Light in the Darkness

"The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of deep darkness a light has dawned."

- Isaiah 9:2

This is a classic Christmas verse that we hear every year at some point during the Advent season. It has become one of those sentimental texts that hits our ears and somehow provokes a nice reaction in our hearts, without being absorbed fully in our brains. Darkness becomes light. A nice positive message over which we should rejoice, right?

Or is it?

Have you ever been in a situation of darkness for a long time, when your eyes have become totally adjusted to it and you're actually able to make your way around? What would be your initial reaction if someone immediately shined a light in your eyes? Would you welcome the light?

No! Whether you've just been awakened by someone turning on your bedroom light, or you're seeing approaching headlights while driving on a lonely, unillumined road in the dark... Your eyes are used to the darkness, and your first reaction is not to welcome it but to shield yourself from it, fearing its penetrating brightness. You must make a choice to allow your eyes to adjust to the light, in order that you might see the things the light reveals.

John's Gospel tells us that "Light has come into the world, but people loved the darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. All those who do evil hate the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed" (John 3:19-20). All humans live in a state of willful rebellion against their Creator. Until recently this was generally accepted as the doctrine of Original Sin. To such rebelliousness, the Divine light of truth is not something that is initially welcome, for it will expose those things which made darkness so appealing.

In American culture the Christmas story has become so "sanitized" that it no longer makes the impact that should be made by a bright light shining in darkness. It has become a cutesy children's tale, enmeshed in elements of paganism and commercialism, that does nothing to penetrate beneath the surface of our lives and shock us with a prophetic indictment that should accompany the proclamation of God's Word.

Can we reclaim the message of Luke 1, which tells us that the cultural, political, and religious establishment generally fails to grasp what God is really all about, and that we must be receptive to messages of Divine truth from unexpected places, from the fringe of life?

Are we willing to view Mary and Joseph in a different light...not as iconic, perfect saints but as a scared young couple willing to put everything on the line for the sake of the call God placed on their lives? Are Christ-followers willing to be more like that second option, instead of unfairly holding themselves and others to the standard of the first?

Can we discern a deeper meaning in the story of the Magi, whose faith in pagan religious practices and in their own wisdom led them to the evil dictator Herod, while it was the Word of God alone that led them to Baby of Bethlehem?

Is there a political message in the story of King Herod, who ruled with lies and fear rather than with truth and justice? Will the "Herods" of our day (of all political affiliations) learn to bend their knees before the true King of Kings and be willing to expose all their deeds to the light of Christ's truth?

Most importantly, are we willing to acknowledge that so much of what we define as Christmas today...commercialism, entertainment, obligatory gifts, and wanton busyness...that these things have nothing to do with the One whose birth we celebrate and whose life we claim as our standard of everything that is true and good.

May the light of Christmas break through the darkness of sin, injustice, and apathy, that we may truly sing, "Joy to the world! The Lord is come!"

A Political Re-Run

Today, in light of recent news in the American political scene, here is a "re-run" of a post that originally "aired" on January 5, 2008...a few days after the Iowa caucuses of the '08 Presidential Campaign. The Republican winner of those caucuses was Gov. Mike Huckabee, and the Democratic winner was then-Senator B. Hussein Obama. I specifically ask that, in light of the Democrats' insane attempts to literally force their health-care legislation on a skeptical American public, that you read the last two paragraphs. But definitely peruse the whole article, and memorize the second quote from G. K. Chesterton!





The other night, my wife Cherith and I were watching the results of the Iowa caucus. As usual, there were roaring crowds, enthusiastic candidates, and media pundits ready with their fast analysis of the results (which usually changes from day to day).

Obama, the Democratic victor, gave what was by far the most inspiring speech, focusing on the historic moment of the first African-American to win a presidential caucus/primary, and on the hope that he will bring as a candidate of change (although change to what, I haven't yet gotten from him).

The speech that caught my attention was Huckabee's, the Republican winner who seems to be championed by many Evangelical Christians. Certainly more "folksy" and less polished than Obama's, he made reference to a quote by G. K. Chesterton...one of my favorite writers and a major influence on all of the Inklings.

The quote was: "A true warrior fights not because he hates those in front of him, but because he loves those behind him." A great quote, which Huckabee proceeded to take totally out of context and misapply to his point.

However, Huckabee's use of Chesterton in a political speech made me think of another quote from Chesterton in his book, The Everlasting Man: "A despotism may almost be defined as a tired democracy. As fatigue falls on a community, the citizens are less inclined for that eternal vigilance which has truly been called the price of liberty; and they prefer to arm only one single sentinel to watch the city while they sleep."

A despotism is a tired democracy. What a statement.

I look around the US, and in many respects, a tired democracy is exactly what I see, even among faithful Christians.

I see religious conservatives wanting government to legislate their moral principles and allow Christian orthodoxy to intrude into the public sphere...rather than doing the hard task of building relationships, loving, evangelizing, and discipling those who are lost.

I see liberal-thinking Christians wanting government to demonstrate the compassion and justice of Scripture through government entitlement programs and universal health care, all the while using most of their budgets on congregational programs and structures that are often more culture-bound than biblically mandated.

I see the majority of Americans believing that government owes them something beyond being a source of impartial law, an enforcer of contracts among people, and a protector from criminals and foreign enemies...which was implicitly the vision of our Founding Fathers.

Government has gotten so large and has taken on so many functions, we would hardly recognize the very frugal and simple government that existed for the first 100 years of our nation. Ironically, when our national government was small and had limited functions, it was then that our local communities were strong and vibrant, because those local communities were empowered to do things for themselves rather than immediately relying on Washington, D.C.

Is America slowly on the road to becoming a despotism? Are American citizens really more interested in being "cared for" by the government, rather than trusting in God and relying on their own ingenuity and the willing generosity of family, friends, and churches in their communities? Is it even possible to return to the vision of a national government so eloquently stated by Thomas Jefferson: "...a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned"? Or has government become yet another idol in which we choose to put our unquestioning faith?

In conclusion, a brief lesson of history: In 1933, Adolf Hitler, perhaps the greatest despot of the 20th century, was elected into office. He did not seize power; it was given to him by the people of Germany, and as he usurped more and more authority while silencing his critics, the majority of Germans (including the church) chose to do nothing.

I pray to God that never happens here, but something tells me He might feel like teaching us the hard way.....

What is the Church and its Mission?

Here is a recent paper that I wrote as a part of my Covenant Ordination. It answers the question, "What is the nature and mission of the Church?" Obviously this is not a "compendium" on ecclesiology...just a handful of insights into my perspective on what Scripture says about the Church...

In attempting to articulate my understanding of the nature of the church, I find two images especially meaningful and helpful. The first is the New Testament (especially Pauline) image of the Body of Christ, and the second is the Evangelical Covenant Church’s affirmation of the church as a fellowship of believers.

The Body of Christ image is a vital reminder that the Christian church is not merely a free association of individuals, like a Kiwanis club or American Legion. It is an objective reality founded and built by Jesus Christ Himself (Matthew 16:18) and of which He is the head (Colossians 1:18). Since Christ is both its source and head, the Church can never be found to promote any human agenda (however good or noble), but it must humbly be the servant of His agenda: to reconcile the world to God through His atoning sacrifice on the Cross.

The Scriptural image of “body” also suggests that the church is not merely an institution, certainly not a modern corporation, but a dynamic and living organism graced with the power and presence of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit indwells each believing member and equips him or her with unique gifts and talents so that—like the distinct organs of the human body—each member might contribute uniquely to the body’s life, health, and growth (I Corinthians 12). I believe the church is at its best when each member’s spiritual gifts are acknowledged, encouraged, and utilized for the good of the whole body. The Spirit also calls individuals who—through the preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacraments—provide spiritual leadership for the church (Acts 6, I Timothy 3). This will be discussed in the paragraphs below.

While in the later Pauline epistles (Ephesians, Colossians) the Body of Christ refers to the universal church, it is clear that Paul applies this image to the local body in his earlier letters (Romans, Corinthians). Therefore it would seem that from a biblical perspective, in some sense the whole Body of Christ is present in each local manifestation of the church. Being careful to recognize the importance of the greater universal church, we must affirm that each congregation of believers is gifted by God with everything necessary to continue Christ’s ministry in its unique setting (Hans Küng, The Church, 292-312).

The Evangelical Covenant Church’s affirmation of the church as a fellowship of believers also finds significant biblical support. The Last Supper narrative in John’s Gospel reveals an intimacy between Jesus and His followers to the point that He refers to them as His “friends” and He commands them to love one another in the same way that He has loved them (John 15:9-15). The early chapters of Acts (see especially 2:42-47) reveal that this intimate friendship was continued by the early church, and Paul consistently reacted against churches in which intimate fellowship was disrupted by faction, false teaching, or sinful behavior. Clearly, the church is not merely an objective reality; it is also a deeply subjective experience of friendship and fellowship with God and with others (Course Reader, 153-154). Jean Lambert challenges us to avoid trivializing this concept through overtly emotional language or sentimentality, and that is why I think this image of church is best seen in creative tension with the more objective image of the Body of Christ (Course Reader, 155).

This sense of church as fellowship is distinct from the authoritarian, power-driven institutional model that has (unfortunately) often manifested itself as church. Christ’s lordship of the Church was secured to Him not through power but through submission and service (Philippians 2:1-11), and those who want to be great must also be willing to serve (Mark 10:42-45). The Greek term for fellowship (koinonia) means more than mere companionship; it is a partnership in which individuals come together and work for a vision that is greater than all of them (Course reader, 157-158; see also William Taylor, Partnership: Philippians. Christian Focus, 2007). Deep relationships are necessary byproducts of such a partnership, but they must not be allowed to distract from the purpose for which the partnership was formed. This is why I find the ECC’s term “mission friends” helpful: it affirms fellowship while placing it within the greater blueprint of the church’s mission in the world.

What is the church’s mission? I believe it is to continue the ministry of Jesus Christ in the world until His return. The practical aspects of this have been understood in many different ways. In my own life and ministry, it has been most helpful to understand the church’s mission in terms of Jesus’ three offices of Prophet, Priest, and King. (This approach is helpfully outlined in Mark Driscoll’s recent book, Vintage Church: Timeless Truths and Timely Methods. Wheaton: Crossway, 2008).

In its prophetic ministry, the church is called to confess the sufficiency and authority of God’s Word over all human wisdom and authority. There are objective truths in Scripture that must be upheld by the church, and these truths do not merely involve right belief (orthodoxy) but also right living (orthopraxy). In upholding these truths, the church must contend against the world’s false teachings that contradict what God has spoken explicitly in His Word. The church must also expose sin (both individual and corporate) for what it is: willful rebellion against the Creator and against our own nature as beings meant to live in relationship with Him. At the root of both false teaching and willful rebellion is the basic sin of idolatry, and here the prophetic church must intentionally combat all idols that lure people’s hearts away from God and His will. This is especially important in contemporary American culture, where the two most destructive idols (sex and money) have caused significant damage inside as well as outside the church.

In my opinion, it is in the prophetic ministry where the issue of ordination is crucial. I believe that every Christian is called to ministry in general, as I will address in the paragraphs below. What distinguishes the ordained minister is only the kind of ministry to which he or she is called: a greater investment in spiritual formation, biblical study, theological inquiry, and practical training, so as to bring God’s Word to bear on the vision and ministry of the local congregation. This call must be recognized and affirmed both by the individual and the local congregation through a process of prayer and discernment. Through Word (preaching) and sign (sacraments), the ordained person proclaims the truths of Scripture to the people and exhorts them to join him or her in living out those truths in a transformational way.

The priestly ministry of the church is a ministry of reconciliation and healing, of experientially living out the grace and love of Jesus Christ in community. It is in this sense that we can speak of a priesthood of all believers, since all Christians must actively participate in such a ministry for it to be fruitful. In this context, all boundaries that would normally divide (economic, racial, gender) are eradicated as all believers stand in solidarity with one another and with Christ (Gal. 3:28-29). As believers encourage one another, exhort and rebuke according to Scripture, and provide care and mercy in times of need, they are truly functioning as priests.

This area of ministry is so important and yet so misunderstood, and the American church in particular has been remiss in faithfully putting it into practice. Our individualistic culture has created a milieu in which genuine community-building is almost impossible. Too many people go to church only to have their own needs met, and many pastors are at fault for caving in to this and becoming (as Bishop Willimon calls them) “quivering masses of availability.” Yet, I believe the priestly ministry of the whole church is more likely to convert people today than any prophetic sermonizing, and Jean Lambert’s thoughts in Amicus Dei would seem to substantiate this (Course Reader, 161-163; see also Matt. 5:14-16). It is high time the church reclaimed the “priesthood of all believers” and put ministry back into the hands of the people.

Finally, Scripture makes clear that in His resurrection and exaltation, Jesus now reigns as king over all creation, and His church is called to proclaim this gospel to every culture in the world (Acts 1:8). Indeed, every church is an “outpost of Christ’s coming kingdom” (Driscoll, 10). This ministry involves the planting of self-sustaining churches into every people-group on the planet (see Winter and Hawthorne, Perspectives on the World Christian Movement, 248); contextualizing the method of communicating the gospel so that all people may understand and respond in faith; prophetically denouncing worldly powers which—through their dehumanizing and destructive acts—exist in opposition to Christ’s rule; and working on behalf of the poor, oppressed, and children, to whom Jesus said His kingdom belongs.

This is the whole mission of the church. Every local body of believers must prayerfully discern how God is calling them to be invested in this mission at the local, national, and international levels, and they must invest both actively and financially. As Edmund Clowney wrote, “the congregation that ignores mission will atrophy and soon find itself shattered by internal dissension. It will inevitably begin to lose its own young people, disillusioned by hearing the gospel trumpet every Sunday to those who never march” (Clowney, The Church. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1995).

In conclusion, I believe that all three of these functions (prophet, priest, and king) must be present in church ministry for it to be wholly biblical. When a church excels in only one function, to the exclusion of the other two, it will weaken the church’s witness to a world that desperately needs all three. The world needs the truth that only comes from Jesus Christ; it needs communities of love and reconciliation; and finally, it needs the transforming power of God’s Kingdom.

"What I've Done" - Sin and Responsibility

Recently, the youth praise band here at BUMC introduced me to a song by Linkin Park entitled What I've Done. It's a single from their latest studio album, Minutes to Midnight, which was released exactly one year ago. That I am just now introduced to it reveals the sad truth that I am at least one year "behind the times" when it comes to much of popular culture. On the other hand, considering that I'm a child of the '80's, I guess I'm doing pretty well.

The music itself is an interesting mix of a hauntingly repetitive piano motif, juxtaposed with very raw-sounding electric guitars and percussion. But what caught me was the lyrics:

In this farewell
There’s no blood
There’s no alibi
‘Cause I’ve drawn regret
From the truth
Of a thousand lies

So let mercy come
And wash away
What I’ve done

I'll face myself
To cross out what I’ve become
Erase myself
And let go of what I’ve done

Put to rest
What you thought of me
While I clean this slate
With the hands of uncertainty

So let mercy come
And wash away
What I’ve done

I'll face myself
To cross out what I’ve become
Erase myself
And let go of what I’ve done

For what I’ve done
I start again
And whatever pain may come
Today this ends
I’m forgiving what I’ve done!!!

What I’ve done
Forgiving what I’ve done

If you preview the video on YouTube, you'll see that these words and music are intermingled with incredible visual images revealing the reality of sin in our world: drug abuse, war, terrorism, racism, pollution and environmental destruction, materialism, evil dictatorships, and nuclear destruction. Clearly, all of these images point to the consequences of our fallen human nature and our rebellion against the sovereign Lord of the Universe.

The typically modern view of sin (if sin is acknowledged at all) is that it is something out there, in the world, in society. We humans are essentially good, modernity taught us, and that the evil in the world is all of these external evils such as war, poverty, ignorance, etc... Sin can be overcome merely be combating these external evils and removing them from the earth, so that we humans can thrive with our natural goodness. In general, modernity tended to shy away from the "dark side" of human nature, believing that we are all in a natural process towards progress. Human reason and motivation are infallible and good, and they alone can save us.

This is certainly not the vision of What I've Done.

While the video depicts all of the external evils rightly abhored by modernity, the lyrics go to the heart of the issue by focusing on what I've done. The lyricist/singer has no illusions about his own essential goodness, or the purity of his motives. He takes full responsibility by acknowledging his own sinful actions, and he hints that mercy must come to him from somewhere outside himself in order that those sinful actions can be fully washed away. While he does declare presumptuously that he will forgive himself, he acknowledges that starting again and forgiving himself must come at the cost of great pain.

Authors such as Hugo A. Meynell and Robert Webber aver that modernity's naivete towards human evil has gone out of fashion among the postmodern generations. Contemporary people, especially the young, are not only more willing to talk about the evils inherent in life, but they are also willing to deal honestly with evil's manifestations in their own minds, hearts, and actions. "The power of positive thinking" and the "cult of self-esteem" has given way to a more realistic assessment of the individual person who, while having clear aspirations to the true and good, acknowledges the limits (even the corruption) of his own reason and volition.

The song What I've Done illustrates a significant scriptural truth, that the individual must fully deal with the log in his or her own eye, in order to see clearly and then deal with the speck that is in our neighbor's eye. It also suggests that our culture today is much more open to hearing a biblical view of individual sin and responsibility - a view which much of the church has failed to proclaim in our world.

Too few Christians are hearing from the pulpits a Word-informed anthropology which stresses the full weight of what we've done as individuals. We are rebels against a holy and righteous God, and we constantly set up false idols to fill the absence of His presence. Certainly, the world beyond the church is not hearing this truth. As it is, we are not giving people a true reason for being Christians in the first place: to receive God's incredible forgiveness and justification in Jesus Christ, to have our sins washed away in sanctification, and to live in the reality of His grace and mercy.

Clearly, Linkin Park (and obviously much of their fans) understand the need to face themselves honestly, to have mercy come to them, to have their sins washed away and the slate wiped clean, and to feel the joy of forgiveness. It's about time that we proclaim the whole Gospel without fear of offending others, so that those inside and outside the Church can be convicted of their sin and thereby return to the One who bore the pain of our forgiveness and Who accepts all of us in spite of what we've done.

Feeling God's Pain

During this season of Lent, I am focusing my devotional reading of Scripture on the minor prophets. It's a section of Scripture I haven't read in a while, and so I decided to delve into the words of individuals who may not have written as much as guys like Isaiah and Jeremiah, but whose message to us is just as important.

So I started reading through the first chapter of Hosea. Right at the beginning, God does the unthinkable: He orders His prophet Hosea to marry an adulterous wife and to conceive unfaithful children. The reason? "Because the land is guilty of the vilest adultery in departing from the Lord." Apparently God wanted Hosea to feel the kind of gut-wrenching emotions that God Himself must feel when His people abandon Him, prostitute themselves before the lifeless pagan gods around them, and ultimately beget children who are faithless.

If I were Hosea, I don't know what my resonse would have been.

You see, I have a couple close friends of mine who experienced this firsthand. They married women, they loved them, but over the course of the marriage, the women's hearts changed and they engaged in adulterous relationships.

In both cases, my friends expressed a willingness to reconcile, to go to counseling, to try and rebuild the trust and intimacy and start fresh. But their wives would have none of it. They had made up their minds ahead of time and chose to sever the relationship rather than work things out. In one case, my friend's wife walked away with half of the financial assets in the marriage, even though she contributed very little financially.

I saw what that situation did to my friends. I saw grown men crying like babies, heart-broken, shocked, angry, filled with both love and hatred. My one friend has three boys, and despite the counseling they have received, I'm sure the scars of that experience will always be with them.

All because one party in the marriage chose narcissism, self-gratification, deceptiveness and unfaithfulness over commitment, truthfulness, communication, and reconciliation.

I reflect on this, and then I think... Is this what I do to God every time I sin? Does God's heart ache like my friends' did when I make my self-interest, rather than God's glory and righteousness, the motivating factor in my decisions? And on a more corporate level: how does God truly feel about the church's relationship with the pagan gods of our culture today, or the church's sometimes selfish agenda? Does He view us as adulterous?

Biblical scholar Walter Brueggemann argues that pathos is absolutely crucial to prophetic ministry: the ability to feel, and to energize others to feel, the heart of God that cries out against apathy, numbness, and unfaithfulness. The people of God must be exposed to a candid expression of the way in which their individual and corporate sin has betrayed God on the very deepest levels. This requires more than theological savvy or administrative gifts: it requires a discerning heart driven by a life of rich prayer and disciplined spirituality, as well as a courage to speak deeply and truthfully about unpleasant things. (See Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination)

If the experiences of my friends (and of Hosea) are any indication of God's reaction to His people today, I believe that this season of Lent offers us a unique opportunity. I pray that through my reading of the minor prophets and through my prayer life, God may invite me into a deeper understanding of His heart, and also a courage to know how most effectively to use that understanding in a way that is productive and energizing.

May our Lenten journey give us a fresh understanding of the lengths to which God will go, and has gone, to restore us adulterous people to our rightful place as His Bride, the Church.