taken from Precious Remedies Against Satan's Devices by thomas brooks a puritan born in england in the early 1600s.
THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY
to his most dear and precious ones, the sons and daughters of the Most High God,
over whom the Holy Ghost hath made him a watchman.
beloved in our dearest Lord,
Christ, the scripture, your own hearts and satan's devices
are the four prime things that should be first and most studied and searched.
if any cast off the study of these,
they cannot be safe here,
nor happy hereafter.
it is my work as a christian, but much more as i am a watchman,
to do my best to discovered the fullness of Christ,
the emptiness of the creature and the snares of the great deceiver;
which i have endeavoured to do in the following discourse,
according to that measure of grace which i have received from the Lord.
God once accepted a handful of meal for a sacrifice, (leviticus 2.2; 5.12)
and a gripe (foot: or handful exodus 25.4; 3526) of goat's hair for an oblation
and i know that you have not so 'learned the Father', as to despise 'the day of small things'
(zechariah 4.10).
beloved, satan being fallen from light to darkness, from felicity to misery,
from heaven to hell, from an angel to a devil,
is so full of malice and envy that he will leave no means unattempted,
whereby he may make all others eternally miserable with himself;
he being shut out of heaven and shut up
'under the chains of darkness till the judgment of the great day (jude 6),
makes use of all his power and skill to bring all the sons of men
into the same condition and condemnation with himself.
satan hath cast such sinful seed into our souls, that now he can no sooner tempt,
but we are ready to assent;
he can no sooner have a plot upon us, but he makes a conquest of us.
if he do5th but show men a little of the beauty and bravery (foot: finery) of the world,
how ready are they to fall down and worship him!
whatever sin the heart of man is most prone to that the devil will help forward.
if david by proud of his people, satan will provoke him to number them, that he may be yet prouder (II sam. 24)
if peter be slavishly fearful, satan will put him upon rebuking and denying of Christ,
to save his own skin (matt. 16.22; 26.69-75).
if ahab's prophets be given to flatter,
the devil will straightway become a lying spirit in the mouths of 400 of them
and they shall flatter ahab to his ruin (I kings 22).
if judas will be a traitor, satan will quickly enter into his heart,
and make him sell his master for money, which some heathens would never have done (john 13.2).
if ananias will lie for advantage, satan will fill his heart
that he may lie, with a witness, to the Holy Ghost. (acts 5.3).
satan loves to sail with the wind,
and to suit men's temptations to their conditions and inclinations.
if they be in p-prosperity, he will tempt them to deny God (prov. 30.9);
if they be in adversity, he will tempt them to distrust God;
if their knowledge be weak, he will tempt them to have low thoughts of God;
if their conscience be tender, he will tempt to scrupulosity;
if large, to carnal security;
if bold spirited, he will tempt to presumption;
if timorous, to desperation;
if flexible, to inconstancy; if stiff, to impenitency.
from the power, malice and skill of satan, doth proceed all
the soul killing plots, devices, stratagems and machinations that be in the world.
several devices he hath to draw souls to sin and several plots he hath to keep souls from all holy and heavenly services
and several stratagems he hath to keep souls from all holy and heavenly services
and several strategems he hath to keep souls in a
mourning, staggering, doubting and questioning condition.
...one while he will restrain from tempting,
that we may think ourselves secure and neglect our watch;
another while he will seem to fly,
that he may make us proud of the victory;
one while he will fix men's eyes on others' sins than their own,
that he may puff them up;
another while he may fix their eyes more on others' graces than their own,
that he may overwhelm them.
a man may as well tell the stars and number the sands of the sea,
as reckon up all the devices of satan;
yet those which are most considerable and by which he doth most mischief
to the precious souls of men,
are in the following treatise discovered and the remedies against them prescribed.
beloved, i think it necessary to give you and the world
a faithful account of the reasons moving me to appear in print...
1. because satan hath a greater influence upon men and higher advantages over them
(having the wind and the hill, as it were), than they think..
and the knowledge of his high advantage is the highway to disappoint him
and to render the soul strong in resisting and happy in conquering....
3. the strange opposition that i met with from satan, in the study of this following discourse,
hath put an edge upon my spirit,
knowing that satan strives mightily to keep those things from seeing the light,
that tend eminently to shake and break his kingdom of darkness
and to lift up the kingdom and glory of the Lord Jesus Christ....
my desires to you are, that you would make it your business to
study Christ,
His word,
your own hearts,
satan's plots
and eternity,
more than ever;
that ye would endeavour more to be
inwardly sincere than outwardly glorious
to live, than to have a name to live
that ye would labour with all your might to be thankful under mercies
and faithful in your places
and humble under divine appearances
and fruitful under precious ordinances....
A WORD TO THE READER
dear friend!
solomon bids us buy the truth (prov. 23.23) but doth not dell us what it must cost,
because we must get it though it be never so dear.
we must love it...every parcel of truth is precious as the filings of gold;
we must either live with it or die for it....
a man may lawfully sell his house, land and jewels,
but truth is a jewel that exceeds all price and must not be sold.
it is our heritage: (something that comes or belongs to one by reason of birth)
'Thy testimonies have i taken as an heritage for ever. psalm 119.111
...and now..read the work and receive this counsel from me.
first, thou must know that every man cannot be excellent, that yet may be useful.
an iron key may unlock the door of a golden treasure,
yea, iron can do some things that gold cannot.
secondly, remember, it is not hasty reading, but serious meditating upon holy and heavenly truths,
that make them prove sweet and profitable to the soul.
it is not the bee's touching of the flower that gathers honey,
but her abiding for a time upon the flower that draws out the sweet.
it is not he that most but he that meditates most,
that will prove the ..wisest and strongest christian.
thirdly, know that it is not the knowing nor the talking nor the reading man,
but the DOING man, that at last will be found the happiest man.
'if you know these things, blessed and happy are you if you do them.'...
reader if it be not strong upon thy heart to practise what thou readeest
TO WHAT END DOST THOU READ?
to increase thy own condemnation?
(foot. seneca liked not such as are..always about to live, but never begin.
if thy light and knowledge be not turned into practice,
the more knowing man thou art, the more miserable man thou wilt be in the day of recompense;
thy light and knowledge will more torment thee..in hell.
thy knowledge will be that rod that will eternally lash thee
and that scorpion that will for ever bite thee
and that worm that will everlastingly gnaw thee;
therefore read and LABOUR to know THAT THOU MAYEST DO.
or else thou art undone forever.
(foot: God loves, saith luther, the runner, not the questioner)
when demosthenes was asked what was the first part of an orator, what the second, what the third?
he answered, Action.....
INTRODUCTION
lest satan should get an advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices... II corinthians 2.11
paul encourages the corinthian believers to forgive and comfort the one who had repented
lest 'such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow v.7
satan going about to mix the detestable darnel (matt. 13.25) of desperation
with the godly sorrow of a pure, penitent heart.
it was a sweet saying of jerome,
'let a man grieve for his sin and then joy for his grief'.
that sorrow for sin that keeps the soul from looking towards the mercy seat
and that keeps Christ and the soul asunder
or that shall render the soul unfit for the communion of saints,
is sinful sorrow
in the 11th verse, he lays down another reason to work them
to show pity and mercy to the penitent sinner,
that was mourning and groaning under his sin and misery:
ie. lest satan should get an advantage of us:
for we are not ignorant of his devices....
lest satan should get an ADVANTAGE of us;
lest satan overreach us.
the word in the greek signifieth to have more than belongs to one.
the comparison is taken from the greedy merchant,
that seeketh and taketh all opportunities to beguile and deceive others.
satan is that wily merchant, that devoureth, not widows' houses, but most men's souls.
'we are not ignorant of satan's DEVICES' or plots or machinations or stratagems.
he is but a titular christian that hath not personal experience of satan's statagems,
his set and composed machinations, his artificially moulded methods
his plots, darts, depths...
THE PROOF OF THE POINT
for the proof of the point, take these few scriptures:
ephesians 6.11 - put on the whole armour of God,
that ye may be able to stand against the WILES of the devil...
1. it signifies such snares as are laid behind one,
such treacheries as come upon one's back at unawares.
it notes the methods or waylayings of that old subtle serpent,
who, like dan's adder 'in the path',
biteth the heels of passengers and thereby transfuseth his venom to the head and heart. genesis 49.17
the word signifies an ambushment or stratagem of war, whereby the enemy sets upon a man at unawares.
2. it signifies such snares as are set to catch one in one's road.
a man walks in his road and thinks not of it;
on a sudden he is catched by thieves or falls into a pit, etc.
3. it signifies such as are purposely, artificially, (here used with the sense of 'by the use of an artifice or trick'
and craftily set for the taking the prey at the greatest advantage that can be.
the greek signifies properly a waylaying (to await and accost unexpectedly), circumvention, or going about,
as they do which seek after their prey.
..so doth satan more hurt in his sheep's skin than by roaring like a lion.
take one scripture more for the proof of the point and that is in II timothy 2.26,
'and that they might recover themselves out of the snare of the devil,
who are taken captive by him at his will.
the greek word that is here rendered recover themselves,
signifies to AWAKEN themselves.
the apostle alludeth to one that is asleep or drunk,
who is to be awakened and restored to his senses
and the greek word that is here rendered 'taken captive', signifies to be taken alive.
the word is properly a warlike word and signifies to be taken alive,
as soldiers are taken alive in the wars or as birds are taken alive and ensnared in the fowler's net.
satan hath snares for the wise and snares for the simple;
snares for hypocrites and snares for the upright;
snares for generous souls and snares for timorous souls;
snares for the rich and snares for the poor;
snares for the aged and snares for youth.
happy are those souls that are not taken and held in the snares that he hath laid!
take one proof more and then i will proceed to the opening of the point and that is in rev. 2.24,
'but unto you i say and unto the rest in thyatira,
as many as have not this doctrine and which have not known the depths of satan, as they speak,
i will put upon you no other burden but to hold fast till i come'.
these poor souls called their opinions the depths of God,
when indeed they were the depths of satan.
you call your opinions depths and so they are,
but they are such depths as satan hath brought out of hell.
they are the whisperings and hissings of that serpent,
not the inspirations of God.
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Thursday, July 3, 2014
7.3.2014 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
an unequivocal 'no', a review by rachel marie stone on
'Is It My Fault? Hope and Heling for Those Suffering Domestic Violence by justines. and lindsey a. holcomb;
christianity today, 5,2014, p55.
i can't write about domestic violence without a nod to my current context:
i live in a small, impoverished country in sub saharan africa
where domestic abuse, including phsical and sexual violence agains women and girls,
is rampant.
women have few resources for getting out, getting safe and getting help.
one of my friends and colleagues-a minister in the largest protestant church in this country
-says churches are seldom able to address the issue.
domestic violence is considered more or less 'normal', she tells me
and clergy are inclined to dismiss it either as unimportant
or as something to which a God fearing woman should submit.
until i read (this book), i had no idea
that the leading cause of death for african american women ages 15 to 45
is murder at the hands of a partner.
nearly three out of four americans personally know someone who has faced domestic violence
(90% of the victims are women).
as the holcombs show the effects of domestic abuse are wide ranging,
unpredictable, severe and long lasting,
affecting both the women and their children.
boys witnessing domestic violence, for example, are twice as likely to become abusers themselves.
justin (a pastor and adjunct professor at reformed theological seminary)
and his wife, lindsey (a case manager at a domestic violence shelter),
answer the title's question with an unequivocal 'no'.
they also acknowledge that while' many victims believe clergy have the most potential to help them'
in fact '(clergy) are too often the least helpful and sometimes even harmful'.
indeed, years ago, i sat through lectures in which a bible professor insisted
that spousal abuse was not grounds for divorce
and that submission required enduring some forms of abuse.
a popular pastor theologian once made a similar suggestion in a Q&A session.
he said that if the household abuse is 'not requiring her to sin but simply hurting her',
then he thinks she can endure 'vberbal abuse for a season'
and 'perhaps being smacked one night' before going to the church for help.
he later clarified that women could seek help from the authorities if the situation warrants it).
by contrast, the holcombs are unapologetically bold,
refusing to minimize or dismiss any form of abuse in any circumstance.
following georgetown professor leo d. lefebure, the authors define abuse as
'the attempt of an individual or group to impose its will on others
through any nonverbal, verbal or physical means
that inflict psychological or physical injury'.
they offer sage and sensible advice (including a list of comprehensive resources in the appendices)
for sufferers and also for family, friends and ministry professionals
to whom victims may turn for help.
and they persuasively address distorted theologies
that are sometimes marshaled to defend abuse.
Is It My Fault? insists passionately on the sufficiency of God's grace
to strengthen and heal victims and survivors.
it also invokes the biblical category of lament.
the holcombs say professional help-including psychiatric medication and counseling
-in no way conflicts with finding healing through the gospel of grace.
victims of abuse are
invited by God to cry out for Him to do what he has promised to do:
destroy evil and remove everything that harms others and defames God's name'.
women facing domestic violence often feel that they have no good options:
they can honor God or report abuse;
they can rely on prayer and divine intervention or seek professional help.
rejecting false choices, (the authors) speak into the lives of such women with balance, compassion and biblical authority. (note: where does that authority appear in this review?)
'Is It My Fault? Hope and Heling for Those Suffering Domestic Violence by justines. and lindsey a. holcomb;
christianity today, 5,2014, p55.
i can't write about domestic violence without a nod to my current context:
i live in a small, impoverished country in sub saharan africa
where domestic abuse, including phsical and sexual violence agains women and girls,
is rampant.
women have few resources for getting out, getting safe and getting help.
one of my friends and colleagues-a minister in the largest protestant church in this country
-says churches are seldom able to address the issue.
domestic violence is considered more or less 'normal', she tells me
and clergy are inclined to dismiss it either as unimportant
or as something to which a God fearing woman should submit.
until i read (this book), i had no idea
that the leading cause of death for african american women ages 15 to 45
is murder at the hands of a partner.
nearly three out of four americans personally know someone who has faced domestic violence
(90% of the victims are women).
as the holcombs show the effects of domestic abuse are wide ranging,
unpredictable, severe and long lasting,
affecting both the women and their children.
boys witnessing domestic violence, for example, are twice as likely to become abusers themselves.
justin (a pastor and adjunct professor at reformed theological seminary)
and his wife, lindsey (a case manager at a domestic violence shelter),
answer the title's question with an unequivocal 'no'.
they also acknowledge that while' many victims believe clergy have the most potential to help them'
in fact '(clergy) are too often the least helpful and sometimes even harmful'.
indeed, years ago, i sat through lectures in which a bible professor insisted
that spousal abuse was not grounds for divorce
and that submission required enduring some forms of abuse.
a popular pastor theologian once made a similar suggestion in a Q&A session.
he said that if the household abuse is 'not requiring her to sin but simply hurting her',
then he thinks she can endure 'vberbal abuse for a season'
and 'perhaps being smacked one night' before going to the church for help.
he later clarified that women could seek help from the authorities if the situation warrants it).
by contrast, the holcombs are unapologetically bold,
refusing to minimize or dismiss any form of abuse in any circumstance.
following georgetown professor leo d. lefebure, the authors define abuse as
'the attempt of an individual or group to impose its will on others
through any nonverbal, verbal or physical means
that inflict psychological or physical injury'.
they offer sage and sensible advice (including a list of comprehensive resources in the appendices)
for sufferers and also for family, friends and ministry professionals
to whom victims may turn for help.
and they persuasively address distorted theologies
that are sometimes marshaled to defend abuse.
Is It My Fault? insists passionately on the sufficiency of God's grace
to strengthen and heal victims and survivors.
it also invokes the biblical category of lament.
the holcombs say professional help-including psychiatric medication and counseling
-in no way conflicts with finding healing through the gospel of grace.
victims of abuse are
invited by God to cry out for Him to do what he has promised to do:
destroy evil and remove everything that harms others and defames God's name'.
women facing domestic violence often feel that they have no good options:
they can honor God or report abuse;
they can rely on prayer and divine intervention or seek professional help.
rejecting false choices, (the authors) speak into the lives of such women with balance, compassion and biblical authority. (note: where does that authority appear in this review?)
7.3.2014 WE ALL SHOULD BE CATHOLIC
what we mean when we profess 'one catholic church by mark dever; christianity today 5.2014, p43
if we spotted a church located in a racially mixed neighborhood
and all its worshipers were white, we'd rightly be concerned.
or if we attended a church that focused so much on reaching young families
that singles and seniors felt uncomfortable,
that too would bother us.
most of us would suspect the first church to be racist
and the second, exclusivist.
both suspicions might certainly be true.
but there is more going on:
each church is failing to live out the gospel.
an essential part of the gospel is that is is catholic
-that is, the good news is given to all people.
and the church the Holy Spirit creates is catholic.
putting the matter like this may make some christians squirm.
many protestants affirm, either weekly or semi regularly, the nicean creed, proclaiming,
'WE BELIEVE IN ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH',
but many balk at that word, CATHOLIC.
(that's why in my own congregation, we use the word universal rather than catholic,
because the original greek term katholikos means 'whole, entire, universal'.)
when most of us hear the word catholic, we think of the roman catholic church.
by naming itself 'catholic', the roman church has claimed that
it alone is the true universal church.
its argument is several fold:
1. only rome has a unified, worldwide authority
2. only roman catholics exist in every global region
3. the catholic church is the only christian tradition that dates back to the time of the apostles
4. only the catholic church has the fullness of grace and truth and
5. the majority of christians in the world are catholic.
in short, they claim to have always been everywhere-truly catholic.
i personally cannot affirm that 'catholic' is an accurate description
of that visible organization that submits itself to the authority of the pope, the bishop of rome.
the combination of roman and catholic is oxymoronic
-one word implies spatial and cultural limitations, while the other implies universality and inclusivity.
no one church alone can rightly be called 'the catholic church'.
still, there is much more to be said than that 'catholic' simply means 'universal'.
let me rehearse all too quickly the history and biblical theology behind the term.,
why it's included in the great summary of the christian faith and how it challenges churches today.
as far as we know, ignatius of antioch was the first person to use the word catholic in relation to the church.
in his letter to the smyrnaeans, written around a.d. 112, he wrote,
'where Jesus Christ is, there is the universal church.'
early christian writers believed in the catholic church
-that christians everywhere trusted in one God, confessed one faith, received one baptism and
shared one mission.
in that sense, catholic meant 'real' or 'authentic'.
from the third century on, the word became synonymous with orthodoxy.
thus, 'the catholic church' was in contrast to heretics and schismatics.
ninety years after ignatius, clement of alexandria wrote,
'the one church is violently split up by the heretics into many sects.
in essence, in idea, in origin, in preeminence we say
that the ancient catholic church is the only church.
this church brings together, by the will of the one God through the one Lord...
those who were already appointed; whom God foreordained,
knowing before the world's foundation that they would be righteous.
by the middle of the fourth century, the word came to mean more than authentic and orthodox.
it was also used to connote the church's extensive reach to every land and every class of people.
in his lectures to baptismal candidates around 350, cyril of jerusalem said that the church
'is called catholic then because it extends over all the world, from one end of the earth to the other;
and because it teaches universally and completely one and all the doctrines
which ought to come to men's knowledge,
concerning things both visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly
and because it brings into subjection to godliness the whole race of mankind,
governors and governed, learned and unlearned
and because it universally treats and heals the whole class of sins,
which are committed by soul or body
and possesses in itself every form of virtue which is named,
both in deeds and words and in every kind of spiritual gifts.
in 381 at the council of constantinople, the original nicene creed
was altered to describe the church as 'one, holy, catholic and apostolic'.
by the next century, the word catholic was inserted into the apostle's creed.
and by the 11th century-when the eastern and western churches split
-eastern writers preferred the desciption 'orthodox',
while those in the west preferred 'catholic',
though both meant essentially the same thing.
so from the early church until the modern period, the word catholic has been used to distinguish the church
from that which is irregular or erroneous,
much like conservative american christians use evangelical in opposition to cult.
while the term catholic never appears in the bible the ideas behind it are found throughout scripture.
for example, paul says in galatians that anyone
-no matter who they are, where they live or what time period they live in
-can have a relationship with God, so long as they have faith in Christ:
'so in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith,
for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
there is neither jew nor gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female,
for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (3.26-8)
and in ephesians, paul practically gives a theological treatise on the universal nature of the church:
'this mystery is that through the gospel the gentiles are heirs together with israel,
members together of one body and shares together in the promise in Christ Jesus' (3.6)
according to scripture, the church is a universal entity
and anyone can be a part of it.
the universal nature of the church is one of the great blessings of the gospel.
the bible gives us a grand picture of what the church is
-and what, on this side of the coming kingdom,
it should set its sights on.
that said, the catholicity of the church cuts against four major problems we see in our churches today.
PROVINCIALISM.
our traditions are sometimes not as firmly rooted in the gospel itself as they should be.
they often reflect the particulars of our own country, denomination and personal preferences
more than the spirit of galatians 3.26-8.
the universal church is not called to entrust itself to the will of any one earthly pastor,
whether in rome or elsewhere.
while the universal church exists in all cultures, it's limited to none.
the gospel is displayed powerfully when christians of different cultures
all believe, preach and embody the same gospel.
this is one reason traveling is beneficial.
by visiting christians in other regions and countries,
we discover the many facets of christian practice and thought.
and one of the best ways to better understand your own culture is to live in another one.
by doing so, you realize the things you've always assumed are not necessarily assumed by others.
you're more prone to ask yourself questions like,
'is there a correct way or a right answer?
sometimes there is, but many times there is not.
by interacting with christians from different cultures and traditions,
we discover what the essence of our faith is
and what is merely a particular expression of it is.
SECTARIANISM.
from a congregational perspective like my own, denominations are in some ways
very much like parachurch organizations.
-that is, they are specialized ministries.
even churches with a presbyterian or episcopal polity recognize
that their distinctives are not always coextensive with other churches'.
since we all profess the same faith in the same Lord,
the denominational lines that distinguish us from other christians
should never mark an ultimate separation.
insofar as denominations do not breed an uncharitable and divisive spirit
and allow christians to work for the kingdom, they can be helpful.
but what unites us as christians must always be valued more highly than the things that distinguish us.
RACISM
the universal nature of the true church seriously challenges the racial segregation we wee in our churches.
God forgive historically caucasian congregations
for any ways they have marginalized christians of different skin colors.
white christians would do well to learn about the history of the african american church.
in those first churches, black christians were allowed to exercise leadership and make decisions.
and from tiny financial means, they built great churches and denominations.
nevertheless, our racially divided congregations only harm the church and its mission.
so what can be done to better display the catholicity of the gospel?
the great anglican preacher and theologian charles bridges gives us an excellent image:
'the church is the mirror that reflects the whole effulgence of the divine character.
it is the grand scene, in which the perfections of Jehovah are displayed to the universe'.
God, as trinity, is unity in diversity:
he is one God eternally existing as three distinct persons-Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
and this perfect God is not white.
He's not black.
He's not any skin color.
as image bearers, all humans reflect our creator God.
and as the church, we image the unity of the trinity especially in our diversity.
we may need to divide for practical reasons such as language.
but, as much as we can, let us not divide our churches for other cultural reasons.
the gospel is powerfully displayed when unlikely groups of people
-especially those who formerly showed animosity toward each other
-are united together in love.
EXCLUSIVISM
it's appropriate and commendable that ministries focus on evangelizing or discipling one group of people
-college students, businesspeople, mothers of young children, skateboarders, military personnel and so on.
by identifying with specific groups, christians often can present the gospel
in an accessible, relevant and personal way.
many parachurch ministries do exactly that.
but when an entire congregation focuses on one particular niche or group
so that others are sidelined, the universality of the church is undermined.
the gospel is for every kind of person
and our congregations should reflect that as best as they can.
to be sure, God in His sovereignty will use different congregations in different ways
to accomplish His work.
but we should never make our congregations more specifically focused than God wants them to be.
the gospel is more greatly magnified when our churches strive to include the full range of people whom Christ saves by His mercy.
Christ chooses the living stones who make up His church . I pet. 2.4-9
that's not our task.
anytime and anywhere, anyone
-regardless of ethnic identity or social status
-can be forgiven of his or her sins
by trusting in the one and only savior, Jesus Christ.
that is the true catholic doctrine of the true catholic church.
if we spotted a church located in a racially mixed neighborhood
and all its worshipers were white, we'd rightly be concerned.
or if we attended a church that focused so much on reaching young families
that singles and seniors felt uncomfortable,
that too would bother us.
most of us would suspect the first church to be racist
and the second, exclusivist.
both suspicions might certainly be true.
but there is more going on:
each church is failing to live out the gospel.
an essential part of the gospel is that is is catholic
-that is, the good news is given to all people.
and the church the Holy Spirit creates is catholic.
putting the matter like this may make some christians squirm.
many protestants affirm, either weekly or semi regularly, the nicean creed, proclaiming,
'WE BELIEVE IN ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH',
but many balk at that word, CATHOLIC.
(that's why in my own congregation, we use the word universal rather than catholic,
because the original greek term katholikos means 'whole, entire, universal'.)
when most of us hear the word catholic, we think of the roman catholic church.
by naming itself 'catholic', the roman church has claimed that
it alone is the true universal church.
its argument is several fold:
1. only rome has a unified, worldwide authority
2. only roman catholics exist in every global region
3. the catholic church is the only christian tradition that dates back to the time of the apostles
4. only the catholic church has the fullness of grace and truth and
5. the majority of christians in the world are catholic.
in short, they claim to have always been everywhere-truly catholic.
i personally cannot affirm that 'catholic' is an accurate description
of that visible organization that submits itself to the authority of the pope, the bishop of rome.
the combination of roman and catholic is oxymoronic
-one word implies spatial and cultural limitations, while the other implies universality and inclusivity.
no one church alone can rightly be called 'the catholic church'.
still, there is much more to be said than that 'catholic' simply means 'universal'.
let me rehearse all too quickly the history and biblical theology behind the term.,
why it's included in the great summary of the christian faith and how it challenges churches today.
as far as we know, ignatius of antioch was the first person to use the word catholic in relation to the church.
in his letter to the smyrnaeans, written around a.d. 112, he wrote,
'where Jesus Christ is, there is the universal church.'
early christian writers believed in the catholic church
-that christians everywhere trusted in one God, confessed one faith, received one baptism and
shared one mission.
in that sense, catholic meant 'real' or 'authentic'.
from the third century on, the word became synonymous with orthodoxy.
thus, 'the catholic church' was in contrast to heretics and schismatics.
ninety years after ignatius, clement of alexandria wrote,
'the one church is violently split up by the heretics into many sects.
in essence, in idea, in origin, in preeminence we say
that the ancient catholic church is the only church.
this church brings together, by the will of the one God through the one Lord...
those who were already appointed; whom God foreordained,
knowing before the world's foundation that they would be righteous.
by the middle of the fourth century, the word came to mean more than authentic and orthodox.
it was also used to connote the church's extensive reach to every land and every class of people.
in his lectures to baptismal candidates around 350, cyril of jerusalem said that the church
'is called catholic then because it extends over all the world, from one end of the earth to the other;
and because it teaches universally and completely one and all the doctrines
which ought to come to men's knowledge,
concerning things both visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly
and because it brings into subjection to godliness the whole race of mankind,
governors and governed, learned and unlearned
and because it universally treats and heals the whole class of sins,
which are committed by soul or body
and possesses in itself every form of virtue which is named,
both in deeds and words and in every kind of spiritual gifts.
in 381 at the council of constantinople, the original nicene creed
was altered to describe the church as 'one, holy, catholic and apostolic'.
by the next century, the word catholic was inserted into the apostle's creed.
and by the 11th century-when the eastern and western churches split
-eastern writers preferred the desciption 'orthodox',
while those in the west preferred 'catholic',
though both meant essentially the same thing.
so from the early church until the modern period, the word catholic has been used to distinguish the church
from that which is irregular or erroneous,
much like conservative american christians use evangelical in opposition to cult.
while the term catholic never appears in the bible the ideas behind it are found throughout scripture.
for example, paul says in galatians that anyone
-no matter who they are, where they live or what time period they live in
-can have a relationship with God, so long as they have faith in Christ:
'so in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith,
for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
there is neither jew nor gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female,
for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (3.26-8)
and in ephesians, paul practically gives a theological treatise on the universal nature of the church:
'this mystery is that through the gospel the gentiles are heirs together with israel,
members together of one body and shares together in the promise in Christ Jesus' (3.6)
according to scripture, the church is a universal entity
and anyone can be a part of it.
the universal nature of the church is one of the great blessings of the gospel.
the bible gives us a grand picture of what the church is
-and what, on this side of the coming kingdom,
it should set its sights on.
that said, the catholicity of the church cuts against four major problems we see in our churches today.
PROVINCIALISM.
our traditions are sometimes not as firmly rooted in the gospel itself as they should be.
they often reflect the particulars of our own country, denomination and personal preferences
more than the spirit of galatians 3.26-8.
the universal church is not called to entrust itself to the will of any one earthly pastor,
whether in rome or elsewhere.
while the universal church exists in all cultures, it's limited to none.
the gospel is displayed powerfully when christians of different cultures
all believe, preach and embody the same gospel.
this is one reason traveling is beneficial.
by visiting christians in other regions and countries,
we discover the many facets of christian practice and thought.
and one of the best ways to better understand your own culture is to live in another one.
by doing so, you realize the things you've always assumed are not necessarily assumed by others.
you're more prone to ask yourself questions like,
'is there a correct way or a right answer?
sometimes there is, but many times there is not.
by interacting with christians from different cultures and traditions,
we discover what the essence of our faith is
and what is merely a particular expression of it is.
SECTARIANISM.
from a congregational perspective like my own, denominations are in some ways
very much like parachurch organizations.
-that is, they are specialized ministries.
even churches with a presbyterian or episcopal polity recognize
that their distinctives are not always coextensive with other churches'.
since we all profess the same faith in the same Lord,
the denominational lines that distinguish us from other christians
should never mark an ultimate separation.
insofar as denominations do not breed an uncharitable and divisive spirit
and allow christians to work for the kingdom, they can be helpful.
but what unites us as christians must always be valued more highly than the things that distinguish us.
RACISM
the universal nature of the true church seriously challenges the racial segregation we wee in our churches.
God forgive historically caucasian congregations
for any ways they have marginalized christians of different skin colors.
white christians would do well to learn about the history of the african american church.
in those first churches, black christians were allowed to exercise leadership and make decisions.
and from tiny financial means, they built great churches and denominations.
nevertheless, our racially divided congregations only harm the church and its mission.
so what can be done to better display the catholicity of the gospel?
the great anglican preacher and theologian charles bridges gives us an excellent image:
'the church is the mirror that reflects the whole effulgence of the divine character.
it is the grand scene, in which the perfections of Jehovah are displayed to the universe'.
God, as trinity, is unity in diversity:
he is one God eternally existing as three distinct persons-Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
and this perfect God is not white.
He's not black.
He's not any skin color.
as image bearers, all humans reflect our creator God.
and as the church, we image the unity of the trinity especially in our diversity.
we may need to divide for practical reasons such as language.
but, as much as we can, let us not divide our churches for other cultural reasons.
the gospel is powerfully displayed when unlikely groups of people
-especially those who formerly showed animosity toward each other
-are united together in love.
EXCLUSIVISM
it's appropriate and commendable that ministries focus on evangelizing or discipling one group of people
-college students, businesspeople, mothers of young children, skateboarders, military personnel and so on.
by identifying with specific groups, christians often can present the gospel
in an accessible, relevant and personal way.
many parachurch ministries do exactly that.
but when an entire congregation focuses on one particular niche or group
so that others are sidelined, the universality of the church is undermined.
the gospel is for every kind of person
and our congregations should reflect that as best as they can.
to be sure, God in His sovereignty will use different congregations in different ways
to accomplish His work.
but we should never make our congregations more specifically focused than God wants them to be.
the gospel is more greatly magnified when our churches strive to include the full range of people whom Christ saves by His mercy.
Christ chooses the living stones who make up His church . I pet. 2.4-9
that's not our task.
anytime and anywhere, anyone
-regardless of ethnic identity or social status
-can be forgiven of his or her sins
by trusting in the one and only savior, Jesus Christ.
that is the true catholic doctrine of the true catholic church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)