done, the greatest part of the fruit, which would otherwise be made available to the church of God through sermons, is lost. [20]
They sin, therefore, who stick to the naked finding and explanation of the truth, neglecting the use and practice in which religion and blessedness consist. Such preachers edify the conscience little or not at all. [30]
They sin who do care little about what they say provided it may appear that they may have thought about and spoken many things. They do this frequently, forcing many things out of the text which are not in it and often borrowing for it from other places, bringing anything out of every thing. The result is the ruin rather than the edification of the hearers, especially among the untutored. [32]
In the prayer before [the sermon], general matters ought to be set forth: the end and use of the word and of preaching, our wants, our unworthiness, and our duty, together with the gracious promises of God. All these should be brought to remembrance so that the minds of all will be stirred up humbly to seek and faithfully to observe the will of God. [69]
In the prayer following, the giving of thanks should always be included and the chief heads of the sermon turned into petitions. [70]

What is Paul getting at in 1 Corinthians 2:6-3:4?

2008-02-27T17:22:00.003Z

Paul refers to two types of people in 2:14-16:
1. the natural person
2. the spiritual person

At first glance, it seems obvious that Paul is making his usual distinction between unbelievers and believers. In other words, everybody in Corinth (and throughout the world) fits into one of these two categories.

However, this gets us in a couple of pickles:

1. are ‘the mature’ (2:6) the same as ‘the spiritual’ (2:15)?
· if yes, then is there no distinction between Christians and the mature – so what is Paul’s point in 2:6-7?
· if no, then is not Paul referring to a set of special believers to whom secret and hidden wisdom imparted? and thus undermining his own argument from 1:18-2:5 etc?

2. into which of these two categories do the Corinthian Christians fit?
· if he means to refer to them as ‘natural people’ (2:14), then is he saying that they are not Christians?
· if he means to refer to them as ‘spiritual people’ (2:15), then what about 3:1?

The first one is the one that seems to concern the commentators. The second one is the one I think is more pressing and more revealing. What is happening? Here are four options...

Option 1: Cast doubt on the integrity of the section and suggest Paul didn’t write it. But then we have bigger problems.

Option 2: Try to redefine the language – perhaps ‘the mature’ (2:6) could be understood differently? perhaps Paul does not mean to use ‘the natural person’ (2:14) to refer to non-Christians? But such attempts go against a normal reading of the text. And then we have bigger problems.

Option 3: Suggest that Paul is simply borrowing the Corinthians’ own language. Fine. He probably is. But why borrow their language in such a way as to appear to be undermining his own point? This doesn't solve the problem.

Option 4: Paul is borrowing the Corinthians’ own language for rhetorical effect, with 3:1-4 being the crushing blow to the Corinthians’ hopes of being deemed ‘spiritual’ and ‘mature’. It is just easy to miss this if we stop looking at the end of the chapter.

So. Paul sets up a dichotomy in 2:6-16, with the aim of encouraging the Corinthians to position themselves as the mature, the spiritual, those who need no instruction. He then bursts that bubble in 3:1 when he says he cannot address them as spiritual people.

He's not saying they are not Christians (he refers to them as infants in Christ in 3:1).
But he is saying they are not the mature/spiritual people they think they are.

Instead, they are a third group.
· They are believers.
· But they are immature, and still not ready for solid food, and worldly.
· This shows itself in their divisions – 3:3-4, cf 1:10-13 and 13:1-13.
· This is best dealt with by challenging their concepts of power (1:18-2:5), effective ministry (3:5-23) and apostolic authority (ch 4)...

George Herbert

2008-02-27T08:22:00.006Z

Today, the Anglican Communion remembers George Herbert. Best known for his poetry (he was also presbyter of Bemerton for three years before his death from TB, and apparently a man of spontaneous and excessive generosity), here is his 'Holy Baptism' (2)...

Since, Lord, to thee
A narrow way and little gate
Is all the passage, on my infancy
Thou didst lay hold, and antedate
My faith in me.

O let me still
Write thee great God, and me a child
Let me be soft and supple to thy will,
Small to myself, to others mild,
Behither ill.

Although by stealth
My flesh get on; yet let her sister
My soul bid nothing, but preserve her wealth:
The growth of flesh is but a blister;
Childhood is health.

... ... ...

King of glory, king of peace,
who called your servant George Herbert
from the pursuit of worldly honours
to be a priest in the temple of his God and king:
grant us also the grace to offer ourselves
with singleness of heart in humble obedience to your service;
through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.

(Common Worship: Daily Prayer, p 456)

More from John Owen

2008-02-26T16:04:00.003Z

Some more great moments from John Owen...

A minister may fill his pews, his communion roll, the mouths of the public, but what that minister is on his knees in secret before God Almighty, that he is and no more.
I will not judge a person to be spiritually dead whom I have judged formerly to have had spiritual life, though I see him at present in a swoon (faint)as to all evidences of the spiritual life. And the reason why I will not judge him so is this -- because if you judge a person dead, you neglect him, you leave him; but if you judge him in a swoon,(faint) though never so dangerous, you use all means for the retrieving of his life.
It is not the distance of the earth from the sun, nor the sun's withdrawing itself, that makes a dark and gloomy day; but the interposition of clouds and vaporous exhalations. Neither is thy soul beyond the reach of the promise, nor does God withdraw Himself; but the vapours of thy carnal, unbelieving heart do cloud thee.
Let no man think to kill sin with few, easy, or gentle strokes. He who hath once smitten a serpent, if he follow not on his blow until it be slain, may repent that ever he began the quarrel. And so he who undertakes to deal with sin, and pursues it not constantly to the death.
Temptation is like a knife, that may either cut the meat or the throat of a man; it may be his food or his poison, his exercise or his destruction.

with thanks to the people at JohnOwen.org

Priestesses in the church?

2008-02-26T10:29:00.005Z

Today is the 21st anniversary of the vote by General Synod to clear the way for the ordination of women priests. It wasn't the final stage, but it was a critical one: the final vote was not until 1992, and the first woman in the Church of England was ordained in Bristol on 12 March 1994.

In any case, reflecting on this I was reminded of C. S. Lewis' article 'Priestesses in the church?'. I don't agree with all of his theology, I don't agree with the foundation to his objection to women priests, but he is rightly renowned for clear thought and precise articulation. Here is the paragraph I was looking for...

"It is painful, being a man, to have to assert the privilege, or the burden, which Christianity lays upon my own sex. I am crushingly aware how inadequate most of us are, in our actual and historical individualities to fill the place prepared for us... We men may often make very bad priests. That is because we are insufficiently masculine. It is no cure to call in those who are not masculine at all." (Lewis, C.S. Essay Collection and other Short Pieces, p 402)

There is much more that can, and must be said. But it is surely worth reflecting on the concept that lots of our current problems have been created by the failures of men in the church to be sufficiently masculine.

Owen on Effectual Atonement

2008-02-25T19:35:00.004Z

Some wonderful moments from John Owen in today's "Doctrine of Salvation" class. Many thanks to Garry Williams for taking us through this so clearly - the following is shamelessly cribbed from his notes...

"God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ underwent the pains of hell for, either all the sins of all men, or all the sins of some men, or some sins of all men. If the last, some sins of all men, then have all men some sins to answer for, and so shall no man be saved... If the first, are not all freed from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, 'Because of their unbelief; they will not believe.' but this unbelief, is it a sin, or not? If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be, then Christ underwent the punishment due to it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died from partaking of the fruit of his death? If he did not, then did he not die for all their sins. Let them choose which part they will." (10:173-174)

"If Christ died in the stead of all men, and made satisfaction for their sins, then he did it for all their sins, or only for some of their sins. If for some only, who then can be saved? If for all, why then are all not saved? They say it is because of their unbelief; they will not believe, and therefore are not saved. That belief, is it a sin, or is it not? If it be not, how can it be a cause of damnation? If it be, and Christ died for it, or he did not. If he did not, then he died not for all of the sins of all men. If he did, why is this an obstacle to their salvation?" (10:249)

"If I should entreat a physician that could cure such a disease to cure all that came to him, but should let many rest ignorant of the grant which I procured of the physician, and none but myself could acquaint them with it, whereby they might go to him and be healed, could I be supposed to intend the healing of those people? Doubtless no." (10:234)

NB Effectual Atonement does indeed seem to be a so much better description than Limited Atonement!

Future Men

2008-02-25T09:42:00.005Z

As the father of 4 future men, I have appreciated Douglas Wilson's book (Moscow: Canon Press, 2001). Here are some highlights, which are not meant to be reflective of the overall argument. They simply caught my eye...

Boys must learn
(as lords) to be adventurous and visionary
(as husbandmen) to be patient, careful, and hard-working
(as saviours) to be strong, sacrificial, courageous, and good
(as sages) to be teachable, studious and thoughtful
(as glory-bearers) to be representative, responsible, and holy
(14-18)

"Another related problem is the practice of young men gravitating to one or two things they are naturally good at and staying there. Just as an excuse-maker will try to take credit only for the successes, so other young men will spend all their time in areas where excuse-making is not really necessary. The boy who disliked academics gravitate to sports, and the boy who has trouble with music give it a wide berth. The result is a very narrow competence, and the world outside the realm of competence is simply ignored." (23-24)

"Everything that breathes has an obligation to praise the Lord; no exemptions have been granted for teenage boys. The Bible knows nothing of a normal alienation between generations." (43)

On Joshua 24:14-15: "He charges them to put away their idols -- two kinds of idols.
"They are to put away the idols they had in Egypt, before the Lord redeemed them, brought them out, and established his covenant at Sinai. They were charged to put away the idols they had retained from their pre-Christian past.
"But second, Joshua tells them to put away the idols and their father served on the other side of the River -- the Jordan. Notice that these gods were gods that came into Israel after their great redemption from Egypt. In short, both kinds of gods must be put away -- gods on the other side of the antithesis, and gods of the compromised synthesis." (166)

"Boys are future men. Young men are future men. This means they are future husbands and future warriors. When they arrive at that point, the responsibilities they encounter must not come as a surprise to them." (171)

and, finally...
"Girls cause a lot of trouble. If it weren't for girls, we would have no moms, and if there were no moms, we would have no boys - and boys cause a lot of trouble." (135)

More on Ministry Specifications for Curates

2008-02-22T09:14:00.004Z

Sydney Smith (C19th clergyman) wrote to Lady Holland, deploring the roguish behaviour of a friend:

"He deserves to be preached to death by wild curates!"

Polycarp

2008-02-22T09:00:00.005Z

Tomorrow (23 Feb) is the Festival of Polycarp. Bishop of Smyrna in the second century, he was martyred for his Christian faith. Urged to escape torture and death by proclaiming "Caesar is Lord" and offering incense to Caesar's statue, he responded with the wonderful line:

"Eighty-six years I have served Christ, and He never did me any wrong. How can I blaspheme my King who saved me?"

He was either burned alive at the stake, or stabbed to death after the burning didn't work, depending on which account you go for.

Almighty God,
who gave to your servant Polycarp
boldness to confess the name of our Saviour Jesus Christ before the rulers of the world
and courage to die for his faith:
grant that we also may be ready
to give an answer for the faith that is in us
and to suffer gladly for the sake our Lord Jesus Christ.
Amen.

(Common Worship: Daily Prayer, p 455)

Know anyone running the London marathon?

2008-02-21T11:50:00.001Z

If so, would you consider letting them know about this?

Some friends at Christ Church Mayfair thought it might be worth putting on a service for Marathon Runners who'll be missing church on the Sunday morning because of the race. It may turn out it isn't but here are the details:

On Saturday 12th April at 6pm, at Christ Church Mayfair, there will be church service for Marathon Runners, their families, friends and supporters. Andy Mason, Minister of St John’s, Chelsea, will be preaching on “Zechariah 8: The Streets of the City.”
The service will last approx 1hr. Afterwards, all are invited to stay for a pasta supper served in the church.

What is the aim of the service?
1. To give Christian Marathon runners an opportunity to gather with God's people and hear his word preached - Andy Mason will be teaching us from Zechariah 8.
2. It's a chance for Christ Church Mayfair to extend fellowship to Christians around Britain and the world.
3. The service will try to engage non-Christians as well as Christians and so should provide an evangelistic opportunity for them if they invite friends, family and supporters along.
4. To try something new!

If you're interested in attending, being involved, helping with food or suggesting how we can let others know about this, please email jamesedwardcary@mac.com

From Zechariah 8:
This is what the LORD Almighty says: "I am very jealous for Zion; I am burning with jealousy for her." I will return to Zion and dwell in Jerusalem. Then Jerusalem will be called the City of Truth, and the mountain of the LORD Almighty will be called the Holy Mountain." "Once again men and women of ripe old age will sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each with cane in hand because of his age. The city streets will be filled with boys and girls playing there."

All Saints', Trull

2008-02-21T10:06:00.003Z

We are delighted that we shall shortly be moving to Trull for a curacy in the Diocese of Bath & Wells. More information about All Saints' can be found here. The Diocese has purchased a house in Barton Green, and we hope to move in sometime in early June. In the mean time, we get to ponder curtains and paints alongside the final few months at Oak Hill...

Save us from ourselves

2008-02-21T10:03:00.004Z

O God,
save us from ourselves,
from double standards and divided hearts,
and give us light and life
in Jesus Christ out Lord.
Amen

(Common Worship: Daily Prayer, p 838)

A very one-sided cricket match

2008-02-20T10:56:00.004Z

I think I remember playing in a game like this at Prep School. I particularly like the fact that there were only five scoring shots in the entire game...

Ministry Specifications for Curates

2008-02-20T08:47:00.004Z

Being at the stage of drawing up a Ministry Specification with my Training Incumbent, I was amused to come across this passage in Jane Austen's Mansfield Park...

"Oh! no doubt [the clergyman] is very sincere in preferring an income ready made, to the trouble of working for one; and has the best intentions of doing nothing all the rest of his days but eat, drink, and grow fat. It is ... indolence and love of ease - a want of laudable ambition, of taste for good company, or of inclination to take the trouble of being agreeable, which make men Clergymen. A Clergyman has nothing to do but to be slovenly and selfish - read the newspaper, watch the weather, and quarrel with his wife. His Curate does all the work, and the business of his own life is to dine."

A Puritan's Prayer for the Quiet Day

2008-02-07T12:25:00.002Z

O God,

I know that I often do thy work without thy power, and sin by my dead, heartless, blind service, my lack of inward light, love, delight, my mind, heart, tongue moving without thy help.

I see sin in my heart in seeking the approbation of others; this is my vileness, to make men's opinion my rule, whereas I should see what good I have done, and give thee glory, consider what sin I have committed and mourn for that.

It is my deceit to preach, and pray and to stir up others' spiritual affections in order to beget commendations, whereas my rule should be daily to consider myself more vile than any man in my own eyes.

But thou dost show my power by my frailty, so that the more feeble I am, the more fit to be used, for thou dost pitch a tent of grace in my weakness.

Help me to rejoice in my infirmities and give thee praise, to acknowledge my deficiencies before others and not be discouraged by them, that they may see thy glory more clearly.

Teach me that I must act by a power supernatural, whereby I can attempt things above my strength, and bear evils beyond my strength, acting for Christ in all, and have a superior power to help me.

Let me learn of Paul whose presence was mean, his weakness great, its utterance contemptible, yet thou didst account him faithful and blessed.

Lord, let me lean on thee as he did, and find my ministry thine.

Amen, and amen.

The Valley of Vision: A collection of Puritan prayers and Devotions (p 187)

Church Membership in an Anglican Context

2007-09-21T16:32:00.001+01:00

A helpful session at College this afternoon, with Mark Dever (senior pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington, D. C.), on the whole question of church membership -- especially with regard to church discipline.

My take on his argument is that church membership is vital with regard to (1) resolving church disputes, (2), settling internal doctrinal dispute, (3), sorting out discipline issues, (4) ultimately, therefore -- evangelism. Straightforward and orthodox.

Dever comes from a Baptist background, so he's out working this in any particular way. My issue is: what about for the Anglicans? It seems to me that the electoral roll is key here, but how often is the electoral roll downplayed by evangelicals, or even ignored? If the electoral roll is to be our defining membership criteria, then we need to be crystal clear on what people are signing up to. It seems, from my experience, that our criteria for membership of the electoral roll is very different from our biblical understanding of the criteria for the church membership.

My friends, this should not be. Anglicans cannot and must not duck this issue, and yet we quickly seem to soft pedal on it.

By way of a footnote: this of course has implications for a dissertation on stewardship in the C of E. Stewardship of one's money and assets is inherently linked to one's church commitment.

Modules for a Penultimate Semester

2007-09-21T12:18:00.001+01:00

With the opportunity to specialise this semester, I am looking forward to studying three key areas about which I know little, but about which I should know plenty.

1. Perspectives on Children and Young People in the UK Church

It is unlikely that anyone here would accuse me of being trendy, but this is a chance to study trends that are very influential in (a) youth ministry circles today, and (b) the likely church of 10 years time. There will be the chance to look at issues such as emergent/emerging church, theologies of worship, and alt.worship. Obviously, my aim is to integrate all of this into some sort of understanding that will be helpful as/when I end up leading a local church in the future.

2. Evangelical Public Theology

Should Evangelicals be involved in the public square, and if so, how? Superficial answers are straightforward, but try answering any of these also questions for more than a couple of minutes, and all sorts of issues come to the fore. So, here is the chance to consider the continuity/discontinuity question, the cultural mandate, the great commission, law/gospel, promise/fulfilment, and (obviously!) Eschatology. It should prove interesting.

3. Dissertation: on how to be faithful stewards within the Church of England...

This is the one I'm really looking forward to. The tragic state of the C of E at the moment raises all sorts of dilemmas for godly Christians. I shall be spending time looking at the question of faithful stewardship of money and assets, considering the question of stewardship in an Anglican context, looking at recent changes in the C of E, and doing all of this in the light of those wonderful (but complicated) things that Richard Baxter wrote. I imagine I will probably spend some time blogging about all of this. We shall see.

It promises to be a great semester. Balancing the above with the needs of a lovely wife, four small children, a placement, a home church, and the need to get some sleep, could all be interesting!

One becomes two

2007-03-21T09:50:00.001Z

'Is there a history of twins in the family?' An innocent question, but when asked by technician scanning your wife's abdomen for the first time, one with far-reaching consequences.

We were excited about one, and are even more excited about two. We thank the Lord for his graciousness and generosity, and are also relieved to discover why Liz has been feeling so rough over the past few weeks.

Meanwhile, things to think about:
more space needed in the house
a new, bigger (much bigger) car needed
one cot will not suffice
nor one travel cot
nor one infant car seat

With the twins due in August (rather than in September, as would have been the case with a singleton), there is also the question of camp. Is it realistic to be at camp for 3 weeks before they are born?

Not a good day for the C of E

2006-10-12T20:50:00.001+01:00

In the light of yesterday's report that 'Church backs legal rights for unmarried couples', this seemed depressingly poignant (from the letters page of the Daily Telegraph today):

Sir — Can anyone identify a fashionable vice to which the Church of England is opposed?

I am reminded that the creeds of the Early Church sought to make clear that which they did not believe, as much as that which they did. Perhaps we in the C of E need to be better prepared to make clear that for which we do not / will not / can not stand ...

Christian indignity

2006-10-03T17:07:00.001+01:00

An interesting juxtaposition in today's lectures has set me thinking ...

from Acts 20: the tears of Paul, shed in the service of the Lord and in the interests of the Ephesians whom he would not see again this side of heaven (v 25), but who would shortly face grave dangers (v 29).

from Luke 15: the shock of a father prepared to run (see Ken Bailey's work for the cultural shock of this) to welcome back his prodigal son.

from Jonah 2: imagine arriving at the beginning of a 'Mission' by begin vomited up by a big fish.

Christian living, and Christian ministry, involves great indignity.

Shattering childish illusions

2006-08-15T17:59:00.001+01:00

Have spent the afternoon at the RAF Museum at Hendon (highly recommended, not least because entry is free). My elder son (3 years old and fascinated by planes) was particularly struck by video footage of planes crashing into the sea during the Battle of Britain. His assumption, however, was that the planes were recovered and the pilots rescued - "it was all right in the end, Daddy".

So, as a father, when and how to go about the process of explaining death? His only experience of death so far is of: (1) his grandparents' dog, whom he is convinced will be there again each time we go to visit, and (2) Jesus and Lazarus in his Bible stories book, both of whom were raised to life pretty quickly.

Teaching about the reality of death must be good, not least because without it the promise of eternal life - found in Jesus Christ - makes no sense. One to pray over, I think. But all godly wisdom gratefully received.

On the importance of middle initials

2006-08-15T10:38:00.001+01:00

Why the 'D' in Mark D Wallace?

Sorry if it seems pretentious, but Mark G Wallace and I are in the same year, doing the same course, at the same Theological College. We have got quite friendly in the last year - in that way people do when they find themselves opening another's post on a regular basis. Now that Mark G is married (to the lovely Eileen), there is the possibility for even more confusion with two Mrs Mark Wallaces.

After 12 months of referring to myself via a middle initial, I still haven't quite decided whether middle initials are classy or pretentious. I notice from the spines of books in my study that I am in good company: Craig L Blomberg, William J Dumbrell, Phillip D Jensen, Iain H Murray, Carl R Trueman et al. Mind you, not too sure about George W Bush ...