New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
2 Likes
I donât understand why God chooses to work in this way. So many instances throughout church history where peace could have done so much for the churchâŚat least so it seems to me. Godâs wisdom obviously deems otherwise.
We donât get to succeed; we just get to be faithful. Maybe this is why we need Ecclesiastes.
I think itâs a case of every truth (âKeep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peaceâ) being accompanied by two equal and opposite errors. So if one error is the sort of thing displayed over time by the Church of England - keep the show united at all costs, if in name only - then the opposite error is that demonstrated by the Dutch: âWhere there are two Dutchmen, thereâll be a church, but where there are three Dutchmen, thereâll be two churches!â (Abraham Kuyper, attrib.).
With the matter of divisions, it does beg the question: at what point is leaving something the right option - e.g. the PCA leaving the PCUSA - and at what point do we âgrin and bear itâ?
Difficult question, brother. Lots of thoughts which I hope to get back to later. Travelling today. Love,
1 Like
To return to this question of when leaving is good, a story. Back in 1996, a bunch of us had to decide whether or not to leave our church. This group included me, the Sr. Pastor, and several men who were officers of the church, both elders and deacons. It was tough to think through. On the one hand, Calvinâs comments on the Corinthian church in Book IV of the Institutes. On the other hand, the two or three marks of the church, which included administering the sacraments and exercising some minimal church discipline in a church well over 500.
Leaving to the side many other considerations which apply to this question, let me post here the statement we ended up writing and adopting as we left.
Readers may get a kick out of the part of the story that I tell people if they are looking at my library. Among my books is a beautiful copy of John Owenâs, A discourse concerning evangelical love, church-peace, & unity. With the occasions & reasons to present differences and divisions about things sacred and religious, printed in 1673. As part of this process, I decided to read that book and mark it as I read. So I show them the book and its markings, all through the pages. Likely some of them have thought Iâd lost my mind to do such a thing.
Anyhow, hereâs the statement and excerpt from Owen:
Statement of Elders and Pastors on Origin of Church of the Good Shepherd
November 1996
We recognize there are some who are confused about what happened in the final year at Evangelical Community Church (ECC) wondering why some officers and members of ECC left to join together and start Church of the Good Shepherd (CGS). This confusion is natural. When leaders divide in the midst of controversy it is difficult for the congregation to understand. Here is a short account of our rationale in founding Church of the Good Shepherd. We trust that this explanation will assist those reading it in their discernment of truth and error and that, through this paper, God will be glorified.
First, both ordained pastors (Senior Pastor and First Associate Pastor), the Moderator of the Board of Elders, another two of the currently active elders, and two of the three men who were about to be elected to the elders board all left ECC within a few months of each other in early 1996 because of concerns over its biblical commitments as well as its government and polity. Other church leaders, a member of the church support staff, and a number of deacons also left at this time.
After their departure, all but two of these men joined together and worked toward the planting of CGS. The two pastors of Grace Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Bloomington, John Peoples Jr. and David Wegener, assisted in this planting by training men for service in the new church as elders and deacons. Following their training, these men were examined, ordained, and installed by Pastors Peoples and Wegener.
CGS was officially organized on April 20, 1996, and at that time was named âChurch of the Good Shepherd.â Five months later, on September 5, 1996, the call to serve as the congregationâs first pastor was approved and placed in Rev. Timothy B. Baylyâs hand by the presbytery where Baylyâs ministerial credentials were held, Great Lakes Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America. Prior to accepting the call, Bayly had served as Senior Pastor of ECC, but had resigned on March 30, 1996. Five months later, on October 6, 1996, Bayly was installed as CGSâs first pastor.
The approval of Baylyâs call to Church of the Good Shepherd was given by Great Lakes Presbytery after they had thoroughly examined the situation over the course of a number of months and their examination was stronger because they had a good working knowledge of Bayly, his former associate pastor David Crum who was also a member of that presbytery, and the history of ECC.
The division of ECC left friends and families on different sides of the issue and, although it has caused us some considerable heartache, our study of Scripture leads us to the conclusion that such division is inevitable in the reform of the Church. When such division occurs, we acknowledge that Christ alone is able to accurately and righteously judge the motives and obedience of each of us, but here is a statement concerning our consciences in this matter.
Two matters have been at the center of the historical conflict within the congregation of ECC and both of these problems existed for many years prior to Pastor Baylyâs installation as ECCâs Senior Pastor.
First, there has been opposition by influential people and officers within the congregation of ECC to the exercise of loving and biblical church discipline.
Second, there has been opposition to the biblical preaching of Godâs Word from ECCâs pulpit as that preaching approached âspecific doctrinesâ and âspecific applications.â There was a concerted effort to silence, for instance, the preaching from Godâs Word on subjects such as the call of God to those who belong to Him to boldly witness to His truth within their faculty, staff, and administrative positions at Indiana University; the duty of Christian parents to raise their children âin the nurture and admonition of the Lordâ using alternative methods of education including home schooling and private Christian schools as part of their means of fulfilling this responsibility; the call of God for Christians to publicly stand against the taking of the lives of unborn children through abortion here in Bloomington; the duty of Christians to demonstrate, in their own homes and in the Church, the teaching of Scripture on the proper role relationships between men and womenâespecially the duty of husbands, at home, and men, in the church, to take responsibility for leadership; etc.
In connection with church discipline and the preaching of Godâs Word two documents were a great encouragement to us in the midst of this year of sifting and change. First, an excerpt from a book. And second an open letter that we received when it was distributed by email to the pastors and elders of the Presbyterian Church in America.
First, the book: While Pastor Bayly was in the throes of decision-making concerning whether to continue serving as the Senior Pastor of ECC, he was reading a book by the Puritan divine, John Owen. He found the excerpt from that book attached as Appendix A helpful in the matter of when the absence of, and resistance to, proper church discipline reaches the point where those wanting to be faithful to the Lord in protecting this âmark of the Churchâ must leave the church so compromised. We include Appendix A as a summary statement of our concerns in this area of church discipline.
Secondly, the open letter: Just recently the letter attached as Appendix B was distributed by e-mail to pastors and elders of the PCA. This letter sums up well the nature of the controversy we experienced at ECC concerning the preaching of Godâs Word and the lack of unity within her Board of Elders.
We trust you will find these two documents helpful in understanding some of the issues we have all been dealing with these past few years. May the Lord lead those who now hold responsibility in both congregations as they seek to glorify Him and obey His Word. We believe our departure from ECC was necessary. We also believe the founding of Church of the Good Shepherd was to Godâs glory. It is a great privilege for us to serve this flock as its elders and to see the beautiful unity that God has been pleased to grant us in this fellowship (Psalm 133). Please pray that the Lord will make us worthy of this trust and that we will carry it out faithfully.
Meanwhile, we leave to the Lord the future of ECC. We resigned our positions of authority within her fellowship and other men are now accountable for the edification, worship, and discipline of her souls. May the Lord give them wisdom and strength for their labors and may all the churches belonging to Jesus Christ here in Bloomington bring Him glory. The following verses seem especially appropriate for us to meditate on at this time:
Remember ye not the former things, neither consider the things of old. Behold, I will do a new thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert. (Isaiah 43:18,19).
(A Song of Ascents, of David.) Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together in unity! It is like the precious oil upon the head, coming down upon the beard, even Aaronâs beard, coming down upon the edge of his robes. It is like the dew of Hermon coming down upon the mountains of Zion; for there the LORD commanded the blessingâlife forever. (Psalms 133:1-3).
Sincerely, In Christ,
The Pastors and Elders; Church of the Good ShepherdAppendix A
Wherefore when any Church, whereof a man is by his own consent antecedently a Member, doth fall in part or in whole from any of those Truths which it hath professed, or when it is overtaken with a neglect of Discipline, or irregularities in its administration, such a one is to consider, that he is placed in his present state by divine Providence, that he may orderly therein endeavor to put a stop unto such Defections, and to exercise his charity, Love and forbearance towards the persons of them whose Miscarriages at present he cannot Remedy.
In such cases there is a large and spacious Field, for Wisdom, Patience, Love and prudent Zeal to exercise themselves. And it is a most perverse imagination that separation is the only cure for Church-disorders. All the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit, bestowed on Church-Members, to be exercised in their several stations at such a season, all Instructions given for their due improvement unto the good of the whole; the Nature, Rules and Laws of all Societies, declare that all other remedies possible and lawful, are to be attempted, before a Church be finally deserted.
But these Rules are to be observed, provided always, that it be judged unlawful for any persons, either for the sake of Peace, or Order, or Concord, or on any other consideration, to join actually in any thing that is sinful, or to profess any Opinion which is contrary to Sound Doctrine, or the form of wholesome words, which we are bound to hold fast on all Emergencies.
And farther, if we may suppose, as sure enough we may, that such a Church so corrupted shall obstinately persist in its Errors, Miscarriages, Neglects, and Maladministrations; that it shall refuse to be warned or admonished, or being so by any means, shall willfully reject and despise all Instructions, that it will not bear with them that are yet found in it, whether Elders or Members, in peaceable Endeavors to reduce it unto the order of the Gospel, but shall rather hurt, persecute and seek their trouble for so doing, whereby their Edification comes continually to be obstructed, and their souls to be hazarded through the loss of Truth and Peace; we no way doubt but that it is lawful for such persons to withdraw themselves from the Communion of such Churches, and that without any apprehension that they have absolutely lost their Church-state, or are totally rejected by Jesus Christ.
For the means appointed unto any end, are to be measured and regulated according unto their usefulness unto that end. And let menâs present Apprehensions be what they will, it will one day appear, that the end of all Church-Order, rule, Communion and Administrations, is not the Grandeur or secular Advantages of some few, not outward Peace and Quietness, unto whose preservation the Civil Power is ordained; but the Edification of the Souls of men in Faith, Love, and Gospel-Obedience. Where therefore these things are so disposed of and managed, as that they do not regularly further and promote that End, but rather obstruct it, if they will not be reduced unto their due Order and Tendency, they may be laid aside, and made use of in another way.
Much more may any refuse the communion of such Churches, if they impose on them their Corruptions, Errors, Failings and Mistakes, as the condition of their Communion: For hereby they directly make themselves Lords over the Faith and Worship of the Disciples of Christ, and are void of all Authority from him in what they so do or impose. And it is so far, that any menâs withdrawing of themselves from the communion of such Churches, and entering into a way of Reformation for their own good, in obedience to the Laws of Christ, should infer in them a want of Love and Peaceableness, or a Spirit of Division, that to do otherwise, were to divide from Christ, and to cast out all true Christian Love, embracing a Cloud of slothful negligence and carelessness in the great concernments of the Glory of God, and their own Souls in the room thereof.
We are neither the Authors nor the Guides of our own Love. He who implants and worketh it in us, hath given us Rules how it must be exercised, and that on all emergencies. It may work as regularly by sharp cutting Rebukes, as by the most silken and compliant expressions; by manifesting an aversation from all that is evil, as by embracing and approving of what is good.
In all things and cases it is to be directed by the Word: And when under the pretense of it we leave that Rule, and go off from any Duty which we owe immediately unto God, it is Will, Pride, and Self-conceit in us, and not Love. And among all the Exhortations that are given us in the Scripture unto Unity, and Concord, as the Fruits of Love, there is not one that we should agree or comply with any in their sins or evil practices. But as we are commanded in our selves to abstain from all appearance of evil, so are we forbidden a participation in the sins of other men, and all fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness.
Our Love towards such Churches is to work by Pity, Compassion, Prayer, Instructions, which are due means for their healing and recovery; not by consent unto them, or communion with them, whereby they may he hardened in the Error of their way, and our own Souls be subverted: For if we have not a due respect unto the Lord Christ, and his Authority, all that we have, or may pretend to have unto any Church, is of no value. Neither ought we to take unto consideration any terms of Communion, whose foundation is not laid in a regard thereunto.
(A Discourse Concerning Evangelical Love, Church Peace, and Unity; With the Occasions and Reasons of Present Differences and Divisions about Things Sacred and Religious, by John Owen, D.D., London. Doxman Newman, at the Kings-Armes in the Poultry, 1673; pp. 77-80. [A few spelling and paragraph changes were made, but all emphases are original.])
Appendix B
Open Letter to Ruling and Teaching Elders in the Presbyterian Church in America;
Whatever Happened to Preaching in the PCA?From: Grieved@aol.com
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996Introduction
First, let me qualify this letter by saying that I am not an officer in the church. However, I am the product of the PCA. I was born and raised Presbyterian and have been a member of the PCA ever since it was formed. For the first time in my life I have to seriously consider leaving the PCA to unite with a nondenominational congregation. This contradicts a lifetime of teaching and is not something that I take lightly. While the problems with our denomination are many, I am primarily concerned with only twoâpreaching and leadership. It is extremely difficult in our day to find a congregation that has both faithful preaching and a session united in a path the church should follow. Although I live in a town with several PCA churches, I currently drive my family 100 miles (one way) to church most every Sabbath day. I have told many people that while I do not have to drive this distance to find faithful preaching, I know of no place closer by where I can find both faithful preaching and a session clearly united in a path the church should follow. This results in my bypassing probably 100 PCA churches that would be closer by.
Being a creature of conscience, I have examined my plight over and over again, but always reach the same conclusion. My theology has not changedâit is the church that has changed. Thus I cannot remain where I am. Many elders in the PCA have encouraged me to move my family to a location where we would be âhappyâ with a PCA church. Ultimately, we may move, but the problems in the PCA will still remain. I exhort you to seriously examine the enclosed letter as if it were delivered to your session by one of your members. Except for minor modifications to protect the parties involved, this letter is the same as when originally written.
Dear Brethren:As the Elders of the church, you men are also the guardians of the pulpit. It is your responsibility to determine what is or is not proper spiritual nourishment for the people of God. You will stand before God and give an account of how well the sheep of this congregation have been cared for and fed. Sirs, my family and I are starving. We are hungry for specific instruction about the nature of God, not just His love and mercy, but also His holiness and wrath against sin. We thirst for specific instruction about the law of God and how it applies to every area of our lives. We are daily tempted to grow too comfortable with the sin that yet remains within us, to gloss it over, to refuse to see it for what it is and forsake it. We are suffering for lack of surgery on our evil heartsâthe Word of God applied as a sword and knife to cut away the uncleanness. We long for sermons that are closely applied so as to convict our hearts and stir us to new obedience.
The words spoken at the close of the sermon this evening struck home with us more than we can convey. We are in absolute agreement that unless we see, at least in some measure, the vileness of our sin, what it cost Christ on the cross, and the absolute holiness of God, we will never hope to have a part in eternal life. We are not scholars or theologians, but it would appear to us that this is precisely what is missing from our pulpit. This type of conviction of sin and understanding of the true character of God is essential, not only for the conversion of the lost, but also for the growth in sanctification of the saints. Certainly Godâs grace is the ultimate cause for both of these, but scripture teaches that God is pleased to use means to accomplish His purposes. One of the means that God has promised to particularly bless is faithful preaching. As the Puritans believed,
âThe two great pillars upon which the kingdom of Satan is erected, and by which it is upheld, are ignorance and error; the first step of our manumission from this spiritual thralldom consists in having our eyes opened, and being turned from darkness to light, Acts xxvi. 18.ââ Introduction to the original Westminster Confession of Faith
âThe most ordinary means of our effectual calling is the preaching of the Word . . . and though by other means men may be called, yet seldom or never any are called that neglect and condemn this.â â Thomas White
âFor we must consider that God hath appointed this preaching of his Word to perfect the faith of his elect (I Peter 5:2).ââ Richard Rogers
âPreaching is able to build men up in grace, as the apostle speaketh (Acts 20: 32). . . . There is no such means to make men grow in faith and every other saving grace, to perfect that which is lacking in it, as sound preaching is.â â Arthur Hildersham
It is not our purpose in this letter to enter into a debate about the definition of preaching, but rather to emphasize only those two elements of faithful preaching that were described above âour understanding something of the true character of God and our obtaining some glimpse of the wickedness of our human nature. Theologians call this âspecific doctrineâ and âspecific application.â Add to the definition whatever you will, but apart from these two elements, there is no preaching, only an interesting history lesson or another paraphrased version of the Bible.
Specific doctrine is when we understand more clearly âwhat man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of manâ (WSC 3). The truths of God, when presented in this way, can be remembered and clung to for days, weeks, months, even years to come. Specific application is when that doctrine is applied in a specific, personal way to our own lives so that we clearly see areas in which sin yet remains, have our consciences pricked by the sword of Godâs word, and are motivated to endeavor after new obedience. In the words of the Puritan James Durham, âApplication is the life of preaching.â
As Reformed Presbyterians, we are often guilty of falling into the trap of thinking that just because the words are true and spoken across a pulpit, then it must be preaching. As Martyn Lloyd-Jones so aptly put it, â. . . we are to preach the Gospel, and not to preach about the Gospel. That is a very vital distinction, which one cannot easily put into words, but which is nevertheless really important. There are men who think that they are preaching the Gospel when actually in fact they are simply saying things about the Gospel.â While we have never heard error from our pulpit (and for that we are exceedingly thankful), we are just as certain that what we are hearing week by week is dangerously shallow. True preaching speaks to the heart and must be judged, at least in some measure, accordingly. An old description of the goals of preaching stated that, âit is to comfort the disturbed and to disturb the comfortable.â: Martyn Lloyd-Jones describes the goals of preaching as follows:
âOr take another statement by the same Epictetus: âTell me,â he says in a challenge to the philosopherâand an equally good challenge to the preacherâ âTell me, who after hearing your lecture or discourse became anxious about or reflected upon himself?â That is the test. If people can listen to us without becoming anxious about themselves or reflecting on themselves we have not been preaching. âOr who,â asks Epictetus, âas he went out of the room said, âThe philosopher put his finger upon my faults. I must not behave in that way againâ?ââ
â. . . that is what preaching is meant to do. It addresses us in such a manner as to bring us under judgment; and it deals with us in such a way that we feel our whole life is involved, and we go out saying, âI can never go back and live just as I did before. This has done something to me, it has made a difference to me. I am a different person as the result of listening to this.â Epictetus adds that if you do not do this, the utmost praise you get is when one man says to another, âThat was a beautiful passage about Xerxes.â And the other says, `No, I like that best about the Battle of Themopylae.â In that case, you see, nothing has been done to them at all, but they were just sitting in a detached manner and estimating and judging the speaker. One liked this quotation, the other liked that historical allusion. It had been an entertainmentâvery interesting, very attractive, very stimulating perhaps for the intellect. But it had done nothing to them, and they went out just praising this or that aspect of the preacherâs performance.â
While we say we hold to a systematic theology which unites us together as a denomination, it is preaching which drives these doctrines home to the hearts and lives of the believer. Thus, true preaching is vital for the peace and purity of the church. Without sound preaching, there is no body or unity, but rather a scattered flock of lost sheep suffering from malnutrition with each following his own path, and living by his own agenda. The result is a gradual decay of doctrine and the insipid destruction of the peace and purity of the church.
At present, our congregation bears a striking resemblance to this lost and wandering flock. Everyone seems to have an opinion about what is wrong with our church and what should be done to fix it. Some say that âwe are not evangelizing enoughâwe should be more active in our community.â Others complain that âthere is a lack of fellowshipâwe need more social functions.â Still others are alarmed over the lack of spiritual conviction in our young peopleâ âperhaps they need more activities to participate in as a group.â However, these are all simply symptoms of the true problem. We, as a church, have broken covenant with God; we are not diligently pursuing holiness. Until we recognize that God has placed us here on this earth to be holy, for He is holy; to pursue holiness without which no man shall see God; and to present our bodies faultless before Him (Lev. 19:2, Heb. 12:14, Rom. 12:1), we will never truly solve any of the problems of our church. This is not a plea for legalism but, rather, for the diligent pursuit of sanctificationâan honest desire and a serious attempt to know and do the will of God. Our congregation must be equipped by a steady diet of âspecific doctrine and specific application.â Until the preaching from our pulpit is as from a man ânever sure to preach again, as a dying man to dying menâ (Richard Baxter), problems will continue to grow and multiply until we bear no resemblance at all to a true church.
We have discussed this matter with our preacher and written several notes seeking to express our concern and to encourage him to preach with greater boldness. In addition, we have discussed these matters individually with several members of the Session. Being the sinful creatures that we are, we suspect that our attempts to encourage and express legitimate concerns may have been a source of offense. Please know that this was never our intention. Meanwhile, we have labored to feed ourselves with greater diligence through the use of good books and taped sermons. Now we find ourselves hungering more than ever for sound preaching in our pulpit. In addition, we are strongly convicted that it is essential for our children to sit under the kind of preaching described above. They must see, at least in some part, the vileness of their sin, what it cost Christ on the cross, and the utter holiness of God, and, so seeing, may flee to Him for salvation. Once saved, faithful preaching will continue to feed and instruct them in the way of holiness. Further, by sitting under sound preaching now, they will learn to be discerning so as to recognize faithful preaching later in life.
The problems that we have described herein cannot be corrected except by the guardians of the pulpit. You men must decide whether this letter is correct or filled with errors. If we are wrong, we earnestly desire to be corrected and instructed. However, if we are correct in our understanding of preaching, the content of what is being presented from our pulpit, and the effect upon our church, we strongly exhort you to take the steps necessary to correct these problems and to ensure the future of faithful preaching upon which the people of God may feed and grow. In the interest of upholding the truth, purging sin from the church, and seeking Godâs glory, we respectfully submit this letter to you. We pray that it has been written in and received in the Love of Christ Jesus our Lord.
From Preaching and Preachers, Chapter 2, by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones
â. . . the biblical teaching concerning salvation is that it is the result of bringing men to this âknowledgeâ which they lack, it is dealing with this ignorance. Paul talks about âpreaching the whole counsel of Godâ, and Peter had the same idea when he says that Christians are people who have been âcalled out of darkness into Godâs marvelous lightâ. Now these are the biblical terms, and they all, it seems to me, indicate that preaching always comes first and is given priority. If this is the greatest need of man, if his ultimate need is something that arises out of this ignorance of his which, in turn, is the result of rebellion against God, well then, what he needs first and foremost is to be told about this, to be told the truth about himself, and to be told of the only way in which this can be dealt with. So I assert that it is the peculiar task of the Church, and of the preacher, to make all this known.â
â. . . So I would lay it down as a basic proposition that the primary task of the Church is not to educate man, is not to heal him physically or psychologically, it is not to make him happy. I will go further; it is not even to make him good. These are things that accompany salvation; and when the Church performs her true task she does incidentally educate men and give them knowledge and information, she does bring them happiness, she does make them good and better than they were. But my point is that those are not her primary objectives. Her primary purpose is not any of these; it is rather to put man into the right relationship with God, to reconcile man to God. This really does need to be emphasized at the present time, because this, it seems to me, is the essence of the modern fallacy. It has come into the Church and it is influencing the thinking of many in the Church - this notion that the business of the Church is to make people happy, or to integrate their lives, or to relieve their circumstances and improve their conditions. My whole case is that to do that is just to palliate the symptoms, to give temporary ease, and that it does not get beyond thatâŚâ
âLet me use a medical illustration. Take a man who is lying on a bed and writhing in agony with abdominal pain. Now a doctor may come along who happens to be a very nice and a very sympathetic man. He does not like to see people suffering, he does not like to see people in pain. He is able to do so. He can give him an injection of morphia or various other drugs which would give the man almost immediate relief.
âWell,â you say, âsurely there is nothing wrong in doing that; it is a kind action, it is a good action, the patient is made more comfortable, he is made happier and is no longer suffering.â The answer to that is that it is well-nigh a criminal act on the part of this doctor. It is criminal because merely to remove a symptom without discovering the cause of the symptom is to do a dis-service to the patient. A symptom after all is a manifestation of a disease, and symptoms are very valuable. It is through tracking the symptoms and following the lead that they give that you should arrive at the disease which has given rise to the symptoms. So if you just remove the symptoms before you have discovered the cause of the symptoms you are actually doing your patient real harm because you are giving him this temporary ease which makes him think that all is well. But all is not well, it is only a temporary relief, and the disease is there, is still continuing. If this happened to have been an acute appendix, or something like that, the sooner it is taken out the better; and if you have merely given the patient ease and relief without dealing with it you are asking for an abscess or something even worse. . . .â
âThe business of the Church, and the business of preachingâand she alone can do this âis to isolate the radical problems and to deal with them in a radical manner. . . .â
â. . . When you depart from the primary task of the Church and do something else, though your motive may be pure and excellent, that is the result. I am not disputing or criticizing the motives, I am simply showing that actually this theory in practice has the reverse effect from that which it sets out to achieve. I argue that in many ways it is the departure of the Church from preaching that is responsible in a large measure for the state of modern society. The Church has been trying to preach morality and ethics without godliness; and it simply does not work. It never has done, and it never will. And the result is that the Church, having abandoned her real task, has left humanity more or less to its own devices.â
âOne of the advantages of being old is that you have experience, so when something new comes up, and you see people getting very excited about it, you happen to be in the position of being able to remember a similar excitement perhaps forty years ago. And so one has seen fashions and vogues and stunts coming one after another in the Church. Each one creates great excitement and enthusiasm and is loudly advertised as the thing that is going to fill the churches, the thing that is going to solve the problem. They have said that about every single one of them. But in a few years they have forgotten all about it, and another stunt comes along, or another new idea; somebody has hit upon the one thing needful or he has a psychological understanding of modern man. Here is the thing, and everybody rushes after it; but soon it wanes and disappears and something else takes its place.â
â. . . The Puritans are justly famous for their pastoral preaching. They would take up what they called âcases of conscienceâ and deal with them in their sermons; and as they dealt with these problems they were solving the personal individual problems of those who were listening to them. That has constantly been my experience. The preaching of the Gospel from the pulpit, applied by the Holy Spirit to the individuals who are listening, has been the means of dealing with personal problems of which I as the preacher knew nothing until people came to me at the end of the service. . . .â
â. . . God does not change. As someone put it, âTime writes no wrinkle on the brow of the Eternal.â And man does not change; he is exactly what he has always been ever since he fell and has the same problems. Indeed I would go so far as to say that never has there been a greater opportunity for preaching than there is today, because we are living in an age of disillusionment. . . .â
2 Likes
Thank you for this. Really.
1 Like
Wheaton has two new trustees and is very proud of the âkingdom diversityâ they represent.
From The Wheaton Record:
[Carlene] Ellerman noticed during her time at Wheaton, too, that the Board of Trustees was mostly full of white men. While she commends Wheaton for prioritizing diversity, she said there is still work to be done in addressing the issue of race on campus. The ongoing division between Christians of different backgrounds concern her.
âI still think thereâs a bit of that now on campus and that saddens me because I feel like weâre all made in Godâs image,â Ellerman said. âWe are all brothers and sisters in Christ, so I shouldnât look at you any differently because youâre black or white.â
Chief Intercultural Engagement Officer Vanessa Quainoo wrote an email to the Record regarding Wheatonâs race and diversity mission.
âThe goal of kingdom diversity at Wheaton College includes increasing Christ-centered cultural representation, improving campus life for all racial and ethnic groups and strengthening and deepening intercultural engagement,â said Quainoo.
1 Like
She says âI feel like weâre all made in Godâs image,â displacing Godâs declaration of the imago dei with her feelings about it. In other words, feelings trump Scripture.
But even worse, she declares âwe are all brothers and sisters in Christ.â Whoâs this âweâ?
So bad.
3 Likes