New Blog Coming...

UPDATE: You can get a sneek preview of the site and enjoy a new music video by David Gray. Go to weak on sanctification.

Coming soon! Blogging will resume at a new site that will be announced in September.

The title of the new blog will be "Weak on Sanctification." I hope you will read and comment on the various posts as we carry on our discussion of life, love, and salvation.

See you in September!

Chaplain Mike

SUMMER HIATUS

Olive Trees with Yellow Sky and Sun,
Vincent Van Gogh—November, 1889

I will be taking a hiatus from blogging and spending lots of time on the internet this summer. I need to give attention to other aspects of life. You know, marriage, family, neighbors, church, baseball. Some real flesh and blood concerns.

This might be a good practice for some of you as well.

For your edification, I urge you to read Michael Spencer's straightforward and wise cautionary post about the temptations of technology, HERE.

All things in moderation. As for me, I am pursuing other matters this summer. See you in the fall.

COLLEGE WORLD SERIES REGIONAL NEWS

ROAD TO OMAHA UPDATE.
Two good friends from Franklin High School are competing in the NCAA College Baseball tournament, and had their first games today.

Bart Carter, of the Western Kentucky University Hilltoppers, celebrated with his teammates as they beat second-seeded Missouri with a convincing 11-5 win today. WKU scored 6 runs in the first inning and never looked back. They will play either #8 Mississippi or Monmonth on Saturday evening at 6:00pm.

Jeff Mercer and the Wright State University Raiders traveled to Fort Worth, Texas to play the host TCU Horned Frogs. They didn't fare so well, losing 6-3. That drops WSU into the losers bracket, and they will play Texas A&M at 3pm on Saturday.

EVERYONE MUST ACCOMMODATE

Excellent post by Karl Giberson at Science & Sacred, the blog of BioLogos, called "God and Matter." He answers U of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne's contention that combining faith in God with scientific understanding results in a "hilarious goldmine of accommodationism."

Giberson makes the point that we ALL must make accommodations as we try to understand life and the universe.

But what about the accommodationism of materialists? How do they reconcile their materialism with the rationality of the world? It seems to me reality has to be grounded in one of two deeply mysterious foundations: God or matter. Each has its own set of questions. Theists wonder about the nature of God's existence, the problem of evil, how and why God acts in the world and why God has chosen to remain hidden from us. These are difficult questions and certainly must trouble thoughtful believers. But don't materialists have another set of mysteries? Don't they have to wonder about the nature of physical existence? Why is there something rather than nothing? Why are the laws of nature so rational? Why is our species so religious? Is the world just a big pointless accident?

Don't let the materialistic worldview back you into a corner and make you think theists are the only ones who must face troublesome intellectual problems. "Material alone plus time plus chance" has plenty of its own. In my view, even more troublesome.

A GREAT WEEK FOR OUR FRIENDS

It was quite a week for the Mercer family—no, not ours but those with whom we have become extended family—dear friends of ours here in our community of Franklin, Indiana.

On Thursday, May 21, the first annual Small Victories Charity Golf Tournament was held in memory of Daniel Mercer, on what would have been his 21st birthday. Daniel died three years ago on Memorial Day, after a long, courageous battle with brain cancer. His life, death, and the subsequent charitable works that have been done in his honor have been an inspiration to all of us here in Franklin. His parents, Jeff and Pam, hosted a wonderful event that raised thousands of dollars for at-risk youth here in central Indiana. Thanks to all who participated and helped in so many ways!

To read Daniel's full story, go to the Small Victories website and order a copy of the book that details his remarkable, if all too brief, life.

Then, over the weekend their oldest son, Jeff Mercer and his baseball team from Wright State University battled to win the Horizon League Conference tournament and earned a berth in the field of 64 on the Road to Omaha for the NCAA Division I baseball championship.

And this just a week after Jeff had been named the Horizon League Player of the Year!

In the opening round of the tourney, WSU will travel to Fort Worth, Texas to face the top-seeded TCU Horned Frogs on Friday, May 29 at 8:00 pm Eastern Time. Go Raiders!

We thank God for such a blessed, exciting, and happy week for our friends!

A Christian Apologizes to Atheists

Rev. William Cwirla is a Lutheran pastor who is known for his direct teaching and defense of the truth. He and Craig Donofrio host a podcast called "The God-Whisperers" that is worth your time. Cwirla's blog is always good reading as well.

Today, I read a post there that I admire greatly and commend to you. It's called "Apologies to the Atheists." Christians who tend toward culture warrior-ism ought to meditate on it deeply. Cwirla makes the point that getting angry in response to the rants of today's popular atheists only proves...

1. Our view of God is too small.
2. We've forgotten that our anger does not accomplish God's righteous purposes (James 1.20).
3. We've forgotten Jesus' call to love our enemies.

As Cwirla says,

...I don't know why the atheists are so angry. Perhaps they have good reason to be. I know that Christians aren't always noted for their manners, much less their Jesus-like compassion for those with whom they disagree, myself included. Maybe the angry atheists are just getting back at the playground bullies. Fair enough.

Ghandi once remarked, "I don't reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It's just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ." We can't expect the other guy to put down his sword while we are swinging ours. That's true for many situations. Don't expect someone who believes in nothing to put down his sword. We're called to go first. We claim to follow the One who said, "Turn the other cheek, walk the extra mile, bless those who hate you, pray for your persecutors."

UPDATE: What is the Gospel?

NOTE: This is an update to a previous post, which you can read HERE:


What is the Gospel? In my last post on this subject, I gave a common list of points that people often use in sharing Jesus with others. On his Jesus Creed blog, Scot McKnight suggests the following as a better, fuller account of the Biblical Good News that we are called to proclaim:

• God loves you and everyone else and has a plan for us: the kingdom community.
• But you and everyone else have a sin problem that separates you and everyone else from God, from yourselves, from one another, and from the good world God made for you.
• The good news is that Jesus lived for you, died for you, was raised for you, and sent the Spirit for you - so you all can live as the beloved community.
• If you enter into Jesus' story, by repentance and faith, you can be reconnected to God, to yourself, to others, and to this world.
• Those who are reconnected like this will live now as God's community and will find themselves eternally in union with God and communion with others.

See the differences? What do you think?

BECOMING THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD, part 3

²¹

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
2 Corinthians 5.21 (NRSV)

Jan Lembrecht's Sacra Pagina commentary on 2 Corinthians sets the immediate context for 5.21 as 2 Cor 5.11-21, which begins with the word "Therefore..." and announces a conclusion in Paul's argument.

In this verse Paul returns to his self-defense and plea. No longer the future common destination of all Christians, but the actual situation—his strained relations with the Corinthians—will be treated.

"Self-defense and plea."
Lembrecht's observations answer a major weakness in N.T. Wright's interpretation of 2 Cor 5.21. Wright correctly identifies the primary theme of this portion of the letter as a defense and theological explanation of Paul's apostleship. What he does not emphasize is the APPEAL that Paul is making to the Corinthians on the basis of this defense. Wright therefore interprets 2 Cor 5.21 as a further element in Paul's description of his own apostolic ministry, when in fact it is more likely linked to the challenge he is delivering to the wayward church.

"We and you"
One way to grasp the flow of this passage is to note the interplay between "we" ("us"), and "you," and broader terms such as "the world" or "all" in the passage.

Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, WE try to persuade others; but WE ourselves are well known to God, and I hope that WE are also well known to YOUR consciences. WE are not commending ourselves to YOU again, but giving YOU an opportunity to boast about US, so that YOU may be able to answer those who boast in outward appearance and not in the heart. For if WE are beside ourselves, it is for God; if WE are in OUR right mind, it is for YOU.

For the love of Christ urges US on, because WE are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. And he died for all, so that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died and was raised for them. ^12131415

16From now on, therefore, WE regard no one from a human point of view; even though WE once knew Christ from a human point of view, WE know him no longer in that way. So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled US to himself through Christ, and has given US the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to US.

So WE are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through US; WE entreat YOU on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him WE might become the righteousness of God.

^1718192021

Viewed like this, we can see that Paul's statements break down into three types:

1. Words about the apostles and their ministry
2. Words about what God has done for the world
3. Words about, and directed personally to, the Corinthians

In particular, the words in the first and final paragraphs are personal words about and to the Corinthian situation—they form PAUL'S APPEAL TO THE CHURCH. Note how the "you" texts are found only in these paragraphs.

That means that the final "we" in this passage (in 5.21) is different than all the other "we's" that come earlier. In every other instance, the "we" refers to the apostles and their ministry. But the final "we" grows out of Paul's personal appeal to the church and links them together. If the verse is a creedal statement or line from a hymn that Paul is quoting, as I believe it is, then this solidifies the idea that he is not narrowly referring to the apostles here, but to all Christians.

2Cor 5.21 functions as the REASON for Paul's appeal in v. 20—"We entreat you on behalf of Christ—be reconciled to God."

Next time, we'll sum up...

BECOMING THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD, part 2

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
2 Corinthians 5.21 (NRSV)

In his commentary on 2 Corinthians, Ralph Martin notes that, "the thought of Christians 'becoming the righteousness of God in him [Christ]' is not paralleled elsewhere in Paul." This and other observations lead him to conclude that Paul has included traditional materials about God's reconciliation into 1Cor 5.18-21.

Verse 21, in particular, may be a creedal statement or hymn fragment, which likely reflects Isaiah 53.10-11, about the Suffering Servant who would be made a sin offering, the Righteous One who would make many righteous by bearing their iniquities.

Further, he observes that the emphasis of 5.21 is not on the justification language, but rather on the simple idea of substitution and exchange. (Martin does say, however, that other aspects of the passage, which may indicate Paul's own hand interpreting and applying the traditional materials, cast a light on v. 21 that mirrors Paul's usage elsewhere.)

Yet another aspect of this passage is the way Paul uses evangelistic language to deal with a pastoral situation in a church. "The call [be reconciled to God] is issued with the Corinthian congregation and its pastoral problems in view, and should primarily be interpreted in that context." Paul uses language normally directed to call people to saving faith in Christ and applies it to believers, to impress upon them the ongoing implications of living as reconciled people in right relationship with God.

So, what we have in 2 Corinthians 5.21 is...

1. A creedal statement about Christ's substitutionary sacrifice that brings us righteousness,
2. In a context about being reconciled to God,
3. Which is addressed to a church, not those who need to come to initial faith in Christ.

More to come...

Comments always welcome!

Becoming the Righteousness of God

Crucifixion
Giotto di Bondone, 1304-1306

I have been reading N.T. Wright’s new book, Justification: God’s Plan & Paul’s Vision. It is a well-written defense of certain aspects of the so-called “new perspective” on Paul, which has caused a great deal of controversy, especially among those who hold traditional (“old perspective”) Reformed and Lutheran views of justification by faith. More on that debate another time.

For this post, I want to focus on a verse that has become central to the controversy—2 Corinthians 5.21. This has always been a favorite verse of mine. I have considered it to be one of those great summary texts, which express the Gospel message in a nutshell.

Here it is in the NRSV translation:

For our sake he (God) made him (Christ) to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

The immediate context for this verse is the section that runs from verses 18-21. This passage has as its focus the ministry of Paul as a “minister of reconciliation,” and here is how he develops that focus:

• God reconciled the apostles to himself through Christ.
• God then gave them the ministry of reconciliation.
• Their message is that God reconciled the world to himself through Christ, that he did not count their trespasses against them, and that the apostles are the authorized proclaimers of this message.
• Therefore, the apostles are God’s ambassadors and God is making his appeal through them.
• And so, Paul appeals to them to be reconciled to God for Christ’s sake.

I think it best to interpret 2 Cor 5.21 as the CONCLUSION to this emphasis on Paul's ministry. It states the Gospel truth the apostles proclaim that leads to reconciliation with God.

2 Cor 5.21 is an expansion of what Paul introduced in v.19—that God reconciled the world to himself and did not count their trespasses against them. Some commentators think Paul may be quoting a creedal statement of the church that sums up what Christ has done for us. If so, this solidifies the interpretation that Paul's purpose here is to state the apostolic message in concise form.

The traditional interpretation of 2 Cor 5.21 is represented by this quote from Phil Johnson in his blog post, “The Great Exchange”:

Here is the apostle Paul's most succinct statement about the meaning of the cross. This could be the shortest, simplest verse among many in the Pauline epistles that make the meaning of justification inescapable: "He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

That text is all about the atoning work of Christ. Its meaning can be summed up in a single principle: substitution. It describes an exchange that took place through the atonement that Christ offered—our sin for Christ's righteousness. He took the place of sinners so that they might stand in His place as a perfectly righteous man.

Notice the graphic language: He was made sin (that's the very epitome of all that is despicable and odious), so that we might be made righteousness (that's everything that is good and pure and acceptable in God's estimation). This was the exchange: our sin for His righteousness. Our sin charged to His account; His righteousness credited to our account....

Now, N.T. Wright takes a radically different approach in interpreting this text. Trying to remain faithful to the context, which focuses on Paul as a minister of reconciliation and an ambassador for Christ, he takes the phrase, “that we might become the righteousness of God,” as synonymous with these other vocational descriptions. So, it turns out something like this: “God made Christ, who knew no sin, to be made a sin-offering for us, so that we (the apostles) might become (representatives of) the covenant faithfulness (i.e. righteousness) of God.”

I understand Wright's concern to respect the context, but I don’t think his is the best reading of 5.21 in relation to its context. I believe it makes more sense to see it as a summary statement of the message that the apostles bring as God’s ambassadors. This interpretation fits the context just as well. Wright's view seems forced.

Even though I don't accept that position, nevertheless, on other grounds this verse does present problems for the traditional view. Most notably, what are we to make of the verb, “become” in the second half of the "great exchange" described here. What does it mean that, “in him we...BECOME the righteousness of God”?

The Lutheran and Reformed understanding, based on the economic concept of imputation, is that our sin is placed on Christ’s account and counted against him, and in exchange his righteousness (the merit earned by his sinless life) is reckoned to our account. This "double imputation" leads to a change in the believer's status. We are declared righteous; our legal position before God the Judge is changed from that of "sinner" to that of “righteous.” Imputation does not describe an actual change within us, but a change in our legal standing before the Divine Court. Justification is a forensic matter. We are acquitted of any charges of law-breaking, and furthermore, God declares us perfectly righteous.

This traditional Protestant view has been defended against other interpretations of justification, such as that of Roman Catholicism, which holds that justification consists of a real, interior change in a person—imparted righteousness or infused grace—rather than an external legal transaction.

It is at this point that 2 Corinthians 5.21 causes Protestants problems. Listen again to the text:

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

If Paul wanted to describe justification as a declaration of righteousness based upon imputation, would he have said, “that in him we might become the righteousness of God”? Wouldn’t it make more sense to say something like, “that in him we might be declared righteous by God,” or “that in him we might receive righteousness (i.e. a righteous status) from God”?

What does it mean to “BECOME the righteousness of God”?

Please share your thoughts and the insights you have gained from your own study as I work through this text in the days ahead and try to grasp Paul's meaning.

DEFINING SPIRITUAL MATURITY

Green Ears of Wheat
Van Gogh, 1888

Some of you may have heard about the latest poll from The Barna Group on spirituality, which produced this headline, " Here is the introductory paragraph to their findings:

America may possess the world’s largest infrastructure for nurturing human spirituality, complete with hundreds of thousands of houses of worship, thousands of parachurch organizations and schools, and seemingly unlimited products, resources and experts.

Yet, a new study from the Barna Group identifies an underlying reason why there is little progress in helping people develop spiritually: many churchgoers and clergy struggle to articulate a basic understanding of spiritual maturity. People aspire to be spiritually mature, but they do not know what it means. Pastors want to guide others on the path to spiritual wholeness, but they are often not clearly defining the goals or the outcomes of that process.

They found "five challenges" with regard to the subject of spiritual maturity:

1. Most Christians equate spiritual maturity with following the rules.
2. Most churchgoers are not clear what their church expects in terms of spiritual maturity.
3. Most Christians offer one-dimensional views of personal spiritual maturity.
4. Most pastors struggle with feeling the relevance as well as articulating a specific set of objectives for spirituality, often favoring activities over attitudes.
5. Pastors are surprisingly vague about the biblical references they use to chart spiritual maturity for people.

The director of the research project pointed out the implications of their findings:

America has a spiritual depth problem partly because the faith community does not have a robust definition of its spiritual goals. The study shows the need for new types of spiritual metrics. One new metric might be a renewed effort on the part of leaders to articulate the outcomes of spiritual growth. Another might be the relational engagement and accountability that people maintain. Of course, spirituality is neither a science nor a business, so there is a natural resistance to ascribing scientific or operational standards to what most people believe is an organic process. Yet, the process of spiritual growth is neither simplistic nor without guidelines, so hard work and solid thinking in this arena is needed.

What are we to make of these findings?

Art Show Enjoyment

My son in college took a Painting I class this semester, and had a few paintings displayed at the Franklin College Art Show tonight. This picture above was done as a group project by all the students in that introductory class. Very impressive!

What is the GOSPEL?

To many people, this is the Gospel message that we should share with others:

1. God created you to live in relationship with him.
2. However, you have a sin problem that has separated you from God.
3. Jesus died to save you from your sins.
4. If you put your trust in him, he will forgive your sins, you will become God's child, and you will go to heaven when you die.

Is there anything wrong with this "Gospel"?

I'd love to hear what you think.

WHY I AM NOT A CULTURE WARRIOR...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: When it comes to the culture wars, I am a conscientious objector.

Since the 1970's evangelicalism in America has taken to getting involved in public cultural activism and the political sphere with unprecedented vigor. Evangelicals have followed the voices of religious leaders like Francis Schaeffer, Jerry Falwell, D. James Kennedy, and James Dobson to raise their voices in the public debate about such issues as abortion, the erosion of personal morality especially as portrayed in the entertainment media, and the gay rights movement. In the process, evangelical Christianity became so connected to the conservative wing of the Republican party that at times the two seemed indistinguishable. This involvement had its high water mark in the presidency of George W. Bush and the Republican domination of Congress.

As a result of this evangelical embrace of a culture war approach to their mission in the world, churches, pastors, and individual Christians have been swept up into having to choose sides on many complex issues and to adopt a "Christ against culture" mentality. This has coincided with the development of an entire Christian subculture, which in my view has isolated believers from their neighbors and genuine redemptive interaction with the world.

Thus, evangelicals find themselves in the equivalent of spiritual trench warfare. We are dug in to our positions, separated from our "enemies," seeing things only from one perspective, and having no real contact with those on the other side except to bombard them relentlessly. Doesn't sound like a Great Commission lifestyle to me!

As Michael Spencer observes on his Internet Monk blog:

Every day I listen to and read Christians whose consideration of other persons is on the basis of politics and cultural conflict. Not the Gospel. Their anger and frustration dominates, not the Gospel.

Frankly, I don't want any part of that approach. And so I've decided to conscientiously object to that path of life and "ministry."

Here are some of the reasons I've gone AWOL...

(1) The culture war approach assumes the position that America is somehow different than other nations in our manifest destiny, a "Christian" land that must be "saved" and "brought back" to its Christian "roots."

In the minds of those who assume this, there is an idea of some kind of vague Eden that once existed in our nation when people all went to church, lived moral lives, and the government supported the teachings of Christ. 'Twas never so.

(2) The culture war approach holds that the media is the arena in which we should fight our battles, that it accurately represents the reality of the situation on the ground, and that therefore we must make our voice be heard through the media in order to win peoples' hearts and minds.

The simple fact is that most people listen to broadcasts that confirm their beliefs, not challenge them. You won't find the conservatives lining up to see the latest Michael Moore or Bill Maher film. Nor will you pass many liberals listening to Rush in their cars or catch them watching Fox News at night. Culture warriors generally preach to the choir.

But that's not the only problem. By moving to a media-driven strategy, Christians have become conditioned to seek the spectacular and forsake the down-to-earth path our Savior teaches us to take--the small, seemingly insignificant, seed-planting approaches of loving our neighbors in the context of real daily life. That is the mystery of how the Kingdom comes and how the world is changed.

(3) The culture war approach relies on political machinery as a primary weapon to restore righteousness to the land.

This means we have allowed the world to choose the arena, the weapons, the rules, the referees, and the definitions of what it means to "win" or "lose" in the conflict. In addition, it makes Christians vulnerable to the temptations of power, which are among the least understood among us.

(4) The culture war approach teaches us to fear, dislike, oppose, and look down on our neighbors rather than lay down our lives for them in sacrificial love.

It pits us "against" them, when the Incarnation teaches us to be "with" them.

(5) The culture war approach leads to Christians unwisely choosing our battles and showing a misleading face to the world.

Must a person have "correct" political or cultural opinions before he can come to faith in Christ? The simple Good News of Jesus and his gracious salvation can become so mixed with righteous "positions" that the Gospel itself gets distorted.


IMHO, the culture war approach has a lot more in common with the way the Pharisees lived out the religious life and ministry than it does with our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles.

RANDOM THOUGHTS...

A few random thoughts that have been rolling around in my mind lately...

• When it comes to the culture war, I am a conscientious objector.

• I believe in sound doctrine; I believe even more in proper emphasis.

• Being with sinners is infinitely more important than being against them.

• If you want to have a healthy Christian mind, you should stop listening to talk radio and all the screamers out there—conservative and liberal alike.

• "Relevance" is a sham. Why don't churches try to be "relevant" to the poor and needy, those who live in inner city neighborhoods, the elderly, the mentally ill, the disabled, street people, and others on the fringes of society?
  

• Liturgical worship is not a style preference, and free church evangelicals who think it is betray that they don't understand worship.

• Few things hinder the growth of true holiness more than a strong emphasis on holiness.

• Few things portray the contrast between small town community and suburban isolation more than the front porch and the backyard deck.

• One of the most neglected facts of life is found in James 1:20—"the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God." I don't think I have ever encountered a situation that has been made better in any way by anger.

• The older I get, the more I see that most situations could be improved simply by me shutting up and listening better.

• "God, I love baseball." (Roy Hobbs in The Natural)

• What I like about belonging to the Lutheran tradition = (1) An unceasing emphasis on the grace of God in Jesus Christ, (2) Liturgical worship, (3) Theology that is pastoral in emphasis rather than doctrinaire.

• Bob Dylan's last few albums reveal that he has taken the role of a wise old bluesman, speaking our pain, lust, and disillusionment with a growl and a wry smile.

• The most important things rarely scream at us, and often go unnoticed because we pay so much more attention to the less important things.
  

ROOKIE UPDATE...

Austin pops out to end the inning...



Hey, at least he ran it out!

Red Sox (the good guys) 15, White Sox 6.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED: BioLogos

I am not an expert in any of the sciences, but I have been interested in the culture war that has been a staple of American society between Biblical Christianity and evolution. I was schooled to be a young-earth creationist, intellectually breastfed on books like The Genesis Flood. I never thought too deeply about the issues, and mostly stayed away from the fray when I was a pastor. It was only when I began studying Genesis seriously that my views began to emerge.

This is not the normal path that those who come to question creationism take. The stereotypical student who comes to reject the fundamentalist view becomes a questioner through considering scientific evidence. However, my doubts were born from studying Scripture! Genesis is so much richer and deeper than the bare literalist explanation. The creation narratives also fit within a larger work, the Torah, an interpretive context that most fundamentalists fail to consider adequately.

Now, esteemed scientist and believer Francis Collins has established a foundation with an excellent website that attempts to provide an alternative to the culture war approach of both atheistic and Christian fundamentalists. It's called BioLogos, and here is its mission...

The BioLogos Foundation promotes the search for truth in both the natural and spiritual realms, and seeks to harmonize these different perspectives.

It is a well-designed and well-written site that seeks to answer many of the questions that arise when one tries to take both the Bible and science seriously.

You can also check out the blog that complements the site at Science and the Sacred.

Highly recommended, even if you don't agree. BioLogos is a fine example of thoughtful, careful, and irenic scholarship.

WHY LITURGY?

Good post by Lutheran Rev. William Cwirla on The Top Ten Reasons We Use the Liturgy. Here's the list. Check out his blog for details.

1. It shows our historic roots.
2. It serves as a distinguishing mark.
   
3. It is both Theocentric and Christocentric.
   
4. It teaches.
   
5. It is transcultural.
   
6. It is repetitive in a good way.
   
7. It is corporate.
   
8. It rescues us from the tyranny of the “here and now.”
   
9. It is external and objective.
   
10. It is the Word of God.

I find the last point one of his most interesting. Critics of liturgical worship often claim that their churches are more "Biblical". However, they fail to realize several obvious facts:

• The Bible itself is filled with liturgical materials, in both OT and NT. This shows that God's people have always worshiped in a liturgical fashion.

• The Bible portrays God's people worshiping through liturgy. A simple example may be found in Acts 2.42: "They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." Note especially that they used "the prayers"—that is, the set liturgical prayers that they had learned in synagogue and temple worship. I find it interesting that this liturgical text describes the practice of the Spirit-filled church soon after Pentecost. Those who critique liturgical worship because they say it does not allow for the freedom of the Spirit have a problem here.

• The liturgy is filled with Scripture. More Scripture is read, prayed, sung, and referenced in one liturgical service than in an entire season of services in most free worship congregations. As Cwirla notes, the liturgy IS the Word of God spoken for and by God's people, not simply a "service" in which the Word is included.

A Rookie to Watch...

If you would like to follow Austin's season, you can check out his baseball page at:

http://austinrookieleague2009.shutterfly.com.

RED SOX NATION...

Our grandson Austin starts his Little League career tomorrow. He is playing on the Rookie League Red Sox.

Of course, this makes grandma especially happy, since she grew up in New England, rooted for those great Red Sox teams of the 60's and 70's, and joined with Red Sox nation in celebrating their World Series victories in 2004 and 2007.

To get ready for a season of following our local rookie Red Sox, tonight we watched the ESPN Classic broadcast of game six of the 1975 World Series between the Red Sox and the Reds, one of the greatest baseball games ever played. Carlton Fisk delivered the decisive blow in the bottom of the 12th, using every ounce of body english he had to keep the ball fair as it hit the foul pole above the Wall at Fenway.

Go, Red Sox!

EVANGELICALISM'S PROSPERITY GOSPEL PROBLEM

Well, well, it's Easter season. God's people are rejoicing in the risen Savior, meditating on the awesome mystery of his finished work that conquered sin, death, and hell, and provided his followers with a glimpse of the new heavens and new earth in his own risen state.

Jesus' resurrection and subsequent appearances restored and reassured his disciples in their faith, challenged and corrected their inadequate conceptions of who he is and what he came to do, thrilled their hearts and initiated a process of awakening and renewal that climaxed when Jesus ascended into heaven and then poured out the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, empowering the newly born church to boldly proclaim the Good News of Christ the Messiah, Savior of the world.

This is what Easter is about, right?

It's about Jesus, raised from the dead. It's about...
²³⁴

"the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord..."

Romans 1.1-4

Of all the events in Scripture that are about Jesus, and not about me, the Easter story of Christ's resurrection and appearances has to be at the top of the list. The entire focus is on Jesus.

But wait. A new book has unlocked the secrets of the resurrection accounts! PATH OF MIRACLES: The Seven Life-Changing Principles that Lead to Purpose and Fulfillment, by Samuel Rodriguez, tells readers that the real significance of the resurrection lies in seven principles that show us how to unlock the power within us so that we might achieve a happy, successful life. Read for yourself...

Prepare yourself; your life is about to change.

You are about to discover the way to a life full of accomplishment, achievement, and attainment, of realization, reward, and prosperity. Of healthy and happy relationships, and lasting love. Of satisfying work and success on the job. Of building wealth and financial freedom.

Right now.

This book will show you how. I will be your guide.

...God has a marathon of miracles waiting for you to enjoy right now, in this lifetime, and the seven simple principles in this book will show you how to unlock the power within you, and secure those treasures, right here, right now.

...The seven principles in this book activate heaven so we can live heaven right here. We can experience heaven here on Earth.

This is such transparently awful theology, such impossibly bad exegesis and use of Scripture, such an indefensibly cruel collection of undeliverable promises to the hungry and hurting among us that one might be tempted just to laugh it off as the pitiful sideshow of some insignificant snake-oil salesman.

However, the book's author is the president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference (NHCLC), America's largest Hispanic Christian organization, and was identified by the Wall Street Journal as one of four Latino leaders who are most influential in our nation's politics. The organization recently entered into a strategic partnership with Liberty University. The book's forward was written by respected evangelical leader, Jim Wallis. A blurb on the back flap was written by the chairman of the Board of Trustees for Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, a leading evangelical institution.

Evangelicalism has a "prosperity Gospel" problem. When an evangelical author who heads an evangelical organization, who is praised by leading evangelicals, writes a book that promotes said "Gospel" with such flagrant disregard for the Bible and such in-your-face enthusiasm, can there be any meaning left to the word "evangelical"?

Most certainly NOT recommended for your Easter season reading.

Reflections from the Bible Belt

While volunteering at my son's public high school for a band competition today, I noticed various motivational signs and banners posted around the building.

CHARACTER:
It's who you are when no one's looking.

CHARACTER:
Each person must live his life as a model for others

There were signs for "respect," "honor," "knowledge" (you'd expect that one), "responsibility," "leadership," and other moral virtues and practices. Near the main lobby, a prominent display case held pictures of those who had won the "Set a Good Example" award. This award, sponsored by a local family in memory of their son, honors young people who show exemplary character, leadership, and who serve as role models for their fellow students.

I know many of the teachers, coaches and administrators in the school, and it is clear that these signs and honors are not just for decoration. The qualities represented are actively promoted and urged upon students and the entire school community.

Of course, I am thrilled to have had my children attend a public school that seeks to foster moral character as well as academic and extra-curricular achievement. And this is not surprising to us. We live in a small Midwestern town that is filled with churches and conservative folks, surrounded by an entire region of such communities. A "Bible-belt," you might say.

Which got me thinking. If you mixed in a few "Jesus" words and a couple of hymns or praise songs, what I've seen at our son's public high school would represent something not dissimilar to many churches I've experienced around here. You have a community of caring people, an emphasis on learning, discipline, moral education, all served up via a full program of activities for having fun, building community, and encouraging growth.

What does that sound like to you?

My question is, "How should Christ-followers think about this situation?"

• Does it show that the Christian message has infiltrated local culture to such an extent that our secular institutions reflect the light of the Gospel, at least in moral terms?

• Or does it show that churches (at least in "Bible-belt" regions) have become mirrors of American conservative culture, serving as little more than reflections of the God and country, family values, law and order, bourgeois middle class ethos? Have many congregations become "Christian activity centers" that primarily serve to promote morality and the "righteous" status quo?

• Perhaps it is some of both? What is positive about this state of affairs, and what may be negative, even harmful to the growth of genuinely Biblical Christianity?

Furthermore, when Christ and culture seem to complement rather than radically oppose one another in a given setting, in what ways is the church called to be counter-cultural, and in what ways may it cooperate with the institutions in that community to fulfill the Missio Dei?

Who comes to church?

Will Willimon reminds us that there is only one group of people that attends church services. You can read his observations HERE.

The five minutes that made me a Dave Matthews fan...

MAYBE THE BEST BLOG ARTICLE EVER...

The Gospel is for Christians.

Unfortunately, many Christians don't believe this and don't hear it often enough. For example, listen to the testimony of noted evangelical author Jerry Bridges...

My story is not unusual. Evangelicals commonly think today that the gospel is only for unbelievers. Once we're inside the kingdom's door, we need the gospel only in order to share it with those who are still outside. Now, as believers, we need to hear the message of discipleship. We need to learn how to live the Christian life and be challenged to go do it. That's what I believed and practiced in my life and ministry for some time. It is what most Christians seem to believe.

As I see it, the Christian community is largely a performance-based culture today. And the more deeply committed we are to following Jesus, the more deeply ingrained the performance mindset is. We think we earn God's blessing or forfeit it by how well we live the Christian life.

Today, I read what is perhaps the best and most important expression of the Gospel for Christians that I have seen in the blogosphere. You can find it HERE, at Michael Spencer's Internet Monk blog.

PLEASE READ iMONK'S POST!

• Read it again.
• Meditate on it.
• Pray about it.
• Discuss it with your friends and family and fellow church members.
• Ask your pastor to read it.
• Link to it on your blog.
• Print it out and pass it around.
  
• Carry a copy in your Bible
  

We must restore the Gospel message to the church. We must banish the performance-based culture. We must declare war on the moralistic therapeutic deism that is taking over the mindset of American evangelicals and their congregations.

May I never boast of anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. (Galatians 6.14)

RECOMMENDED READING: Mark Galli on Worship

Mark Galli is an evangelical in good standing, the senior managing editor of Christianity Today, evangelicalism's leading magazine. He is also a member of the Anglican tradition. This combination equips him to speak with true credibility on the subject of worship to other evangelicals. Galli has done so by writing an articulate and winsome book, called Beyond Smells & Bells: The Wonder and Power of Christian Liturgy.

I may write more about Galli's fine overview of liturgical worship in future posts, but today I will let him speak for himself in a passage about "relevance" that is one of the most powerful in the book.

The liturgy asks us to rethink what we mean by "relevant" worship.

For example, it is not an accident that when we think about making church more relevant, we usually have only one group in mind. In North America, that usually means twenty-somethings and young families. For one, twenty-somethings are some of the hardest people to attract to church, and two, only when they start raising families do they begin to return to church. It's a perfect target audience for a struggling or new church to strive to reach.

...self-identified relevant churches, by their nature, limit a full-bodied expression of the church. In our worse moments, this approach appeals to immature motives. For example, I am currently in what many people consider a relevant and even "cool" church, and I have to admit I am proud of it. It's an interesting contrast to note how few churches that want to "reincarnate the gospel within a specific cultural context" want to do so among the poor, the homeless, welfare moms, drug-addicted men, or those trapped in nursing homes and convalescent hospitals.

This is one reason I thank God for the liturgy. The liturgy does not target any age or cultural sub-group. It does not even target this century (it does not assume, as we moderns are tempted to do, that this is the best of all possible ages, the most significant era of history). Instead, the liturgy presents a form of worship that transcends our time and place. Its earliest forms took shape in ancient Israel, and its subsequent development occurred in a variety of cultures and sub-cultures—Greco-Roman, North African, German, Frankish, Anglo-Saxon. The liturgy has been meaningfully prayed by bakers, housewives, tailors, teachers, philosophers, priests, monks, kings, and slaves. As such, it has not been shaped to meet any particular group's needs. It seeks only to enable people—people in general—to see God.

This is top-notch thinking, communicated with clarity. Would that other evangelicals (indeed, all of God's people) might learn to think about meeting with God with such Biblical, theological, and cultural insight.

Highly recommended.

What Passes for the Gospel Nowadays...

It's Holy Week, and the local churches are advertising their special services and inviting the community to attend. Today, I received an offer in the mail to visit a new nondenominational church in town ("A free gift for first time guests!). The postcard they sent was slick and attractive, if a bit impersonal. However, what truly saddened me was its message.

Here is the "Good News" they're preaching this Easter...

FIND THE POWER TO RISE AGAIN AT CHRIST'S CHURCH

Jesus didn't let a nearly two-ton stone keep him down; that Resurrection Sunday he moved the stone and rose from the grave. Are you carrying a weight that feels like two tons: pain, hardship, unmet expectations, or guilt? If you feel exhausted or trapped, join us at Christ's Church and learn how to experience the power of the resurrection in your life. Your burdens can be lifted—a relationship with God can roll them away just like the stone rolled away from Jesus' tomb at the resurrection.

The front side of the card portrays a stone with the words, "Doubt, worry, fear, anger, pain—He still moves stones."

THIS is the message of Easter?

Help! Someone has taken the "evangel" out of "evangelical"!

Thought-provoking Stuff on Religious "Stuff"

iMonk takes evangelicals to task for their criticisms of Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians in the area of devotion to religious objects. Here's a sample from his riff...

Humans are religious. In their religious practices, they endow objects, associations, places, persons and certain sense experiences with meaning. They use these objects, etc. to focus upon God’s presence in the world. All that Catholics/Orthodox do is come out and tell you they believe God mediates his presence through matter. We believe the exact same thing, and can outdo our brothers and sisters in the gear department most days. (I haven’t seen Catholic amusement parks and their bookstores are not quite as numerous as Family Bookstores, Lifeway, etc.).

He's right. For years iconoclastic fundamentalists and evangelicals have looked down on their more liturgical brethren for their habits of worship, particularly when it comes to venerating sacred objects or surrounding themselves with material reminders of their faith. All the while, we've been doing the same thing and calling these objects "tools for witnessing," or something like that.

I encourage you to take a look at his post. Just click the link in the first paragraph to access it.

What do you think?

Just in time for Opening Day...

Be sure to check out Jesus Creed today, where Scot McKnight has a post so funny that I would fall down laughing if I weren't hunched over crying my eyes out.

"Be of good courage, and wait, O longsuffering Cubs fan!"

Pentecost Remix?

I'm no expert on Rick Warren or the ministry of Saddleback Church. I've read a couple of his books and found them unremarkable. He seems to have the facility that many American megachurch pastors have—he can condense the complex and incomprehensible mysteries of God into concise formulas and communicate them clearly, outlining simple pathways for people to follow. He puts the cookies on the bottom shelf.

Then of course, his organization has all the bells and whistles of a superb megachurch. He is committed to missions and making the world a better place. He has also used his well-built platform to garner nationwide public respect through a more moderate and civil approach to evangelical politics. Rick Warren is the epitome of a successful American entrepreneur Christian leader.

But...if you want to get a taste of the kind of shameless marketing, promotion, and religious salesmanship used by Warren and Saddleback, just read Pastor Rick's latest edition of his News and Views. Stand amazed at the church's latest effort to—yes, you heard it right—stage a second Pentecost. Apparently, if enough people will just take four easy steps and become members of Saddleback, divine history will be repeated!

When you read Pastor Rick's upbeat appeal, can you find...

• An extremely truncated Gospel message?
• An instant catechism (discipleship) process? (In fact, if I read it correctly, on this day only you even get a "discount" on the normal time required for the membership class!)
  
• Horrendous sacramental theology that focuses on rebaptism of those already baptized in other Christian churches?
• A "pastor" who is apparently such a celebrity that only on rare special occasions is it possible for the hoi polloi to meet him? (On this day, you can even have your picture taken with him!)
  
• Free giveaways?

It's history! It's fun! You're the greatest! You can do it all in one Saturday!

Sigh.

The Preschooler and the Pistol

Recently, here in Indianapolis, a four-year-old was taken by emergency personnel to the hospital with a gunshot wound. At first, it was not clear what had happened. The family told police the child had shot himself. The police weren't sure that the preschooler was strong enough to have pulled the trigger of the suspected weapon by himself, and so they wondered if someone else had done it, perhaps a family member.

It turned out the family was correct. The little boy lived in a home with other relatives, at least one of whom had several guns. This uncle left one of his pistols on a bedside table and the child discovered it there. The preschooler picked up, played with it, and shot himself in the hand. Fortunately, his injuries were not life-threatening, though he did nearly sever one of his fingers. All in all, the whole family was lucky, including the little boy's two siblings, neither of whom were hurt.

In evangelicalism, pastors too often play the part of the preschooler with the pistol. The Bible is a powerful, explosive tool. When its power is used with wisdom and love, it brings healing, comfort, direction, and salvation. It forms people and congregations into the image of Christ. When its power is used recklessly and without discernment, the Bible can hurt, divide, and destroy. You can blow your own hand off, or someone else's head.

A friend told me a sad story this week about her small-town church, an independent Bible-believing congregation that prides itself for standing on the Scriptures and not the doctrines of men. They have a young pastor who has been with them a few years now. A while ago, he came to the "Biblical conviction" that they were not running their congregation according to what the Bible teaches about church polity.

At the time, they had a joint board of elders and deacons, which included women deaconesses as well. The board made decisions together as leaders of the church. The pastor did a study and concluded that elders alone should rule the church, that deacons should not be included in the decision-making process, and that in any case, women should not be allowed a vote as leaders on church matters. So, he put the congregation through an extended process to change this, and ultimately got his way through a congregational vote to alter the bylaws.

My friend was one of the vocal minority who spoke against this, and the pastor let her know that her lack of support had been noted. She didn't tell me much about how others felt, or whether this situation threatened to divide the church. However, it was clear that she was troubled and concerned about the health of the church. And then she told me the kicker—while all this was going on, the pastor has been actively pursuing a position in another congregation. He will be leaving soon, right after taking my friend's church through this controversial process and forcing a change in the way they've done things for years.

I was reminded of the preschooler and the pistol. Here is a pastor who believes in the Bible, but does not appreciate its power, nor comprehend its wise use. His reckless application of God's Word has wounded rather than healed God's people. Now he's going to walk away and leave it to someone else to stop the bleeding.

Let me be clear—I am not criticizing the decision this church made. People of faith can differ on church polity and women in leadership and a thousand other matters, and have for centuries. No, my complaint is about a minister who does not understand Biblical priorities, who showed his lack of wisdom in elevating a matter that was of minor significance in the church so that it became a leading issue that now threatens to divide them.

This is another aspect of the authority problem in the evangelical world. We subscribe to Sola Scriptura ("Scripture alone") as our source of authority for faith and practice, but we have far too little appreciation for proper interpretation and wise application of the Bible's teaching. And too many churches and pastors, especially in the nondenominational or independent Christian world have little or no guidance in the process.

• In that autonomous congregation, which eschews "tradition," what theologically sound and historically proven practices were there to provide perspective, structure, and guidance to this pastor and the members of the congregation?

• In that small-town congregation, what pastoral mentor or overseer was available to tell the young minister, "Look, you may think you've discovered something in the Bible, but with regard to scriptural priorities, this is way down the list of things for a minister in your setting and situation to be concerned about."

• In that nondenominational congregation, what experience or counsel from the larger community of faith was available to help them work through an issue that other churches have dealt with already?

"Scripture Alone" does not mean "My Bible and Me Alone." Scripture is meant to be studied, interpreted, and applied within a community of faith that honors and respects history and tradition, the larger Body of Christ, and the wise counsel of respected spiritual overseers. Instead, we have too many maverick ministers recklessly taking what they find on the bedside table and firing into the crowd each Sunday.

Evangelicalism's Authority Problem

The Indianapolis Star ran an article this weekend about a man who confronted his pastor in the middle of the Sunday service. The man had evidence about a situation in which the minister was being accused of sexual harassment by a woman he had been counseling. While this was certainly a dramatic instance of how congregations handle ministerial problems, what caught my attention was the Star's observation about (lack of) accountability in autonomous congregations.

...at Hope Baptist and the growing legion of independent congregations with no denominational affiliation, there is no bishop ready to step in, no hierarchy waiting to conduct an investigation or hear an appeal, and no outside accountability.

In traditional denominations, disputes that are not settled within the congregation are funneled through a structured judicial process with long-established rules, said Carol Johnston, an associate professor of theology and culture at Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis. Don Gifford, superintendent of the Indiana District of the Assemblies of God, said he sees the additional layers of a denomination or a fellowship as additional accountability for everyone.

"All of us need to be under authority," he said.

But in recent decades, the traditional denominations have been in decline. As they have shrunk, many people have migrated to independent churches, which often are freer to move into growing population centers and have been quicker to embrace new worship and preaching styles attractive to younger generations.

The risk with being independent comes when the church is organized around the personality of a charismatic pastor who has much greater autonomy than his denominational brothers.

This is an important authority problem Protestants face, particularly with regard to independent, autonomous evangelical churches that have no authority-bearing traditions or practices, and no episcopal levels of oversight.

In the Star article, some of those interviewed said that there need not be a lack of accountability in such churches because boards of directors or deacons may function to provide it. However, the level of historical, theological, and pastoral understanding required to provide true oversight for a pastor or pastoral staff is usually minimal at best when it comes to the lay people appointed to such boards. In my experience, most board members are not even able to provide a knowledgeable annual evaluation of how the pastor is doing with his routine work, even when the local congregation and board have defined it! Imagine how unlikely it is that they would be able to provide skilled guidance in a time of crisis.

When we pursue a "start your own," "make it up as we go along," entreprenurial approach to ecclesiology and pastoral ministry, there are few safeguards. Every man does that which is right in his own eyes.

Houston, we have an authority problem.

AN EVANGELICAL'S LAMENT AND JOURNEY, The Missional Issue, Part 3

My first clear understanding of the missional nature of the church emerged when I was in seminary and pastoring a small church in suburban Chicago. It came to me in the form of two small books by Dr. Richard C. Halverson, called Between Sundays, and How I Changed My Thinking about the Church.

Dr. Halverson has a simple practical ecclesiology, one which I think is still being missed by the church in America...

• The church exists in two basic forms: (1) the church gathered, and (2) the church scattered.


• The first we might call the Sunday church; the second, the church "between Sundays".


• When the congregation gathers, it does so to do "church work"—the work that takes place among God's people, and which also includes maintaining and supporting the institution. When the church scatters, it does so to do "the work of the church"—fulfilling God's mission in Christ in the world.


• One primary purpose of the church's gathering is to equip the church to fulfill its mission when scattered throughout the week in various places where the routines of everyday life occur.
  

Today, a few pertinent quotes from Dr. Halverson to flesh this out a bit...

The Christian life is elliptical; it revolves around two foci--one an invitation and the other a commission. The invitation is that of Jesus Christ, "Come unto me...." The commision, also from Jesus Christ, is "Go ye into all the world...." The healthy Christian life revolves around the coming and the going. (How I Changed..., p.21)

He further observes that this "coming and going" lifestyle must be balanced. There are those who are always "coming"—who build church-centered lives and devote most of their time and attention to being involved with the Christian community. Others, perhaps disillusioned with the institution, are always "going"—devoting their lives to doing good in their community but neglecting the edifying fellowship of other believers.

However, these complementary spheres of Christian living are meant to balance and support one another...

If one were to begin from scratch to build a theology of evangelism and mission on the basis of what he found in the New Testament epistles, he would probably be impressed with the paucity of material upon which to build....

...the weight of the exhortation and instruction in the epistles has to do with the relationship of believer with believer in the community, in the body of Christ. The implication can be clearly drawn that when these relationships are right, i.e., when the brothers and sisters love one another and when they are abiding in Christ, evangelism and mission will be the normal and healthy result of such relationships....

...Here one does not find the churches organizing to reach the world with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But what one does find is the Gospel being scattered widely and rapidly because the church is in such a healthy condition that this can happen. (How I Changed..., pp. 63-65)

The true work of the church happens when this kind of congregation scatters and each member engages the world of his neighbors daily in the context of real life situations...

It became apparent that the work of the church is not what is done for the institution, the organization, the establishment. The real work of the church is what is done between Sundays when the church is scattered all over the metropolitan area where it is located—in homes, in schools, in offices, on construction jobs, in market places. This is the work of the church and it requires every single member. The responsibility of the pastor is to equip every member to do the work of the church wherever he is between Sundays. This radically alters the pastor's way of thinking about his responsibility to the congregation. No longer do they represent men and women who are to be mobilized to do the work of his ministry; but on the contrary, they have a ministry wherever they are and God has called the pastor to equip them for their ministry....

One of the reasons the institutional church has become irrelevant to the extent that it has in our contemporary life is that many Christians have become so busy in church work they have not had time to do the work of the church....

The view persists that the serious Christian, the one truly committed, will be active in the life of the religious institution. If he loves Christ he ought to be doing "something for the church." The program of the establishment is equated with service for Christ. As one does this he is "spiritual." In everything else, except as he may sporadically talk to someone in an effort to win him to Christ or get him into the church, he is "secular." The truth is, everything we do in the church organization, in the church building, in the church program ought to contribute to the church's effectiveness when it is not involved in the building or the program or the organization—when it is out in the world.

...In other words, the measure of the effectiveness of a congregation is not what one sees when the congregation is gathered, not the size of the building, nor the size of the budget, nor the size of the congregation or the Sunday school. The real measure of the effectiveness of the congregation is what happens when the congregation is not in the sanctuary or the Sunday school or meeting officially as boards or committees or councils. The measure of the effectiveness of any local congregation when it is gathered, is the measure of what that congregation is doing when it is dispersed. (How I Changed..., pp. 71-77)

Halverson summarizes the missional focus of the church in this succinct, earthshaking statement:

Think of it this way. The program of our church is everything all the members are doing between Sundays. (How I Changed..., p.106)

Why is this so earthshaking? Because it challenges the fundamental understandings and deeply ingrained practices of a vast majority of churches. In fact, I know of NO churches in my own experience that genuinely believe and act like this.

• Isn't the church's program what we announce in our bulletins, calendars, newsletters, and websites?
• Doesn't the program of the church consist of what we organize and oversee in order to fulfill God's mission in the world?

For the most part, NO.

The programmatic approach that most churches take says much more about our cultural commitments than it does about living out our Biblical calling to be Christ's people in the world.