Grace City

21 Years Old - What you need

2011-12-04T19:20:00.000Z

I have just returned from visiting a former student in Hereford, starting his first pastorate.

I could not resist a pause on the 360 odd mile round trip to explore a second hand bookshop. One of the titles I purchased was a book which turned out to have a handwritten inscription. In beautiful copperplate ink, it reads thus:

'Oct 19th, 1898

To Evelyn Milnes Gaskill,

With much affectionate remembrance on his 21st birthday -

Words are the true reflection of the mind,

If it so be, that they be honest, each to the other, nor by pride do overreach the cord, which God around them hath entwined; Thus when the heart is warm, it is inclined to utter by the tongue sweet words of love, responsive to the thoughts that inward move - words that seek out and will not lag behind.

Tis so dear Evelyn, between you and me, on this occasion of your natal day,

When you attain to manhood's full estate,

My prayers rise up today that you may be in God's safe keeping, as years pass away; Blest in this love, whose bidding angels wait.

Jo Sharp'

One assumes with an inscription such as that, the young woman selected the book with care - it would contain the kind of knowledge that a man would require upon reaching 'manhood's full estate' in the year 1898.

The book's title?

'A History of the Church of England' by Henry Wakeman, fellow of All Soul's College, Oxford.

Times have changed - today not many 21 year old's receive a book like that as a sign of being equipped for adult life.

Church & State

2011-05-09T08:41:00.000+01:00

“The Queen is not only very charming, but incredibly well-informed. Less agreeable, are the visits and letters from the Archbishop of Canterbury [Fisher]. I try to talk to him about religion. He seems to be quite uninterested and reverts all the time to politics.”

Diary of Harold MacMillan British Prime Minister, 1957-1963

Just War & Bin Laden

2011-05-07T23:21:00.000+01:00

‘Rome at first desired to be free, then since it seemed inglorious to serve, desired to be master’. Augustine

‘This is a time to celebrate America’s victory over bin Laden. And it’s also a time to see a just way forward in the war on terror.’ Chuck Colson

‘The act was fully justified by the demands of just war theory, the historic Christian means of moral reasoning that measures the justification for acts of lethal force.’ Al Mohler

‘I think the killing of an unarmed man is always going to leave a very uncomfortable feeling because it doesn't look as if justice is seen to be done.’ Rowan Williams

'Justice has been done'. President Obama

On a personal and theological level, it is difficult to know how to respond to events of terrorism. Having spent my childhood living in N. Ireland I am very familiar with the injustices of terrorist attacks, and have seen up close the horror such violence wreaks in families and communities. I have been moved both by seeing terrorists turn to Christ, people forgive for their loved ones being killed - and I have been shocked at the callousness of those committed to the thrills of terror in the name of a shallow political cause.

That said, I have found the internet-published comments from evangelical leaders, on the death of Bin Laden, surprising. In particular, I find the appropriation of just war theory premature, to say the least. There are few more complex areas of philosophical and theological thought than ‘Just War Theory.’

Agonizingly intricate in the lecture room; divided schools of thought in the literature. Several thousand years of secular and Christian reflections coalescing around the writings of Aristotle, Cicero, Augustine, Aquinas and Grotius. In the modern era the Holocaust casts its shadow alongside the theory stretching realities of nuclear weapons and terrorist cells. Even the label ‘theory’ has its problems - for it suggests, incorrectly, that the tradition can indeed be summarised as a series of headings. It is often done so on blogs, but in actual fact the weightings given to areas of concern, are far more complex than the lists can convey. Further, the affective dimensions of Augustine’s presentation on the matter of the pursuit of glory are hardly ever considered.

Just War Theory is serious due to the stakes of life in its balance. As war is never satisfactory, neither is the theory - since it must reluctantly and partially be put into effect in the real world.

It is good that American evangelical leaders such as Mohler and Piper have been quick to criticise scenes of jubilation over Bin Laden’s death. However it is surprising that so many leaders have assumed within a matter of days that Bin Laden’s death satisfied the ethical requirements of Just War theory.

Those strands of the Just War tradition which deal with the conduct of war, and its closure, commend restraint and use of legal structures. Justice requires more than retribution and equivalence. More than the fact of death is relevant - the order, place of decision and chain of command do impact justice. In a situation where an unarmed terrorist is killed, and the story released changes from a 40 minute firefight, to only one dead man having been armed - many questions remain. The absence of trial and legal execution are regrettable, from the perspective of desiring to see justice done. Any satisfaction of Just War theory is messy, partial, unsatisfactory and regrettable. As the released stories change, it is very unclear at this point whether the killing of Bin Laden was part of a war action that was just; or whether it was a case of state sanctioned retributive assassination. Ideally, of course, the Western nations would hold themselves to a higher standard of justice than their opponents. That has been done in a number of areas - whether the killing of Bib Laden is one of those is not yet clear.

What are the implications of all this for evangelicalism? At least four:

1. The interface between church and state is, perhaps, going to be the most important area of concern for Western Christendom over the next 20 or so years. We need our leaders to up their game in terms of theological reflection on matters related to that. Failure to do so will have direct implications for the reputation and well being of local churches.

2. American evangelicalism exerts influence well beyond the shores of America. The reasons for that are obvious, and have little to do with theology. The helpfulness of American evangelicals to those of us in other countries will be improved not inconsiderably by American evangelicals’ willingness to up their game in theological terms. That will include not assuming that the grand tradition of just war theory simply backs any military action their nation takes.

3. The idea of justice lies at the heart of the Christian gospel. Christian leaders ought to be at the forefront of those who appreciate the complexity and difficulty of justice being done.

4. Evangelicalism is a popular mass movement which has done much good in spreading the Christian gospel around the world. However when it comes to complex ethical areas such as the role of the state and war, we need more than theological cliches and catch phrases. If the role of the state does, as I believe it will, become more problematic for Christian witness in the next few years, we need leaders to become acquainted with the rich, nuanced and convoluted world which forms our great theological tradition. Since that is found in the libraries of writings of people such as Augustine and Aquinas - not on blogs - I will stop writing, now.

Hell: The End of Sin?

2011-03-22T13:58:00.003Z

As evangelicals rush to defend the orthodox doctrine of hell, caution may be in order.

Some of the popular attempts to defend the Bible's teaching have a high price.

One such approach is the idea that everlasting hell is fair since the damned in hell continue to rebel and sin without repentance. This apology is utilised by leading writers such as DA Carson:

'What is hard to prove, but seems to me probable, is that one reason why the conscious punishment of hell is ongoing is because sin is ongoing' Gagging of God, p.533.

The chapter from which this quote is taken is one of the best summaries of the issues available, and one I frequently recommend. Carson himself admits that the apology is 'hard to prove'.

Tim Keller makes much of the idea, originally taught by CS Lewis (Problem of Pain) that hell's 'door is locked on the inside'. Keller develops these ideas in his Reason for God, Chapter 5.
Recently, in response to Rob Bell, the idea that rebellion and sin are ongoing in hell has been commended by various evangelical teachers.

Defending hell's justice on the basis of people's ongoing rebellion is an appealing approach. Tragically though it is an apologetic which comes with a high price - it is predicated upon a Pelagian prioritising of human freedom over God's sovereignty. This is seen very clearly in the development of the approach by Keller and Lewis, which makes the reality of hell more palatable by calling into doubt the sovereign freedom of God, as the ultimate reason for hell. Ironically even those who have come to a Calvinsit/Augustinian view of the will, are susceptible to accepting the Pelagian approach when it comes to post-mortem existence. The injustice done to God's sovereignty is just as real at that point of reality.

The Pelagian prioritising of human choice over God's sovereignty was presumably the reason Augustine - a strong defender of the Biblical view of hell as everlasting torment - refused to countenance the idea that sin exists in hell. The idea that sin could continue to exist and even be enlarged in hell flies in the face of the expectation that after Christ's return, all sin is ended and God is glorified in all things.

Augustine wrote:

'After the resurrection, when the universal judgement is over and done with, the two cities will have their boundaries, one of the good the other of the wicked, both composed of angels and people. The former will have no will to sin and the latter no ability to do so, nor will either have any possibility of dying.'
Enchiridion, 29.111.

Rather than a portrait of hell as a place where sin continues and grows as it is endlessly freely chosen by the rebellious damned, Augustine saw the Biblical texts as urging him to conceive of hell as a place where sinners glorify God by agreeing with the rightness of God's judgement, regretting their sins (which the New Testament describes as having been done 'in the body,' not post-mortem) and being subject to the fearsome reality of God's righteous, holy wrath.

God is God of this world, and the future worlds of heaven and hell. Humanity has never been, nor ever will be, in charge. Sin truly will be no more after Christ returns. Thankfully, in view of the horrific nature of hell, the God who is in charge is abounding in mercy and intervenes to give us that which we could never desire of ourselves.

Compassionate to deny Hell?

2011-03-18T23:38:00.001Z

One may imagine that denying the Bible's teaching on hell is compassionate. Unfortunately such 'compassion' is neither new, mainstream nor truly compassionate. Here is Augustine making those points in City of God 21:17-

"I am aware that I now have to engage in a debate, devoid of rancor, those compassionate Christians who refuse to believe that the punishment of hell will be everlasting either in the case of all those men whom the completely just Judge accounts deserving of that chastisement, or at least in the case of some of them; they hold that they are to be set free after fixed limits of time have been passed, the periods being longer or shorter in proportion to the magnitude of offences. On this subject the most compassionate of all was Origen who believed that the Devil himself and his angels will be rescued from their torments and brought into the company of the holy angels, after the more severe and more lasting chastisements appropriate to their deserts. But the Church has rejected Origen's teaching, and not without good reason."

Whatever

2011-01-21T17:54:00.000Z

It is considered cool to not care.

Not having strong feelings is for the modern Western culture a mark of rising above the masses.

I'm not bothered; don't care; whatever...

I have been reading through the Yale edition of Jonathan Edwards' Works. Having started with some volumes of sermons, I returned to the Religious Affections and Original Sin.

I was struck by Edwards' repeated attack in Original Sin on the false belief that one can ever act, decide or choose something and actually remain 'indifferent'. Edwards perceived that the will is always moved to do or choose something, if it actually does anything. The superior desire may be only a small amount more compelling than an inferior desire. Still, if it is not actually more powerful, then the alternative will be acted upon.

Edwards convincingly shows that the cool, indifferent, non-caring, whatever person is in fact a myth.

In the case of Edwards' opponents, the myth of the indifferent person was a building block in the theological creation of a people who are not in need of God's grace, and in the end are little gods in their own lives.

If Edwards is correct and there are no indifferent people - what is the overwhelming desire so cleverly and self-deceptively pursued by the whatever generation? Makes you wonder.

Whatever.

The Natural Heart

2011-01-04T08:38:00.000Z

I was guest preacher at Cambridge Presbyterian last Sunday evening. One of the nice things about guest preaching is you can choose the passage! I opted for Jer 9 - one of my favourite OT passages, which urges us to boast in the Lord. This imperative is given against the grim backdrop of an exposition of the natural, uncircumcised human heart. Enjoy.

Jeremiah 9: Boast in the Lord

Musculus on Grace

2010-12-28T12:42:00.000Z

I am working on a translation of Musculus' Latin commentary on Colossians. Born in 1497 he begged for money as a child, singing to earn a living. He was taken in by monks and flourished under their education.

Here is my rendering of a statement I particularly like from his comments on Colossians 1:10:

Is not our God difficult and pernickety, so that unless you satisfy him in many ways, you might displease him in some and frustrate your satisfaction in many ways? If this is the situation, is any mortal able to be saved? For there is nobody who at no point might sin. And what is the benefit to us of the grace of Christ's mediation? I answer: In this way indeed righteousness is in him, that whoever stumbles in one thing, is guilty in all.

However we should consider that on the one hand it is true our imperfection may be earned, yet we may also be impacted by grace. Because we are believing in Christ our saviour, all may fail in many ways. It is of grace that our offences are on account of Christ not imputed.

Original Sin

2010-08-30T12:06:00.000+01:00

I recently participated in a radio debate with a non-Christian about the doctrine of Original Sin.

You can listen to the podcast at the Apple Store:

Apple UTunes Unbelievable

Or you can try the radio show web site:

Unbelievable Premier Radio

New Whitefield Sermons

2010-08-04T22:37:00.000+01:00

Lee Gatiss has just had a new collection of George Whitefield's sermons published. They look like excellent editions, and form the first volumes in a new reformed Anglican library, called REAL (!) Check it out here and consider adding them to your collection:

http://www.churchsociety.org/publications/real/index.asp

The Personal Touch

2010-07-19T13:21:00.001+01:00

One of the responsibilities an Anglican minister has is conducting marriages for those who do not attend church. When the issue of such marriages is talked about in evangelical circles, the matter is usually considered from the perspective of evangelistic opportunity. Linked to that is the matter of resource and time priorities.

I have been reflecting on the issue from another perspective. It strikes me that secular society is painfully impersonal. Civil Marriage ceremonies are shockingly bureaucratic and impersonal. When somebody comes to request a church wedding, they get, among other things, a service and preparation which is by contrast incredibly personal. Imperfect, but real work is done to try and equip the couple for married life. Concern for the individuals can be expressed.

Now, it seems to me that aspiring to evangelise a couple who comes for a wedding, within the constraints imposed by time, expectations and situations, is ordinarily too ambitious. However introducing the personal, is something that is achievable - and may well be a good bridge towards more holistic presentation of the Christian message.

So, having met a few couples seeking marriage, I have been asking myself, 'How can I show couples that Christians value them as personal, individuals? And, I have been wondering how showing that can lead to opportunities for sharing the Gospel.

It occurred to me that the instinct to press ahead with Gospel outlines as quickly as possible, is actually to forsake our distinctive of personalness, and to retreat to impersonalness. It is deeply ironic if that happens at a church wedding of all places!

I have found little in the way of theological resources from the evangelical constituency on the matter of personalness. However, exploring through the library a bit off the beaten track, I came across Paul Tillich's lectures, 'The Spiritual Situation in our Technical Society.'

Tillich observes:

Man's self [is] lost in his own production, in the production that he calls the world of objects... he became an object amongst the world of objects produced by his own cognitive approach, losing the power in which he produced it, namely, his own centred selfhood. (p.112)

Tillich is about as far as one can get from an evangelical theologian. But, as Luther quipped, 'I will accept a piece of gold from anybody.'

The pain of living in an impersonal secular society is immense. It seems to me that wedding preparation is a prime opportunity to introduce the personal touch. It is easy to let a couple know the way Jesus informs and redeems our desire to be personal. It has value in its own right, and is an essential first step towards further fruitful evangelism.

Of course as soon as I say that, I feel the desire to calculate the number of hours that must be spent for offering something as small as such a personal touch. But such cost benefit analysis only shows how deeply rooted the impersonal is in my own heart.

I am open to other suggestions about how one should approach weddings for those from outside the church. For the time being, offering the personal touch is a key part of what I will be trying to do.

Listening to God in the world?

2010-06-22T10:59:00.000+01:00

There is a renewed desire in evangelicalism to engage with contemporary culture. That is surely a good thing - we are called to proclaim the Gospel in a way which can be understood, and to love in a manner which is genuine. Mission and obedience to Christ do demand engagement with culture.

However - that does not mean that all theological programmes for such engagement are equally valid and Biblical. One approach, to which I take exception, is the idea that the Church is called to engage with culture, by seeking to discern the voice of God in the world. Scholars such as Rowan Williams have called for this for some time - Christians are urged to listen to God's voice in the world - he may be saying surprising things.

The appeal of such an approach is obvious; it creates the excitement of possible change; overthrow of previous norms; building of new inclusive relationships.

Ben Myers takes the theme of listening to God in the world, in his recent paper about the nature of Christian scholarship:

"Scholars have no privileged access to Christ’s voice, but their job is to help the church to discern this voice so that the whole church can respond in obedient faith. The church will at times discover ‘its own nature and mission’ only as it listens carefully to the voice of Christ in contemporary thought or in wider social discourses and practices."
Ben Myers 'A theology of scholarship'

I have not learned many truly new things in my doctoral study, but I have become more deeply convinced about a few foundational theological convictions. One of them is that the only place where the Church hears the voice of God today is the scriptures. I appreciate that there are diverse ways and settings for hearing that voice, and not all Christians will agree that God is saying the same thing to them on every matter. Nevertheless, I am of the view that encouraging people to seek to hear the voice of God in the world's culture is misguided.

If the intent is simply to encourage engagement, mission, love, sensitivity or what Stott called 'double listening' - then there are better ways to phrase it, which do not appear to undermine the clarion call of scripture itself, which places the emphasis upon proclamation to a lost world.

Proclamation to the world is where Karl Barth placed the weight of scripture's message:

The world, then, cannot evolve into agreement with God’s Word on its own initiative nor can the Church achieve this by its work in and on the world. The Church is the Church as it believes and proclaims that prior to all secular developments and prior to all its own work the decisive word has in fact been spoken already regarding both itself and also the world. The world no longer exists in isolation or neutrality vis-à-vis revelation, the Bible, and proclamation. Whether it believes or not, whether it develops in this way or that, whether the Church exerts greater influence or less, whether it consists of millions of confessors and proclaimers or whether only two or three are gathered together in Christ’s name—whatever becomes of the Church and the world the only thing that can matter is the event that follows the decisive word already spoken.

Sermo enim Dei venit mutaturus orbem, quoties venit ('For the word of God comes, insofar as it comes, to change the world.' Luther, De servo arb., 1525, W.A., 18, p. 626, l. 26).

Barth, Church Dogmatics, Volume I The Doctrine of the Word of God, Part 1. 2d, S. 155.

Sadly, if Myer's intention is to encourage evangelicals to engage with contemporary culture (and that is a good intention) - the method of encouraging a listening for the surprising voice of God in that culture, will turn many away from that cultural engagement.

Augustine & Architecture of Preaching

2010-06-17T10:47:00.002+01:00

People often ask me about the physical setting of Augustine's preaching. What would it actually have looked like to hear him preach?

Well, in all likelihood the preacher would be wearing the long robes of a monk. Beside his fellow ministers, he would have looked undistinctive as he would not have worn symbols of high ecclesiastical office. Shaved head, simple robes, dark African skin.

Before the service he would pray with his fellow ministers, while
the congregation stood around gossiping. Once he entered the church building, a certain anticipation would occur, though by all accounts that did not mean the people would be silent! They could be shouting out demands for their favourite readings, requests that the sermon deal with an issue they were concerned about, expressing frustrations about a legal ruling Augustine may have given against them.

After the readings and sung Psalm, Augustine would preach. The most striking thing, to my mind, about the visual experience would be his posture. Modern preachers stand to speak, while listeners sit. Jewish rabbis (such as Jesus) sat to teach, with listeners crowded round.

The model Augustine adopted was taken from his secular environment of the Roman empire. In Augustine's church, the listeners (about 300 of them) stood, packed into the small church building. Others milled around outside. While the crowd listened, and the stenographers scribbled down every word, Augustine sat to preach on his cathedra.

The cathedra was a large, imposing seat. It was made of either polished stone or possibly marble. Sitting on a raised platform, it may have been draped with a colourful cloth. The cathedra would have been an incredibly emotive and symbolic position from which to proclaim the Gospel. For from a similar cathedra, Pilate had sat to pass judgment on Jesus Christ (Matthew 27:19). The example I have pictured above is a marbel cathedra, used for the coronation of Roman Emperors from about 930 to 1530.

Thus Augustine's preaching, visually, represented the stunning advance the Gospel made in only a few generations since Jesus. Before Constantine, preaching could not be practiced in N Africa - at least not has it came to be done by Augustine. For prior to Constantine, persecution forced Christians to meet secretly in small groups. The church leaders wrote treatises and scholarly works, but they could not offer preached sermons as public discourse.

Augustine's cathedra represented the subversive victory of Christ over the Empire that executed him, and was emblematic of Augustine's remarkable ability to make use of secular tools in service of Christian preaching.

It can be interesting to analyse the visual setting of the place we hear sermons preached from...

Apple & Porn

2010-05-17T09:16:00.005+01:00

The CEO of Apple Computers has been getting a lot of negative press recently - some people don't like the way he carefully controls the software and hardware worlds of his computer empire. The most public stir has been created over his refusal to allow apps in the apple store that use or were programmed with Flash. Jobs argues (rightly in my view) that Flash is a buggy, bloated programme which slows down computers. Since Jobs is trying to create portable computers that last for 11 or so hours on battery, he wants to avoid Flash. Personally I am more than happy to never see another Flash video on my computer - I can't stand the way Adobe make their software bloated to the point where it slows my computer down.

Another aspect of Job's defiance of critics has been less commented on. Jobs has argued that he wants his portable computer devices to not sell or stock pornography.

When a critic emailed him to say that this infringed his freedoms, Jobs emailed back and told him to buy a different type of computer.

Steve Jobs is a fan of Bob Dylan. So one customer emailed him to ask how Dylan would feel about Jobs' restrictions of customers' freedoms.

The CEO of Apple replied to say that he values:

'Freedom from programs that steal your private data. Freedom from programs that trash your battery. Freedom from porn. Yep, freedom. The times they are a changin' and some traditional PC folks feel their world is slipping away. It is.'

The interlocuter replied:

"I don't want 'freedom from porn'. Porn is just fine! And I think my wife would agree."

In the most revealing line, Steve Jobs dismissed the critic thus:

"You might care more about porn when you have kids."

Pause for a moment and consider what the above emails represent.

The CEO of one of the wealthiest, most successful international companies, responds to the email of a customer. Business prospers on the mantra 'The customer is always right.' Business wants the customers' money.

But in this case, over the moral issue of pornography, Jobs is happy to tell customers to buy a different product. He argues that children and innocence ought to be preserved - and that trumps the dollar.

Google (with their motto 'Don't be evil') rake in billions through pornography. Ranks of employees spend their time categorising and arranging advertising for pornography. (I know, I spent some time discussing the difficulties posed to a Christian who worked in their UK HQ) Pornography is huge business, yet here is the CEO of Apple telling the pornography businesses to take their dollars elsewhere.

Now Steve Jobs cannot actually stop pornography being accessed on the devices he sells - indeed you can jailbreak a device and run any pirated software on it. Neither can he necessarily set the ethical bar as high as a Christian may want it - but what he is doing is significant and commendable. He is taking responsibility for doing what he can. He is trying to not profit from pornography. Those deeds are important for the sake of his own soul. Matthew 18:7 comes to mind: "Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!"

For the souls of other people, his public statements are valuable in that they permit consumers to identify with and commend his resistance to pornography. Our generation is saturated in pornography; a public statement from Steve Jobs resisting that, encourages others to believe that the secular-liberal-capitalist agenda is not the only show in town. Jobs' comments are important for the manner in which they shape public cultural discourse.

CICCU Talks

2010-05-14T14:52:00.002+01:00

Here are some talks I gave for Cambridge CU last week:

A 20min apologetics talk:

'I could believe in Christianity if it weren't for all the miracles.'

and a more in depth Bible exposition:

1 Peter 2 'When everything seems unfair'

Green Politics

2010-05-06T15:08:00.002+01:00

When all is said and done, much that motivates political votes (for whatever party) in our secular culture, is envy.

It is one thing to conform to the external act of voting. It is another to penetrate to the inner motivations which drive us.

Some words from Peter Chrysologus, a North African preacher ministering shortly after Augustine:

'All vices always tend towards and aim at harming those whom they possess, but envy always consumes its own even more.

Envy has always been the killer of its own, it strains thought-processes, it racks spirits, it torments minds, it ruptures hearts...

Envy tampers with heaven, for there it made the devil out of an angel.'
Sermon 172.

The Rulers

2010-05-05T11:10:00.001+01:00

Jesus said:"You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you."
Mark 10:42-43

New Yorker on female bishops

2010-04-21T13:03:00.003+01:00

Sometimes it is good to read articles that contain various views, with which one may not agree...

This is a new article about the move to have female bishops in the Church of England. It is interesting for many reasons - the sociological feel of it, the passing mention of theological observations of dubious weight. All say much of the postmodern zeitgeist which has displaced scholarly theological debate, and which now provides the basis of making ecclesiastical decisions in many quarters.

The article involves interviews with many people - one of the main strengths of the piece. When invited to be interviewed on a subject such as this, a conservative Christian has good reason to feel nervous about the ever present danger of being misrepresented or vilified by the final edition of the encounter. That being the case, it is very encouraging to see that amidst the archbishops, oxbridge tutors, MPs and authors interviewed, Vaughan Roberts is interviewed and comes across as sane, and pastorally concerned. Well done to him for making a contribution.

Follow the Link for New Yorker article.

Are UK Christians Persecuted?

2010-04-05T13:34:00.003+01:00

I watched this BBC programme last night - hosted by Nicky Campbell.

While 'persecution' is not the correct word to describe what is happening in the UK right now, there are real infringements of liberty which cause immense pain and distress to those caught up in them. Not only that, every media case of a Christian who loses their job due to their beliefs or conscience, weakens the resolve of churches in their ability to speak out.

This show is excellent - first time I have heard the Christian viewpoint in the media, pressed home with seriousness. The show traces current problems back to the EU Human Rights Charter, which as it is applied to aspects of British society, creates an inevitable tiered hierarchy of competing rights. In case after case, it is Christian belief that is selected as the 'losing' right.

There are interviews with reporters, philosophers, bishops and minority faith representatives. It is quite chilling to hear people like Polly Toynbee flatly deny that Christians have any right to feel poorly treated, and another opinion former makes clear that even if Christians feel discriminated against - it does not matter because 'morality changes' and they are, after all, 'a minority...'

You have a week to view the show. Click here.

Praying into God's Love

2010-04-01T17:40:00.002+01:00

The prayer in Ephesians 3 is one of my favourite passages in the Bible.

Ephesians 3:14-21 4 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, 16 that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith- that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. 20 Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, 21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen.

Here is a sermon I preached a while back on this passage. It attempts to preach in a style which takes due measure of the nature of both prayer and preaching. I don't know how effective it was, but I was aiming to draw us into the prayer, and by preaching to move us beyond knowing the passage, to knowing the love of Christ. Enjoy:

Sermon: Ephesians 3 Prayer

When you're wrong...

2010-03-23T11:45:00.004Z

As I write the final couple of chapters of my doctoral thesis on Augustine's preaching, a figure from church history causes me occasional moments of anxiety:

Michael Baius (1513-1589) was a from a poor background and worked hard to acquire books and an education. He was deeply enthusiastic for scriptural knowledge. He completely rejected the scholastic methodology and theology which was the norm in his day. He set about trying to return Christianity to its Biblical form - the person whom he found the greatest aid in his task was Augustine.

Baius read Augustine's works repeatedly and in depth. His knowledge of the texts was unrivaled. Augustine's corpus remains one of the largest of the ancient world. Baius appeared to have mastered it. His career included the post of professor and then chancellor of Leuven University.

So, you may ask, why is the figure of Baius a cause of concern? The reason is this - when all is said and done, he was wrong.

Baius knew the writings of Augustine better than anybody else, doubtless better than me. However, he presented a theological interpretation of Augustine which painted him in a light which can only be caricatured as Pelagian. Baius' writings earned him two papal condemnations - discretely written without actually using his name, so as to not give ammunition to Protestant reformers.

In the hands of Baius, Augustine emerges as a theologian of law, effort, ability and merit. How can a man who knew Augustine so well, so radically misinterpret him? The doctor of grace mutates into a doctor of law.
And if Baius could get it so wrong.... what hope do I have?

This is the question that exercised Henri de Lubac, in his masterful analysis of Baius' Pelagian reading of Augustine. De Lubac asks, 'How can the disciple so misinterpret his master?'

The answer de Lubac offers has been a major encouragement in the methodology I have adopted for my dissertation. De Lubac reflected:

'The truth is that to understand an author it is not enough merely to read him.' De Lubac, Augustinianism and Modern Theology, p.11.

I am sure I have made errors of judgment in my interpretation of Augustine. My methodology has been to present the sermons and preaching of Augustine in a manner that enables readers to do more than merely read them. The hope is that one can see a bit beyond the recorded words; to catch a sense of what it felt like to listen to Augustine preach to a packed church, to listen in on his tutoring of African preachers, to feel his agonised modifications of secular rhetorical principles. Beyond 'mere reading' lies the goal of humble listening, conversation, and perhaps - progress in understanding.

To do more than 'merely read' - a worthy aspiration for all theologians.

Intellectual Histories

2010-03-16T10:45:00.014Z

A genre of writing I particularly enjoy is the 'history of thought' work. Many Christian and non-Christian scholars have attempted the daunting task of tracing the flow and development of philosophical and cultural thinking. Christians ought to familiarise themselves with these sorts of books - it is very helpful to understand why our culture is as it is, for evangelism, preaching and general sanity!

There are many benefits in reading multiple attempts to scale the mountain of intellectual history - no one effort can capture everything, and authors inevitably have differing views about how best to explain and organise their material.
Reading books such as this motivates you to go and read the classics of intellectual thought, and gives a bit of a suggestion about how to approach them.

When I read one of these works, I am interested to note whether or how an author deals with the role of Christianity; what organising principle is used to interpret the history, and whether a particular turning point in history is highlighted.

Here are my favourite intellectual history books, all of which I have enjoyed over the past few years. I will offer brief comments on each - bear in mind I hold none to be authoritative! They are in no particular order (like my library book shelves):

1. Francis Schaeffer, Escape from Reason: Best one to start with. Extraordinarily short - you can read it in about an hour and a half. Deeply Christian - the shock and pain of realising where modern thought leaves people - in despair and meaninglessness - is a splendid incentive to thoughtful evangelism. Highly recommended, but remember after reading this, that there are plenty of complementary and alternative accounts to consider...

2. Alasdair MacIntyre, A Short History of Ethics: This is an early work of MacIntyre; clearly based on lectures he gave. It forms the genesis of his later masterpiece 'After Virtue' - given the choice I would recommend reading the 'Short History of Ethics' first. It is indeed short, and is to be commended for having a whole chapter on Christianity.

Macintyre does not hold back in this book, don't mistake this for a dull academic work. He savages thinkers such as Hobbes, and makes several hilarious comments about the English (!):

Aristotle's great-souled man 'indulges in conspicuous consumption. He walks slowly, has a deep voice and deliberate mode of utterance. He thinks nothing great. He gives offence only intentionally. He is very nearly an English gentleman. This is an appalling picture of the crown of the virtuous life...' (p.79)

MacIntyre admits in the final paragraph of his chapter on Christianity that he does not really understand Christianity - accurate and honest. He makes several sharp observations, but is held back in his attempt to explain Christianity, by fitting it into general categories of philosophy such as command theory and theism. He does not even mention the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Still - credit is deserved for giving Christianity a key role in his narrative. I think that it demands to be present in all stages of the narrative, not just one point.

3. Richard Tarnas, Passion of the Western Mind: Very readable. Brilliant explanation of Plato and Aristotle. This book is a terrific but twisted work. On the one hand it appears to be a clear, if slightly secular, take on the narrative. Early in the narrative there is a section on Christianity which has an odd emphasis on the Virgin Mary. Tarnas gives her a lot of airtime. This made me pause - then I forgot about it as the books tears off into the Enlightenment and so forth.

Then - the shocking surprise that makes sane readers fall off their chair. Tarnas concludes his work arguing that the natural and right direction for western society to take, is an embracing of feminine Gaia goddess mysticism! Tarnas lays his cards on the table, and it transpires that after a sober analysis of Western Philosophy and culture, he desires to leap off into the irrational world of modern Gnosticism! I have never been more surprised by the conclusion to an academic book. No idea what he was smoking... highly recommended. (The book that is.)

4. Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self. Like MacIntyre, Taylor wrote an intellectual history as an early part of his scholarly career. Much of his later work builds on it.
I like Sources of the Self, as it uses Augustine as a framework for the entire narrative of western thought. He argues that secularity is essentially a bastard child of Augustine's inward turn. Augustine urged people to turn inward in order to reflect on the God who is above. Secularity basically removed God, and looked inward - at the self alone.

Taylor is incredibly careful and shrewd in his analysis. His recent magnum opus, A Secular Age, is the single best explanation of why secular people find it difficult to believe in God. He is much more open in that work about his own Christian commitments (To Augustinian Roman Catholicism). He does a terrific job of commending Christian love to a secular culture - his thesis could be strengthened by also commending Christian grace.

5. AC Grayling, What is Good?: The Search for the Best Way to Live. Grayling is rabidly secular in his writing. He views history as series of Enlightenments, and seems unaware of the devastating critiques of rationality launched by the Continental Philosophers such as Derrida and Foucault. His belief in humanity's innate ability, progress and evolution is touchingly naive and so painfully modernist. This is the sort of book Richard Dawkins would describe as 'insightful scholarship.'

Well worth reading to get a clear grasp of the secular version of history - this is the narrative people imbibe from the media and national curriculum. Those who hold to it inevitably view Christians as dullards or dangerous.

6. Revolutions in Worldview, Edited by W. Andrew Hoffecker. Most of the authors are associated with Westminster Seminary, USA. It is the clearest textbook type work in my list - excellent for teaching. The central thesis of the work is that Christian thought is continually corrupted by being mixed with secular assumptions. This is one of the only books which attempts to treat Christian thought at each stage of history.

Carl Trueman's chapter stands out as being particularly sensitive to the historical context of the period he treats. I also learned a lot from the later chapter which highlighted the significance of Dewey.

7. Radical Orthodoxy, Edited by John Millbank. This is not an easy read. It is highly revisionist, and as such won't benefit readers much who are not already familiar with the traditional narrative of western thought.

Hanby's chapter on Augustine is excellent, and the book as a whole does a good job of making one reconsider the positive contribution Aquinas could have. Not convinced by the central thesis, but enjoyably avant-garde! The authors clearly believe that the theologians of the past matter for today - refreshing.

8. Christianity & Western Thought: A History of Philosophers, Ideas & Movements, Colin Brown. This contribution from IVP is actually a three volume work. Very solid, but I felt that there was a bit of a lack of a central interpretive motif or thesis. Lots of thinkers summarised well - I prefer the bite of a shorter work which tries to organise material in more than a merely chronological narrative. Safe and reliable.

9. Paul Johnston, 'Modern Times' & 'Intellectuals.' British historian Paul Johnston can be considered to make a contribution in the form of these two works. The former is a history of the modern world which maintains a strong focus on individual thinkers. He opens with an enthralling study of Einstein's Theory of Relativity and how it relates to popular forms of postmodernity.

Modern Times is long; interest is held by Johnston's beautiful attention to detail in character studies. Should be read alongside 'Intellectuals' - a justly celebrated cynical demolition job on the validity of secular thinkers' claims to shape modern society.

10. John Burrow, A History of Histories. Terrific idea - a book that chronicles the histories that have been written through time. The author clearly thinks that Gibbon got history right - he frequently uses Gibbon to critique other approaches to history and Christianity. I like reading Gibbon as much as the next man (!), but can't stand the smug dismissal of faith which his fans imbibe from his historical method.

11. Michel Foucault, History of Madness. It starts with a study on leprosy, and develops into a history of how we have treated the insane, through time. The records of 19th century madhouses are used to explicate the attitudes of society to the mad. Foucault claims that he sees no development in Western thought - it is all random vignettes. While he says this, his work does give a philosophical outline of development. Still, he is a helpful challenge to overly rigid structures of interpretation.

It is deeply disturbing to have Foucault slowly bring you face to face with the possibility that secular society is itself insane, and we all too often collaborate with it, rather than let grace redeem it. A stunning piece of philosophical history, that deconstructs the arrogance of secular modernity. Obviously Foucault replaced the problems of modernity with a different set of problems - but the apologetic power of his critique of modernity is immense.

If you are going to read it, go for the recently published version which includes the sections left out of the older editions. (Follow link above) If you can't face the length of this work, try his three volume 'History of Sexuality' instead - makes many of the same points more briefly, and engages with Christianity more.

As you reflect on the history of thought - remember the reality that historians so rarely face. Jesus Christ said 'I am the first and the last.' (Rev. 1:17)

Nottingham University Mission Talks

2010-03-09T17:13:00.003Z

Last week was Nottingham University CU's Mission week.

We had a terrific time - I learned a lot about the challenges and opportunities of presenting the claims of Christianity to a diverse student body. Every day there was the opportunity to engage with secularists, Muslims and enquirers from all kinds of backgrounds.

My message was that Christ is the great saviour; my method was to let Christ be the great persuader.

In the apologetics lunchbars that resulted in attempts to intrigue and attract people with Christ. In the expositions, the hope was that people would hear Christ for themselves and respond to him.

All the expositions are now online. The one which seemed to cause the biggest stir was the one on John 6 - 'Why you can't come to Jesus.' This presents an uncompromising portrait of Jesus preaching predestination to unbelievers - something we tend to not do!

The first apologetics lunchbar was titled 'Is God on Cameron's side?' The chance to discuss politics appeared to go down well with Muslims and others, who were intrigued to question a believer about how Christ would affect political views.

The talks are online at this link. Enjoy :)

Sermon: Obadiah

2010-03-08T21:16:00.003Z

One does not hear the book Obadiah preached that often....

This sermon treats the central issue of Pride: the accusation God lays at the door of Edom. The sermon serves as an example of how the more one studies the historical circumstances of the text, the more clearly the central issue applies itself.

Follow this link for Obadiah sermon

Plastic People - New Book

2010-02-05T13:21:00.002Z

My new booklet, 'Plastic People: How Queer Theory is changing us' is now available.

The book aims to explore the philosophical writings which underpin current debates about gender and sexuality. It also offers some tentative suggestions about ways to begin ministering into these complex situations.

Available to order, at a reduced price of £3.50 at:

http://www.latimertrust.org/ls73.htm

Debating Equality

2010-01-26T10:11:00.003Z

In the best attended debate of recent years, the House of Lords defeated the Labour government - accepting the three amendments to the Equality Bill, which preserve the freedoms of churches and religious organisations to live out their faith as appropriate.

For the past ten years the Labour party has ruthlessly done all it can to reduce the power of the House of Lords. Under the guise of fairness they attacked British traditions of life peerage, and they carefully attempted to fill the seats with their supporters (often generous financial donors).

I am not opposed to reform of the House of Lords - though after the past year of financial scandals, it is interesting how slow the Labour Party have been to reform their own house.

Having read yesterday's Hansard debate, I believe the reason the Labour Party wish to silence the Lords, is due to the extraordinarily high quality of tolerant, conservative political views, which so many of its members articulate. It is far and away above the standard of thought normally heard in the media. Were it listened to by more thoughtful people, the vacuousness at the heart of the modern secular project would be seen for the sham it is.

Consider this speech, from Lord Pilkington of Oxenford:

My Lords, I want to widen the debate somewhat, because it touches the very roots of democracy in society. It has been a fundamental principle of the democratic state, certainly over the last 100 years, that independent corporations within the state have a freedom and enjoy a freedom. Churches and faith groups are independent corporations. Their life does not spring from the state, but from within their own communities. Freedom, for them, means the right for their members to follow the rules of their faith, provided it does not offend decency or public order.

Even in a different age, less democratic, more intolerant than our present age, this principle was observed. In 1795, the narrow Protestant Parliament of Ireland gave £8,000 to the Catholic Church to build the seminary at Maynooth. The English state, when the Union of Parliaments occurred, continued with this grant, which rose to about £26,000 a year, a lot of money in the early 19th century. The Bill alters all this and we are in grave danger of using the ideology of equality to question the demands that faith communities make on their pastors and followers.

Traditionally, faith schools-the essence of faith in many cases: the Roman Catholic Church almost bankrupted itself to create its schools-demanded that their staff followed the practices of the faith that the school represented. This was certainly the case when I was briefly in charge of a parish in the early 1960s, when teachers in local schools were expected to respect the faith that the school represented and on which the faith had spent large sums of money. The Bill seems to me to restrict this right to employ members of their creed and those who practise their moral code
only to those who are pastors, priests or teach doctrine. I think it ought to extend to many more people, particularly teachers in schools, and not be restricted to that narrow area.

I return where I began: that hard-fought right of independent corporations to express themselves is an important element of what we mean by freedom in the state. Dictators always restricted these rights of churches, trades unions and more, and this, in a funny way, is what we are doing at the moment in the interests of ideology.

In France, savage anticlerical legislation was passed in 1905. The result was 50 years of conflict-fifty years in which charitable activities were restricted-and we see a faint sign of how that could occur with us in what has happened to the Catholic Children's Society. It is a paradox that in the early 19th century the narrow, intolerant Protestant minority was prepared to build a Catholic seminary and that our generation, which is supposedly generous and understanding, is actually restricting the rights of church bodies and inaugurating conflict that can only do harm. I beg noble Lords to support the amendment.

Such articulate speeches shame not only the Labour Government, but a society and media which rests satisfied with far less then the best of intellectual political engagement.

Equality Bill

2010-01-25T10:57:00.005Z

The House of Lords today debate whether or not to narrow the exemption in The Equality Bill.

As the law currently stands, it is lawful for churches and religious organisations to expect employees to live out the beliefs and principles of the religion they are involved with. The Labour Party are attempting to reduce the scope of the exemptions, so that fewer religious posts are free from the anti-discrimination laws of general employment.

What I do not understand, is why political parties are allowed to expect their members to act and behave in accordance with the beliefs of the party - but it is assumed that secular society ought to have the right to over rule churches' ability to employ people who embody their beliefs?

After all, the Labour Party Handbook states:

'6. To be and remain eligible for membership, each
individual member must:
A. accept and conform to the constitution,
programme, principles and policy of the party

8. No member of the party shall engage in conduct
which in the opinion of the NCC is prejudicial, or in
any act which in the opinion of the NCC is grossly
detrimental to the party. Any dispute as to
whether a member is in breach of the provisions
of this sub-clause shall be determined by the NCC
in accordance with Chapter 1 Clause IX above of
the constitutional rules (in chapter Chapter 1
above) and the disciplinary rules and guidelines
(in chapter Chapter 6 below).'

Can the Labour Party give Churches the freedom that it gives itself?

The Bill, however it is phrased will be tested in the courts. Many assume it will be tested by a prosecution against a bishop, minister or church.

Could we perhaps instead test it in a prosecution against the Labour Party?

New Year's Walk: 2 John

2010-01-07T13:09:00.002Z

I have not been able to post much recently - baby Lewis was born five weeks early, and he has kept us very busy!

Normal service will resume in due course, meanwhile, here is a sermon I preached to welcome in the New Year. It is an exposition of the short letter, 2 John.

God bless and happy new year!

2 John- A New Year's Walk

History of Christianity

2009-11-08T16:15:00.002Z

The first in a six part televised history of Christianity is available to watch on BBC IPlayer (only to UK residents!)

Prof. MacCulloch was my tutor in reformation studies at Oxford. Both lucid, enigmatic and witty, there are few people alive who know more about the history of Christianity - or can speak about it with such verve. Here is a show that takes the history and impact of Christianity seriously. You need to watch this!

http://bbc.co.uk/i/nrtr8/

Perverted Grace

2009-10-26T08:37:00.003Z

'They are fruitless trees - twice dead - uprooted...' Jude 12.

When studying Jude for this sermon I was struck that Jude's response to people perverting the doctrine of grace, was not merely to restate the doctrine correctly - but to remind readers of lots of Bible stories. It seems that the Bible stories embed grace (rightly understood) deeper in us, than merely understanding the doctrine - which is of course necessary.

I tried to use the issue of teaching children the Bible as a way of exploring our need to be excited and thrilled by the Bible stories-

Sermon: Jude

How long do you preach for?

2009-10-08T09:43:00.003+01:00

The general tendency of evangelicals today is to view 25 minutes as the optimum length of time for a sermon. Over 30min is usually regarded as excessive or more than people can bear.
Obviously, if a preacher is dull, then even five minutes will be tedious - but assuming a preacher is competent, gifted and faithful in exposition - are we selling ourselves short in aiming to be the generation which has the shortest sermons in the history of Christianity?

Perhaps secular wisdom ought to give us pause for thought - In the above video David Cameron discusses his conference speech with William Hague and his wife. Cameron is asked how long his speech will be, and he replies,

'I'm trying to get it down to under an hour...'

At first I thought he was joking, then Hague admits that he sometimes spoke for over an hour and that was indeed too long.

Hague observes that the optimum attention span of the human mind has been shown to be 50min - and that applies to listening to a speech.

Cameron justified the hour long target for his speech by saying that the matters and occasion that he is speaking to merit time.

Might that not be even more true for the content of the Bible?

Children

2009-10-07T08:26:00.006+01:00

These proposals will be a terrible blow to British people's freedoms to minister and raise their families as they see fit. It will in due course hinder not only people who currently homeschool, but also Christian camps and Sunday Schools.

It is indicative of this government's statism that their ideology drives them to such authoritarian proposals. It is a sad situation when councils say they cannot intervene in horrific cases of abuse, such as baby P - due to not having enough resources. But they do have the resources to plan a massive further infringement of middle class freedoms.

The Christian Institute have more details - go to their site and get link to EMAIL your objections. There is only a few days for your view to be registered. (I guess the government wants consultation, but not too much!)

Virtue

2009-10-05T11:42:00.004+01:00

One of the most insidious temptations for evangelical Christians is to understand and accept the Gospel initially, then over time, begin to build an identity and sense of security upon our response to that Gospel.

It is almost inevitable that this problem manifest itself in our lives in one way or another. Changes inevitably flow from becoming a Christian - battling sin, changing relationship patterns, beginning church attendance, trying to evangelise. With time, one begins to feel that doing these things makes you a Christian. Intellectually, a person believes the Gospel; functionally, security and identity are built upon the good things that form a response to that Gospel.

One of the distinctive features of Augustine's theology was his deep appreciation of the Christian's ongoing need to depend on God's grace.

So, he preached against the ever present danger of building upon our response to the Gospel:

'When one relies on one's own virtue, the result is great sin.' Sermon 163.10.

May we have a deeper, fresher sense of the reality of God's grace!

Idols of the Heart

2009-10-01T16:24:00.003+01:00

Tim Keller has done much to popularise reformed teaching on the subtle dangers of idolatry. Previous generations of evangelicals have focused upon sin as transgression; Keller reminds us that idolatry is also a fundamental Biblical way of viewing sin.

The reformed teaching on idolatry is associated with John Calvin, who famously wrote that the human heart is a 'factory of idols.'

The reformed idea of idols in the heart is rooted in Biblical texts such as Ezekiel 14:3: "Son of man, these men have set up idols in their hearts and put wicked stumbling blocks before their faces. Should I let them inquire of me at all?"

Augustine of Hippo ought to receive some credit for highlighting the Biblical theme of heart idolatry, long before the 16th century reformation.

There had been some civil disturbance as a result of some physical idols being destroyed on property which a recently converted owner had donated to the church. Augustine took up the theme in Sermon 62.18:

'The land was given to the church. Should idols remain on church property? It is not enough for the pagans that we don't destroy idols in their country villas - they even want them preserved on our property?
We preach against idols. We remove them from people's hearts. We persecute idols; We don't deny it. Should we preserve idols? I don't destroy them where I have no authority to; I don't do it where the owner of the property objects - but where he desires it done, where he is grateful it is done - I would sin if I held back.'

In this sermon, we can see Augustine using a real life case of contentious idol destruction, in the physical sense, as a springboard to preach about what he really wants to see done - the dismantling of idols which reign in our hearts.

Write to Grayling MP

2009-09-14T15:05:00.004+01:00

The Christian Institute has made a statement about the new government vetting programmes which will apply to all who have contact with children.

You can read it here: Christian Institute Statement

There is a chance these laws could be repealed - if the incoming Conservative government state that they will abolish them, then the organisation will be unworkable till after the election.

Christians in the ordained ministry, involved in camps, Sunday School or churches need to be clear about what is involved in the Independent Safeguarding Authority procedures.

It appears to be less hassle than CRB checks, as it will be a one off round of paperwork.

But while CRB is a check on actual convictions, this is a registration on an ongoing database file. If anybody makes a complaint about you by telephone, saying that they feel you are having a problem relating to children, or you discipline your kids harshly, or struggle to relate to contemporaries, or tend to be a loner... then you will be investigated.

Receiving unreasonable complaints and being on the brunt of unjust allegations comes with the territory of being an ordained minister. I have lost count of the number of people I have spoken with who have got hatemail or been threatened by various people. The ISA will take such things as evidence against you - no smoke without a fire.

Under current law, you would only be investigated as to whether you have committed a crime. Under these new procedures, if you raise two red flags in the assessment, or there are several anonymous complaints, then a judgement will be made on the probability of you committing a crime in the future.

If banned, you will be unable to be near children legally for ten years. If you are ordained, you will lose your job. If a Sunday School teacher you will no longer be able to be near kids. If you are a parent - social services will need to consider whether further intervention in your family is required. Your ban will last ten years.

For the above reasons, putting your name on the ISA register is a colossal risk - you are entrusting your career, reputation and family-life to a government quango which has no meaningful accountability to traditional views of evidence or justice.

There is a chance to force the ISA to be disbanded. Write to the shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling MP, saying that you appreciate that he has said the ISA needs to be 'cut back'. Tell him that this is not enough and that you hope he can state publicly that it will be dismantled.

MPs take letters seriously, it is assumed that for every one person who writes, a hundred others agree.

The address is:

Chris Grayling MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

Children, Church and Survival

2009-09-11T08:46:00.002+01:00

On a number of occasions I have suggested that British evangelicals need to be realistic about the cultural situation we are currently living in. Our culture is becoming rapidly more and more oppressive to churches and families which desire to embody Christian principles of speech, behaviour and mission.

Evangelicals in the UK are often well educated and concerned for evangelism. It is odd then that so few seem to make the connections between current government initiatives, and their inevitable impact on society, mission and family.

To take only one recent example - the full extent of powers of the new 'Independent Safeguarding Authority' have now been made public.

People who have regular or frequent contact with children will be subject to new checks and database recording, in addition to current CRB checks. The organisation's website goes into some detail about the nature of 'regulated' activity and so forth - notice any historical parallels?!

The director of the Indepependent Safeguarding Authority is quoted on the BBC site as explaining:

"We want to make sure we have got appropriate safeguards in place so that people with backgrounds we don't want to work with children and vulnerable adults are not entering the work place."

But exactly what sort of people are the sort that 'we don't want to work with children'?

Obviously, the groups top of the list are paedophiles and child killers - the energy to set up the ISA came in the wake of the Soham murders. But make no mistake, the remit of the ISA goes much further than the paedophile. Society has already accepted government regulation which enforces anti-Christian ideas about what kind of person is permitted to adopt a baby; is there any reason to think that after trampling over Christian views in the adoption case, suddenly there will be fairness and generosity?

'Soft intelligence' will be taken into account in vetting people - translated into vernacular that is accusations made anonymously which are unproven. Again - ring any bells historically?

The ISA is covered by most of the main newspapers in today's media. Each paper picks up on different aspects of the organisation. One part of the approach that will be taken by the ISA which ought to gravely concern Christians is the assessment of beliefs and lifestyle:

'The scheme will even take into account lifestyles, relationships and beliefs when assessing an individual’s background.' (Daily Telegraph, 11 Sept '09)

How is all this going to affect Church Sunday Schools, Christian Camps, families, Home Education and Churches?

That is a question the vast majority of evangelicals will ask. Tragically, most will fail to ask the questions that should be asked subsequent to that. Questions such as, how far should I as a Christian accept the State controlling me and my family? Where is the point to draw a line and say, I will not submit to what you are commanding? Will evangelicals work together to resist things which will undermine the Gospel? What is the role for passive civil protest?

A certain kind of person can actually get excited about the prospect of having more bureaucratic regulation to fill out - it gives such a sense of legitimacy and acceptance. It can also be shortsighted. The inevitable impact on evangelism and family life and church needs to be seen clearly.

Do evangelicals realise that to the people who will be assessing their beliefs, teaching orthodox views to children about sex, is viewed as tantamount to abuse? Will evangelicals who have tacitly supported a government which has done so much to damage the spread of the Gospel, be able to recognise their weakness and repent? The Book of Common Prayer talks of the need to confess 'things left undone.' There is much that has been left undone. Will there now be any public, effective leadership?

Ventures such as this have in other periods of history been part of the end of Christians being able to live and speak freely. They have been harbingers of people fleeing countries for freedom elsewhere, families getting broken up, discrimination, prison and even death. What will a mother say to the investigators who call at her home, instigated by an anonymous phone call from a nosy neighbour who takes offence at Christian beliefs and discipline?

Even atheist, anti-Christians such as Pullman are outraged by the new remit of the ISA. He is making public statements, resisting the organisation and pointing out its injustices. I can't find a single public response yet from an evangelical Christian leader, and recent history does not give much hope to the idea that Evangelicals could work together to offer effective leadership in an area such as this. In the absence of evangelical comment on something which will have considerable influence on church and family, here are links to a small selection of the secular commentators:

Telegraph

BBC

Daily Mail

And the web site of the ISA:

Independent Safeguarding Authority

A Root of Error

2009-09-10T17:13:00.004+01:00

Am (slowly) translating one of Augustine's sermons on Romans 7. Augustine exposes a link between sinful behaviour and the interpretation of the passage made by his opponents.

Augustine describes how people justify their own sin and comments:

Putant se apostolo esse similes. s. 151.1.

They think the apostle himself to be the same.

The assumption that the Bible will simply say what we would say, is always a temptation. Indeed, it may well be a root of most of our errors. It is very difficult to avoid thinking that we are similis to God, for in a post-Genesis 3 fallen order, it feels natural to assume that we are indeed 'like God.'

Augustine's insight on Romans 7 flowed from his ability to follow through on one of his central theological beliefs - people are dissimilis to God in two important respects - we are created and we are sinful. When we assume that God's Word will say what we would say, we may have forgotten in what respect we are dissimilis to God.

Practical application? Pick up the Bible and expect to be surprised!

Dead Souls

2009-07-15T17:45:00.004+01:00

I have been writing a section of my thesis today on the Soul. This was a topic which interested Augustine through his whole life. He blazed the way in the West towards a spiritual view of God and the soul - managing to reject the Stoic view which dominated philosophy, that all which exists must be physical. After several years in the sect of the Manichees, he also managed to shrug off their idea that the soul contains sparks of the divine imprisoned in a body.

Once Augustine managed to conceive the possibility of a non-physical soul, he began to find ways to make sense of scripture.

With his famously hierarchical view of the universe, Augustine represented God as being above the soul, and the soul above the body. So, God gives life to the soul; the soul gives life to the body.

This enabled him to argue that the soul is immortal, but only in a certain manner of speaking. It is immortal in that even when it is dead, it can give life to the body. It is mortal in the sense that it dies when not enlivened by God.

All of this meant that Augustine could preach about the rather grotesque image of bodies walking round the place, animated and inhabited by dead souls:

‘The soul is able to die, it is able to be killed. It is certainly immortal. Look at what I dare to say – it is immortal and able to die. That is why I said that it is immortal in its own kind of way.’ s. 65.3.

‘So wonderful a thing is the soul, that it is able to give life to a body though it is itself dead. So great a thing is the soul, so excellent a creature, that it is able to enliven a body though it is itself dead.’ s. 65.6.

‘The soul is dead without God. Every person without God has a dead soul. You mourn the deceased: mourn rather the sinner, mourn the wicked, mourn the faithless.’ s. 65.7.

It makes for a hauntingly disturbing sermon illustration, which Augustine seems to have played up as he acted out the situation of asking somebody to try and prove their soul is not dead!

People worry that Augustine's highlighting of the soul as the true reality of a person denigrates the body, or was overly Platonic. Taken in isolation from the rest of his theology this is an understandable concern - but it should be remembered that alongside the above doctrine, Augustine argued strongly for the physical actual resurrection of the body. When he parted company from the beliefs of his day, he did so with verve. Am writing about the resurrection tomorrow.

For Sale

2009-07-14T14:54:00.004+01:00

I was speaking with an elderly woman a few days ago, and asked her how she became a Christian. There were lots of interesting things to reflect on in her story, which involved traveling round post-war Europe, educating her children and the death of her husband.

She was very enthusiastic for the Lord and thankful for the good news of salvation through Christ. When she came to explain the details of how she was told the message of Christianity, I pressed her for more details on what convinced her to become a Christian.

Her answer was - 'The man who talked to me about Jesus was so clearly not trying to sell me anything. He was just talking about reality.'

I think we try to sell the Gospel too much these days. The Gospel is indeed more credible when those who believe it, appreciate that it is reality.

Wrestling with God

2009-07-13T10:04:00.002+01:00

Here is a sermon I preached on Genesis 32 recently, at Eden Baptist Church, Cambridge.
The passage is one of the more mysterious ones in the Old Testament - it poses several challenges to the preacher: How to preach the Gospel from it, the legitimacy of character examples, the need to outline Jacob's earlier life - and the sheer strangeness of the scene. God wrestling with Jacob; I learned a lot from studying the passage.

We enjoyed visiting Eden Baptist. Sermon is at link below:

Genesis 32: Wrestling with God

Calvinism - Drink Shaken

2009-07-10T14:14:00.002+01:00

Follow the link below for a short article I wrote for Reformation21, the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals.

It reflects on the significance of piety in Calvin's development of the Institutes.

Calvinism - Best Drunk Shaken

Romans 1 & Knowing God

2009-07-10T08:26:00.004+01:00

We have been reading Romans past two days - it has been on my mind as I go about daily business.

As a result a thought occurred to me-

On the train I noticed a number of older academics attending a conference in Cambridge celebrating Charles Darwin. I have no idea what the conference stated or taught, but it was clear from their conversation that they as individuals celebrated the fact that Darwin legitimised their atheism.

It seems obvious to me that Darwin is regaled and hailed as far more than a scientist - he is seen by many as a revolutionary theologian who has disproved the existence of God. Having read his writings I know that he did no such thing, and the praise of him has much of the spirit of Psalm 2 about it - 'let us throw of our chains....'

However the ongoing 'debate' about atheism/theism and Darwin/creation legitimises assumptions that run contrary to Romans 1.

The long and short of it is this. As I listened to the conversation about atheism on the train, I realised that the 'debate' has made many Christians engage with secularists as if said secularists are unsure whether there is a God. There is need of evidence and a debate - we think.

However Romans 1 teaches that not only do all people know there is a God - we also know how he feels towards us. We know that he feels angry. This point, that we know God is angry, is one I do not believe is taught or preached widely today. Our friendship evangelism, courses, invite events, publicity efforts etc seem calculated to win people already very inclined to think God feels warmly towards them and will help out with life when they are polite enough to make time for him. They do not seem aimed to rouse and awaken those who harden themselves to the fact they know - they have offended God and he is angry with them.

Ironically, the suppressed knowledge that God is there, and is angry at us, is a very plausible explanation for the excessive regaling of any thinker who we think gives us justification to disbelieve God's existence.

Trek Illustration - Beam me up!

2009-06-26T21:40:00.002+01:00

Be warned - this recent sermon has a Star Trek illustration.

Through gritted teeth a small number of non fans have admitted it may help clarify an important Biblical concept.

Beam it down at:

Mark 7 Sermon

Marriage?

2009-06-09T19:21:00.002+01:00

I am preparing to marry my wife's sister this weekend...

Thankfully (no offence intended) not in the sense Laban arranged it for Jacob in Gen.29.

This will just involve leading some marriage vows and preaching on 1 John 4.

Love of Money

2009-06-01T13:42:00.003+01:00

When invited to preach at a church recently, I felt that the media stories on MPs' Expenses, suggested that a sermon on the Love of Money may be apposite.

Here is an exposition on the final chapter of 1 Timothy, which contains the famous warning about the love of money being a root of all kinds of evil.

A fascinating quote from Simon Cowell is included...

Sermon on 1 Tim. 6.

Assurance: A touch stone?

2009-05-14T19:24:00.002+01:00

I felt a bit guilty recently, since I realised that I have on several occasions criticised the book 'Evangelicalism in Modern Britain, A history from the 1730s to the 1980s', by D. W. Bebbington. I have done that without reading it...

I have in the past mentioned that I feel his definition of evangelicalism to be inadequate and misleading. Without going into it in too much detail, I am of the opinion that it is too sociological a definition. There are varied consequences of this, some of which permit his history to proceed; others give room for a form of evangelicalism I, for one, am not fully comfortable with.

Anyway, I felt a twinge of guilt at criticising a book I have never read (I know I know - I am sorry!). As an act of penitence I bought a lovely secondhand hardback copy yesterday from my Cambridge bookdealer.
Having read the work, I still disagree with his definition, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that after the opening chapter, the definition seems to fade from the book, and one gets a fascinating romp through evangelical history.

I learned a lot, especially from the sections on the late 1700s. The 1980s were, I think, rather thinly covered. Little real appreciation for the significance of Stott, Lloyd-Jones and Lucas was demonstrated. All were mentioned too cursorily; perhaps that was due to the proximity of time when Bebbington was writing.

Anyway, the point which intrigued me was Bebbington's highlighting of the doctrine of Assurance:

'The three symptoms of discontinuity in the Anglo-Saxon tradition of conservative Protestantism should not be seen in isolation from each other. They are bound together by an underlying factor, a shift in the received doctrine of assurance with all that it entailed.' p.42.

Now I find this very interesting.... For it is a doctrinal analysis of aspects of evangelicalism. This I would commend as a worthwhile exploration. However it is not the sort of analysis that sits well with his sociological definition of evangelicalism. In other words, I think that the crux of Bebbington's argument is a doctrinal critique. However that for which he is best known, and what he states upfront as his terms of debate, is sociological.

Assurance is indeed very important. We need to try and avoid several errors:

1. We should avoid suggesting that it is normal or good to lack assurnace.
2. We ought to resist basing assurance upon merely rational deductions.
3. We must discern the different situations people seeking assurnace are coming from - ie the uninformed new believer is in a different place to the long term believer who is sinning with a high hand.

As we go about all this, we should long for a doctrinal articulation, in the context of pastoral ministration, which gives due weight to the unchanging Word and ever living Spirit. It should go without saying, that a merely sociological understanding of assurance never gave anybody a peaceful night's sleep!

Step out of the Crowd

2009-05-13T10:38:00.003+01:00

Here is a sermon I preached recently on Mark 5 - the raising of Jairus' daughter and the healing of a woman.

Stepping out of the Crowd - Personal Faith

I enjoyed the study for, and delivery of this sermon. One of the main reasons for this was that I allowed myself to explore and develop the themes that I found interesting in the passage. In doing so, I was following advice I have heard from a well known preacher- 'Preach what you find interesting and the listener will probably find it interesting too.'

Recently, I defended that approach in a public class, and was rebuked with the reproach that, 'Such an attitude leads to cults.' I reflected on that comment for a month or two, and while it contains a grain of truth, I surmise that it is erroneous. The advice is sound, because it is not intended to be advice which is followed in isolation from all the other principles of Bible handling and exposition. On the contrary, the advice is a necessary acceptance of two truisms:

1. The alternative, to preach that which the preacher is not interested in nor drawn to, involves an inner disjunction that leads to hypocrisy (in extreme cases) or, more usually, a performance in which the preacher's heart is not in it.

2. It is constitutive of good preaching that the preacher make personal selection of focus, emphases and direction. This is simply an acceptance of the fact that God chooses to use human preachers and does not simply email his interpretation to congregations.

In the end, all preachers preach what they have found interesting. Following the advice to do so is simply a healthy recognition of what we must do. It is only when we realise what we are doing, that we can learn to do it better.

So - I hope the interpretation of the passage is sound, and I also am unashamed to say that it focuses on issues in Mark's Gospel that I have found interesting and which grip me. Other preachers may not focus on the crowd theme, neither might they take so much time to explore the significance of the Mosaic Cleanliness Laws. That is fine - we are all different and come at the passage with our own lived experiences.

I guess that has implications for the issue of people copying other people's sermon material... But I will leave you to ponder that for yourself!

Stepping out of the Crowd - Personal Faith

Old Testament Believers

2009-05-12T12:27:00.002+01:00

While giving a day of teaching on the Gospel and Law, last week, I enjoyed the question times.

One issue that was raised is, 'What did an Old Testament saint who goes to heaven believe?'

For what it is worth, I think that a fruitful approach to this often asked question, is to make some effort to distinguish the covenants.

As Paul tells us in Galatians, the covenant to Abraham is the gospel. John Calvin, following Augustine, points out that this proclamation of the gospel is in temporal shadows. It is, however, the very gospel by which all believers are saved.

My suggestion is that an Old Testament believer offered his or her sacrifices at the temple, in obedience to the Mosaic Covenant. However, they did not expect these to cleanse them from sin - they obeyed the Law as best they could and cast their hopes upon God's commitment to fulfill the Abrahamic Covenant. Such faith would be the faith of Abraham, as commended in Rom. 4.

The undergirding importance of the Abrahamic Covenant helps us understand how men such as David could see beyond and through the Mosaic sacrifices, in his rejection of physical sacrifices (Ps. 51).

This interpretation is commended by the fact that the OT Prophets appealed to the Abrahamic Covenant as their hope of salvation beyond the Mosaic Curse of Exile; Micah 7:20.

In this way, the unity of the OT and NT is maintained with due deference to the shape and development of the narrative. The belief of OT saints is recognisable as both genuine faith, and a form of such faith appropriate to their stage of salvation history.

The Future End

2009-04-24T10:30:00.004+01:00

I'm in the Classics Library reading Augustine's sermons - gathering material for a chapter entitled 'Preaching on Death & Resurrection.'

Had to catch myself and enjoy the moment as I realised that I was simultaneously experiencing two things-

Music playing through headphones was Muse - 'Thoughts of a Dying Atheist':

'It scares the hell out of me,
The end is all I can see,
I know the moment is near,
And there is nothing we can do,
Look through our faithless eye
Are you afraid to die?'

As my music played this track, I was reading the following words preached by Augustine in about the year 415AD:

'You see the dead bones, the burnt flesh - will this body rise again you ask?
Believe.
Because if you believe in this, your soul will be raised to life. Indeed, believe, and your soul is raised now. "Do not be surprised at this - an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the son of God and live." (Jn.5:24)' Sermon.127.15.

Experiencing both the hopelessness and hope in a simultaneous sensory moment. It's quite a thing, but is it not essential if you are to be an effective preacher and evangelist? Let's all share a moment of schizophrenia and enter into the atheism of hopeless secularity. It is a dark place in need of a light.

Thielicke on Spurgeon

2009-04-22T10:47:00.002+01:00

A tutor lent me a copy of Thielicke's book 'Encounter with Spurgeon', yesterday.

It is a remarkable work - Thielicke was one of the great German Lutheran theologians in the post-war years. Men of such a high academic standing do not usually publish on, or even encounter, what may be termed 'popular preaching.'

Yet here we have Thielicke publishing a selection of Spurgeon's works, and adding his own introduction. This introduction is gold-dust. It contains numerous splendid insights about preaching that are very much needed today.

The book, originally published in the 1960s, now sells for around 15 pounds. However you can read the entire introductory essay on Googlebooks, for free - and most of the rest of the work.

In all seriousness - this short essay ought to be read by every preacher. Check it out for free at:

Encounter with Spurgeon - Thielicke

Comparing preachers in training with flowers, Thielicke mourned:

'We keep killing flowers in the bud, because we are no longer capable of letting things grow. We can no longer let things grow because we have forgotten how to pray 'Thy Kingdom come.' In its place we have put our 'manager's faith,' our belief that everything can be produced and organised... We say 'our God reigns,' - and still we run around madly trying to keep the ecclesiastical machine going... The result of this may be some kind of success, but it is not the fruit of the Spirit... We are pragmatists, awed by the art of influencing people.' p.12, 13.

Planet Narnia - Watch it on BBC

2009-04-21T19:24:00.002+01:00

If you live in the UK, then you can watch the recently broadcast BBC programme 'Planet Narnia.'

I have looked into the theory presented and find it very compelling - as the author says, 'It is a real literary discovery.'

If you are at all interested in Narnia - then you should watch this programme. In addition, the final ten minutes or so is an excellent response to modern scientific atheism. Check it out and jump into a 'meaning drenched universe!'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00jz2qp/The_Narnia_Code/

By the way - when you see 'E Staircase' in the Cambridge college - that is my staircase from whence I pen this blog....

Preaching and the Theologian

2009-04-20T12:03:00.002+01:00

I have just finished reading the second volume of 'The Evangelical Faith' by Thielicke. He has many thoughtful insights. Since a lot of us were preaching or listening to preaching yesterday, here is a comment from Thielicke:

'Preaching, then, is an exercise in conservation which is indispensable for the theologian.
Its correctives keep him close to the heart of the matter and protect him against the ferment of destruction and disintegration which will inevitably be present in reflection when it is not corrected by immediacy.
Being direct, preaching is the most appropriate form of Christological statement.'
p.331

Too clever?

2009-04-17T08:45:00.002+01:00

For those of us who work in the university environment, it is easy to put too high a premium on cleverness and intelligence - those gifts of God that often resist the Gift of God.

Kierkegaard made a relevant and amusing sarcastic riposte to Hegel's famous model of intellectual enquiry 'thesis, antithesis and synthesis.' It is worth a moment:

"I am so stupid that I cannot understand philosophy; the antithesis of this is that philosophy is so clever that it cannot comprehend my stupidity. These antitheses are mediated in a higher unity; in our common stupidity..." Kierkegaard, Prefaces.

Preach the simple Gospel

2009-04-15T10:44:00.002+01:00

There are still some who think that all you need to be an efficient evangelism machine (!) is a simple Gospel outline and relentless energy. Increasing numbers of people are however searching for more profound ways to connect the Gospel with people; ways that can be heard and understood. We have many people to thank for such positive developments - Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, DA Carson - to name but a few.

But perhaps we ought to be especially thankful for the man who started the ball rolling, and spoke up for the need to communicate the full riches of the Gospel. There were not many taking the stand he took in the 1960s. Here is a comment from Francis Schaeffer's work, 'He is there and He is not Silent':

"At times I get tired of being asked why I don’t just preach the 'simple gospel'. You have to preach the simple gospel so that it is simple to the person to whom you are talking, or it is no longer simple. The dilemma of modern man is simple: he does not know why man has any meaning. He is lost. Man remains a zero. This is the damnation of our generation, the heart of modern man’s problem. But if we begin with a personal and this is the origin of all else, then the personal does have meaning, and man and his aspirations are not meaningless. Man’s aspirations to the reality of personality are in line with what was originally there and what has always intrinsically been.
It is the Christian who has the answer at this point — a titanic answer! So why have we as Christians gone on saying the great truths in ways that nobody understands? Why do we keep talking to ourselves, if men are lost and we say we love them? Man’s damnation today is that he can find no meaning for man."

Unbelieving Abraham?

2009-04-14T17:32:00.003+01:00

I have been writing some teaching material on the Abrahamic Covenant recently. As I read over the texts and review various sermons on the issues, one small point has arisen.

Many preachers criticise Abraham for taking Lot with him (Gen.12:4). This is said to be evidence that Abraham did not fully trust God to care for him, and so he disobeyed the command of Gen. 12:1. This assessment of Abraham is made fairly frequently, since Gen. 12 is referred to regularly by those who are influenced by the Biblical Theology books from G. Goldsworthy etc.

I am just wondering - ought we to be more nuanced in our assessment? The pastoral value of making such a negative comment is to suggest to listeners - 'You should do better than Abraham.' However one might just as easily exhort listeners - 'You should imitate Abraham.'

The command to leave his 'kindred' and 'father's house' (ESV) could not be an absolute command to go on his own - that would have necessitated him to leave his wife. Though she was barren, the alternative to taking her; that Abraham could be expected to later take a Gentile wife, would fly in the face of God's choice of him as Israel's father.

As soon as we grant that the command was not an absolute call to an individual trek - we are left unsure how general or specific his leaving was to be.

The ESV study Bible notes (really excellent but not inerrant - I have discovered a few places one may wish to respectfully demur!) specifically comment on the issue and say that we ought to assume a positive view of Lot accompanying Abraham. At least I think that is what the notes imply - or they could be hedging their bets a bit: 'Abram may have been responsible for Lot...Since by this stage Lot is wealthy, readers may assume that he desires to support Abram's mission.' (ESV notes on 12:4) Are they specifically saying that Lot thought it was a good idea, but remaining silent on Abram's attitude?

Add to the mix that this is the crucial turning point of salvation history, and despite future unbelief mingled with belief, Abraham is held up as the man of faith (Rom. 4); All things considered, I suspect that we ought to hold back on criticising our father at this specific point. I think that those who went with Abraham were evidence not of his unbelief, but God's graciousness in catching his family up in the blessings of the Gospel which was preached to Abraham (Gal. 3:8).

Boring Words

2009-04-03T10:55:00.004+01:00

One of the aims of my academic work, currently, is to encourage evangelical preachers to remember that they must avoid being boring. We need to preserve our accuracy and rigour in handling the Bible, but dullness will undermine the value of said enterprise.

In an opinion piece in The Guardian, Simon Jenkins makes the same point in the secular sphere:

'When a good speech fails, it is not because its words are mendacious - many of the best speeches have been stuffed with lies - but because it is boring.'

Read the full article at:

All Spin and Flam

Seven Deadly Sins (4) Sadness

2009-03-30T10:43:00.009+01:00

The original sin of tristita, sadness, was in time replaced with ‘sloth.’ Many today struggle to accept that sadness can be sinful. Sadness may be something for which we are culpable, or it may not be. When our sadness is a condition for which we are not responsible, our response to it is more where our responsibility arises.

Our secular culture can make two main errors in its approach to sadness. It can fear exploring below the surface, or it can become endlessly entangled in the feelings. Not for the first time, humanity makes two contradictory mistaken responses to a situation!

Martyn Lloyd-Jones opened his classic book ‘Spiritual Depression’ with a study on Psalm 42.

Psalm 42:11 Why are you cast down, O my soul, and why are you in turmoil within me? Hope in God; for I shall again praise him, my salvation and my God.

MLJ notes, ‘The main art in spiritual living is to know how to handle yourself. You have to take yourself in hand, address yourself, address yourself, preach to yourself, question yourself… You must remind yourself of God, who God is, and what God is and what God has done… Then end on this great note: defy yourself, defy other people, defy the devil and the whole world. Say with the Psalmist ‘I shall praise my God.’ (Spiritual Depression, p.21)

One of the places in scripture which addresses the issue of sadness in a sustained manner, is the section of teaching Jesus gives his disciples in John 14-17. Two important points may be made which arise from the turning point in salvation history, which is the focus of these chapters – the imminent absence of Jesus from earth.

Jesus draws attention to the disciples’ sadness at the fact that he will soon leave them:

John 16:5-7 Now I am going to him who sent me, and none of you asks me, 'Where are you going?' 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart.

I take it from Jesus’ words here, that sadness must be a part of the normal Christian experience, as we live on a planet from which our Lord is absent. Knowing Jesus brings great happiness into one’s life, but sadness is not ameliorated in a straightforward manner through this. For the more one loves Jesus, the more one is sad and sorrowful that he is not with us today. If we love Jesus, then in a real sense, sorrow should fill our heart at the realisation that he is in heaven rather than with us.

Jesus goes on to draw his disciples’ attention to the Holy Spirit:

7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.

The disciple of Jesus is not left alone, and ought not try to deal with sadness in his or her own strength. For the Spirit has real supernatural power, which he desires to help us with. It is a pastoral tragedy that so many Christians think that they should face life in their own strength, not realising that as our Lord imparted power to heal the sick, in his earthly ministry, so he imparts power to believe and rejoice, today, through his Spirit. The power at work is no less real.

As we see the inevitability of sadness, due to Jesus’ absence, we should rely on the available power of the Spirit. The Spirit’s power to uplift is as much the result of Jesus’ going away, as is our greatest sadness. Obviously, it is a cause of great concern that the things which most cause sadness to us are often far less deserving of our tears, than our Lord’s absence.

Augustine preached about sadness is Sermon 254.2 He used the Latin word tristitia, and said:

‘Sadness is like dung. Dumped in your home it makes your place filthy, dumped in its proper place it makes useful compost. If you are sad the way God wants you to be sad, then you are sad with repentance for your sins. Paul says that the sadness that is according to God produces repentance leading to salvation… We cannot reach the good life except by repentance of the bad life. Will you ever be pleased to find dung in a fresh sheaf of wheat? Yet it is by means of dung that you produce that beautiful wheat. Ugliness is the way to beauty.’

The Christian Church was wrong to remove sadness from the list of seven deadly sins. One can understand the difficulty of explaining in what ways sadness is good, sinful and inevitable. It is not a straightforwardly obvious sin. However it is a condition addressed by scripture and the Church Fathers. Our secular age neither knows how to be sad nor truly happy. Jesus Christ enables us to bring joy out of sadness, and his words on the matter were spoken from the perspective of cross and resurrection shaped experience.

Previous Posts in Seven Deadly Sins series:

1. Envy

2. Anger

3. Avarice

Calvin on the Cross: Feel anything?

2009-03-25T20:54:00.006Z

I recently discovered that John Calvin's Latin is much more pleasant to translate than Augustine's.

The irony that Latin may have been written more carefully and accurately in the 16th century by a Frenchman, than by a Latin speaker of the 4th, does not help me struggle through Augustine's odd allusions and spoken Latin...

Anyway, I have enjoyed looking at a few pieces of Calvin's works in Latin - here are a few lines from one of his letters. I think it is worth pondering since it is a splendid example of the way Calvin wrote about scripture with real passion, and expected other students of the Bible to respond to the text with due emotion and feeling. Latin first, my (rough) translation below:

Tales erant perfidorum in Dei
filium voces: Si filius Dei es, descende de cruce
et credemus tibi.
O christianam pietatem!
o evangelicam caritatem!
o praeclarum facinus pro tutela
et quiete ecclesiae excogitatum!
Quis tam ferreus et Neronianus haec audiens non horrescat?
Quis tam Busiricus et adamantinus haec siccis oculis legat?
John Calvin, Letter 1918

They were of such a treacherous kind as would shout against God's son: If you are God's son, descend from the cross and we will believe in you.
O Christian piety!
O evangelical love!
O beautiful crime which was devised for the protection and peace of the church!
Who could be so hardened and like Nero as to be hearing this and not tremble?
Who could be so like Busiris and adamantine that he could read this with dry eyes?

NB: Calvin has woven into his comment two classical allusions - to Nero and Busiris.
Nero is quite well known today as the Roman emperor famed for his cruelty in persecuting Christians.
Busiris was a mythological King of Egypt known for his xenophobic practice of executing all foreigners who entered his country.

With two neat name droppings, Calvin conjures up pictures of the hard-hearted unfeeling person before the cross as both cruel and racist.

Feel anything yet?

Abortion - raising awareness

2009-03-11T17:29:00.002Z

Psalm 139:13-16 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb. 14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there were none of them.

While we were in hospital waiting for our baby to be born, who had died in the womb, we were uncomfortably aware that babies of the same age could, in this country, just about still be legally aborted. The sitting of technological medical advances alongside barbarity says a lot about the sin that pollutes the human heart.

Biblical Words

2009-03-05T08:40:00.002Z

When you have to speak of terrible events, what sort of language do you reach for?
It is rare to see it today in secular media, but it used to be the case that educated writers utilised the power of Biblical imagery and rhetoric. The metaphors, characters and events of the Bible are the great images of Western civilisation - indeed they are God's images.

So it is quite remarkable to read an entire opinion piece, from Will Self, which is dripping with Biblical allusion. If you don't know your Bible, then it is mumbo jumbo. The more of the allusions you get, the more you chuckle, and the weightier is his interpretation of reality. Have a look - he has it all, the whore of Babylon, pharisees and High Priests. The name of Yahweh is even used - though blasphemously identified with Rupert Murdoch!

CS Lewis used to have the Bible as a set text for his english students, since he knew they could not hope to understand literature without the foundational text. After reading Will Self, why don't you go read your Bible - it expands the vocabulary and imagination!

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/46659,opinion,will-self-flagellating-sir-fred-will-not-appease-the-voters

Luther was Wrong!

2009-03-02T20:23:00.002Z

Please don't ask Piper to write a book against me just yet... read the rest of the post first.

A friend asked me a couple of weeks ago to track down an Augustine quote, which he had found in the Augsburg Confession; founding document of the Lutheran church. The quote is:

St. Augustine writes in the epistle against Petilian, that, “We should not obey those bishops who have been duly elected, if they commit errors, or teach or ordain any thing contrary to the divine Scripture.”

You can read it in full at: http://augsburgreader.blogspot.com/2006/11/article-xxviii.html

Neither my friend nor I could find the quote in Augustine's work against Petilian (A Donatist with whom Augustine clashed theological horns). The work against Petilian is well worth reading as one of Augustine's finest arguments against Donatism. You can view it at: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1409.htm

I had a look in Augustine's letters and searched through the various mentions of Petilian in other works by Augustine - to no avail. I was at a loss to explain where this quote can be found - all over the internet we are told it is in Augustine's letter/treatise against Petilian - but it was not.

Then the heretical thought occurred to me - what if the Augsburg Confession were wrong??! Permitting such a thought opened up a further avenue of investigation.

I checked the Latin version of the Augsburg Confession, which reads:

Et Augustinus contra Petiliani epistolam inquit: Nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est, sicubi forte
falluntur, aut contra canonicas Dei Scripturas aliquid sentiunt.
Augsburg Confession, Article 28,28.

A quick search of Augustine's works in Latin, for the word 'consentiendum' revealed that the Augsburg Confession correctly quotes Augustine, but wrongly attributes the source. The quote is in fact from 'Ad Catholicos Fratres Liber Unos', Chapter 28. Petilianus has nothing to do with this work; it is a short letter of summary arguments and proof texts against popular Donatist views. Unlike his more famous work 'Against Petilianus', Ad Catholicos Fratres is not mentioned in Retractions.

So - there you have it. The Augsburg Confession is wrong; a minor error admittedly, but we are talking about the founding document of a major reformed denomination.
One would like to hope that Melanchthon and Luther would enjoy the irony of the proof that the humanist slogan 'ad fontes', to the sources, was not as reliable as some of their secular contemporaries imagined!

Thank goodness Cranmer saved us Anglicans from the embarrassment of misquoting documents in the 39 Articles...

Excellence - in all areas

2009-02-28T10:04:00.006Z

Augustine's first treatise was about Music. It is well worth reading for many reasons. One of the things it reminds me is that he sought out and allowed himself to be impressed with, excellence in the realm of the arts. As a theological principle, we ought to refuse to seperate and divide our world into secular and sacred. Part of the implication is that Christians should seek to broaden their capacity for appreciation and enjoyment of, excellence. Whether it is music, drama, literature or art- we Christians can affirm all that requires creatures to hone and refine the gifts God has endowed us with.

In that spirit, here is a video clip of David Beckham hanging out with the NBA Basketball star, Kevin Garnett.

Garnett tries several times to kick a ball into a basketball hoop. Note the casual skill with which Beckhahm does it in one attempt. The sports star may not reflect on who gave him his skill and ability. It may not always be used in such a way that God gets the glory. But if you are a Christian, you know. You can pause for a second and wonder at the insights of Psalm 8.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1559540561/bctid14362210001

Wrongs and Wrights Piping Up

2009-02-26T14:49:00.002Z

When I was an undergraduate at Oxford, ten years ago, the 'New Perspective' on Paul was, well, old. However debates about its significance and various applications continues.

As best I can ascertain, I find it difficult to get that excited about the New Perspective, since I still feel as I did a few years ago, Firstly, that the methodology and history of the development of the view is overly sociological; Secondly, that the doctrinal conclusions reached by the method do not fit with several important texts in the Bible.

However, I read John Piper's critique of NT Wright's views on Justification yesterday, and today began to read NT Wrights new book 'Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Plan.'

I honestly don't think I can make any substantive comments on Wright's book yet- the rhetoric and humour of it still stun me too much!
The opening two pages describe those who reject New Perspective views as being like both people who insist the sun revolves round the earth, and angry Pharisees! Now, to be fair, there is a serious point made by this image - developed later in the book as a metaphor for a God centred view of salvation. It is also used in the concluding pages as part of bitingly ironic satire of Paul. Still, it is a rhetorical approach that goes far beyond what one normally gets from academic theologians. Perhaps we ought to have more of it.

Once one gets past the rhetoric - often very funny and witty - one struggles to pin down the precise argument Wright wants to make. (Perhaps this is intended - on several occasions Wright says that if you don't agree with him it is because you have not understood him....) But the difficulty I have is that while Piper clearly points out the detailed definition of justification which he rejects, Wright keeps saying that it is the bigger picture of the Bible that Piper is neglecting - the Spirit, the Covenant, Israel and so forth. I suspect that if you want to know what Piper believes about the Spirit or covenants, he will tell you (indeed his sermon repository will preach it at you loudly)- but his detailed comments on the meaning of justification do, I feel, require a slightly more precise response than that given by Wright. It won't do to keep shifting a debate about definitions to the wider canvass of that which was not said. (Incidentally such an approach was a rhetorical strategy of Cicero's)

Still - I highly recommend both books. The sense of humour and irony in cracking jokes about the old new perspective is heartening. Further books on the topic are threatened...

New Journal

2009-02-26T14:33:00.002Z

I have been asked to provide a link to Ecclesia Reformanda, a new British Theology print journal.

All who know me are aware that I think there ought to be a good deal more entrepreneurialism in theology, ministry and teaching. There is far too much evidence that British evangelicals sort of stopped doing new things shortly after the second world war.... (yes I know that is an exaggeration/poetic license!)

Anyway, in the spirit if supporting efforts and energies thrown towards encouraging people to think theologically - here is the link:

http://www.ecclesiareformanda.org.uk/

Oxford Martyrs

2009-02-25T11:41:00.006Z

I have always been proud of the way Oxford does not try and hide the religious heritage it has. Here is a striking blend of the Protestant ancient and modern.

These are promotional photos which will appear on Oxford buses soon, promoting the Ashmolean Museum. Pictured are Colin Dexter (centre)- author of the Inspector Morse crime novels. Alongside him are two of the famous actors from the TV series based on his work.

Each of the figures are holding artifacts relating to the imprisonment and burning of the Protestant Martyrs - the band which held Cranmer, his manacle and prison key. Each portrait also has words scrawled over their forehead, linking them to the protestant reformation:

From top to bottom-

1. Cranmer said: 'I have sinned, in that I signed with my hand what I did not believe with my heart'.
2. Latimer said: 'play the man; we shall this day by God's grace, light such a tourch in England as will never be put out'.
3. Cranmer watched from the prison as flames consumed their bodies. His turn to die a martyr was yet to come.

Proud to be a Protestant? Colin Dexter is.

You: An Introduction.

2009-02-12T10:50:00.007Z

A Book Review.

You: An Introduction.
By Michael Jensen.
Matthias Media, 2008.

Dr. Michael Jensen teaches nothing new, original or surprising in this short book. Which might make you think there is little point in reading it.

That would be a mistake. The reason why this book is worth reading becomes clear when we consider a little the nature of good doctrinal theology. Lack of new facts in the text is simply evidence of orthodoxy; not something to be taken for granted when reading modern theologians. The difficulty we sense is that if orthodoxy involves a certain rejection of the new, that may suggest that there is no need for fresh writings, and ‘sound’ doctrine ought to be dull, predictable and tedious.

Too much orthodox doctrinal writing is indeed simply endless repeating of the same surveys, facts and summaries. Such things make orthodoxy seem boring and other approaches enticing.

The value of this book is that it is an orthodox reflection upon one important aspect of doctrinal theology – anthropology, the doctrine of humanity – which while having nothing new to reveal, presents ideas in fresh and surprising ways. Karl Barth insisted that if Theology is to have the ‘gravity of true art’ then it must involve a certain ‘playfulness.’ (Barth, Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century, Ed. C. Gunton, p.423.) This book is playful in the way that commends orthodoxy.

The book has an earnest goal:

‘The point of this book is to ask what the Bible has to say about You, and to compare it to some of the current alternative views of You. You are a ‘You’ in relation to other ‘Yous’ – especially in relation to the one who made You.’ (p.12-13)

Yet the points are made in a number of playful ways. After drawing attention to some of the ways playfulness creeps up on you in the book, I will conclude by suggesting how this aspect of the text promises readers spiritual benefit.

Playfulness is suggested immediately by the bright colours on the cover of the book (yes, we do all judge books by their covers!). The simple title, with its double meaning invites a giggle. ‘You: An introduction.’ The use of the word ‘introduction’ is infinitely more attractive in Michael’s book, than say that by, for example, Maurice De Wulf’s- ‘An Introduction to Scholastic Philosophy, Medieval and Modern’! Chapter headings maintain the evocative tone set by the title. Chapters include, ‘Touched’, ‘Stuff’ and ‘boy/girl.’

The book has an air of freshness and originality in structure, as each chapter originated in form as a blog entry. A few comments from other bloggers have been preserved at the end of each chapter. The playful blending of book and blog, invites reflection on the role of the internet in society and personal identity. It also reminds us that as in the sixteenth century, Christians used the new technology of printing press to spread the Gospel, we must today utilise the new digital printing presses.

Playfulness is also seen in the casual blog-like style of writing, and various comments throughout. A few of my favourites were the introduction of the story of a woman who suffered from bleeding- ‘Here’s a touching story.’ (p.33) Read Mark 5:21-34 and think about it! The creation story of woman is introduced by a heading- ‘A gentle Ribbing.’ (p.91). Readers are gently mocked, ‘If you are a human being (and if any non-human beings are reading this book, could you please let me know?’ (p.115)

Michael permits himself to join in the play by sharing a few personal comments – these are not overly done, but hint at a right and proper personal engagement with the subject matter. I think, for example, of his admitting to finding watching the Paralympic Games uncomfortable (p.38).

In summary, this book is peripatetic. That is, in the apocryphal tradition of Aristotle, it is a wandering meander through the lecture hall. Michael’s book does not just lay out in clear logical order the facts of doctrine, rather it sets ideas alongside each other in creative, stimulating ways. (You can read about the Peripatetics at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripatetic_school.) We are invited to wander round the orthodox Biblical doctrine of humanity, to play with it, observe it from fresh angles and as we occasionally laugh – see again that the Bible is not only factually true but theologically rich.

The benefit of this to readers is that such doctrinal theology has a high likelihood of being the sort of doctrine that will impact readers and change them. All reading changes us, not because each book gives us a new piece of information, but because reading itself is an engagement in the process of re-envisioning our world. As Paul Ricoeur wrote, ‘As readers incorporate – consciously or unconsciously – into their vision of the world the lessons of their readings, then reading becomes a medium they cross through.’ (Ricoeur, Time & Narrative, Vol. 3 p.179.)

Reading orthodox doctrinal theology which is playful makes the process of change all the more enjoyable. This has too long been viewed as either a danger or optional extra for the theologian. In actuality the playfulness is itself part of faithful orthodoxy.

You can be purchased from:

USA orders: https://store.matthiasmedia.com/order/orders.asp

UK orders: http://www.thegoodbook.co.uk/You-an-introduction-you_1037/

Aussie orders: http://www.matthiasmedia.com.au/mmstore/you

Freedom!

2009-02-10T08:03:00.002Z

There has been much talk about slavery, and the extent to which Christianity ought to oppose it. I read a number of articles on the topic in preparation for this exposition of Philemon, but found they mostly failed to capture what I felt was the perspective of the apostle Paul. The reason for this is that when people approach the Bible, merely seeking to justify a position in a modern political debate, it is easy to miss the central concerns which preoccupy God and his apostle.

Briefly put - The NT works toward the genuine creation of freedom and dignity. This is not achieved by slogans, superficiality or idealism. Neither is it a false, unreal freedom that does not touch upon concrete life situations, such as slavery. The freedom God brings is wrought in the context of conversion, church and relationships - and it is the only meaningful point from which to offer both slaves and masters freedom.

Have a listen here:

http://www.cambridgepres.org.uk/cd/2009-01-04-am-hi.mp3

Music & Mobiles

2009-01-29T12:17:00.003Z

Augustine was famously sensitive to, and fascinated with, music. One of his earliest pieces of writing was a book 'On Music'. To modern readers it may appear to posit an overly mathematical view of music; in reality it is presenting a view of the universe as fundamentally musical - with rich implications for beauty, communication and relationships.

In The Confessions Augustine pondered the seemingly dangerous power of sung Psalms to overwhelm his aesthetic senses and make him weep. Was this his fallen nature- or a foretaste of heaven?

Renewing a mobile phone contract with T Mobile this morning gave me reason to ponder the power of music. When I suggested that I may leave for another company unless I was offered a cheaper deal (Yes I am from N. Ireland!), I was put on hold. The music which was played down the phone to me was:

'I'm leaving you for the last time,
You think you love me but you don't...'

It did not quite move me to tears, but I stayed with T Mobile. For the music. And infinite free text messages...

Calvin: A Brief Life

2009-01-09T17:22:00.006Z

At 8.08pm last night, our first baby was stillborn. His heart stopped in the womb and he went to heaven before being born to earth.

Before we met, my wife and I both had the same favourite names for children. Our baby boy was given the name we always intended for him - Calvin. Small enough to hold in your hand, he is infinitely precious. Somehow, we know that his all too brief life, was lived for the glory of God.

Little Calvin was named after one of the great theologians - John Calvin, born 500 years ago. Our baby Calvin is now a greater theologian than any person on earth; for he sees God face to face, rather than by faith.

Our God gloriously and awesomely rules over the timing of all events. With regard to the precise moment of death, John Calvin wrote:

"He is said to have fulfilled his day who leaves the world — for a certain time for our sojourn has been prefixed. God, when it pleases him, calls us to himself. Hence, our time is then fulfilled, as our course is said to be finished; for, as the life of man is compared in Scripture to a race, so death is like the goal." Commentary on Lamentations

This sovereign Lordship is particularly painful to behold when it is your own child who dies, in this case before he was born. As the Psalmist wrote:

"Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there were none of them." Psalm 139:16

As I mourn with my wife the loss of baby Calvin, we humble ourselves beneath the sovereign timing of God's gracious hand, and praise him that all his books are masterpieces. It just breaks our hearts that some of his books are so tragically short.

Jeremy Taylor on Secondary Issues

2009-01-02T14:41:00.007Z

I have not posted much recently as I have mainly been either driving accross Britain, or sitting in front of a log fire reading. Having just put a fresh log on the fire I intend this comment to be brief!

One of the books I read over past few days was the classic work on religious toleration, by Jeremy Taylor. Written in 1646, years before the secular pleas for toleration, by Locke, Taylor made a passionate case for not executing heretics. I like highlighting the full title of books, so here it is:

'A Discourse of the liberty of prophesying: shewing the unreasonableness of prescribing to other men's faith; and the iniquity of persecuting other men's opinions.'

Taylor, himself suffered as he was imprisoned and exiled to Wales. When the political mood changed, he secured the honour of being appointed a bishop in Ireland.

In today's secular culture, it may be wise for us to read Taylor's book. For when, as it now is, Christianity is a minority viewpoint in an increasingly hostile environment, we have good cause to avoid fighting and arguing over secondary issues. Taylor's book does not help us progress much towards clarifying the difficult questions of when a secondary issue becomes primary, or how in practice we live out the disputable issues which Paul mentions in Romans. John Stott, in his book 'Evangelical Truth' simply lists issues he thinks may be secondary. I suspect we need a more refined approach, perhaps describing three levels of importance rather than two, and we need to recognise that issues may vary in their position of importance due to the culture, setting and connected variables. Regardless of that, I have found that Taylor's writings are a great incentive to work harder at living out and formulating the charity and catholicity which is truly orthodox.

I have been enjoying some of Taylor's sermons also - which can be very witty. In one I came accross he commented, 'Let no man pull down the ministry of another - for if you can only make yourself look big by pulling another down, you must be a dwarf!'

A typical quote from his 'Of Liberty' is:

'Many mischiefs proceed not from this, that all men are not of one mind, for that is neither necessary nor possible, but that every opinion is made an article of faith, every article is the ground of a quarrel, every quarrel makes a faction, every faction is zealous, and all zeal pretends for God, and whatsoever is for God cannot be too much. We by this time are come to that pass, where we think we love not God except we hate our brother, and we have not religion except we persecute all but our own.'

The nice people at Google have digitised an entire copy of Taylor's book On Liberty and it may be downloaded here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=m3MsvjhzVVwC

500 Years of Calvin

2008-12-19T10:34:00.002Z

Next year is the 500th anniversary of the birth of the Genevan theologian and reformer, John Calvin. Love him or loath him, Calvin is one of the main figures in the history of Christian thought. In my opinion, engagement with the thought of Calvin is a rich and profitable experience. His magnum opus, the Institutes of Christian Religion, was written and rewritten throughout his ministry. Aimed at theological students preparing for ministry, it is pastoral in its aims.

Here is a two page PDF file, which if you print it out folds into a neat daily reading guide for 2009. Follow it daily and you will read through the entire Institutes in 2009. What better way to kickstart your theological reflection in the new year? As Karl Barth wrote to a friend when he was lecturing on Calvin, ' I could gladly and profitably set myself down and spend all the rest of my life just with Calvin.' That may be a bit excessive - but a few minutes each day for a year would not hurt.

http://www.rts.edu/uploads/Calvins_Institutes_in_2009_.pdf

PS You will need to buy a copy of Battle's edition of Institutes. It is available on Amazon

Carol Service

2008-12-04T09:48:00.003Z

This week I preached at the CICCU carol service. A really exciting opportunity to share the claims of Jesus with a large number of Cambridge students. John 1 is a tricky passage to preach on - it is like an overture to an opera, and one is left thinking what on earth can you leave out in order to deal with it!

One thing that may be worth reflecting on. At the end of this sermon I invite people to pray and become Christians. It has been pointed out to me that a lot of evangelistic speakers now are shying away from doing that at the end of a talk. I have downloaded a number of evangelistic sermons and it is the case - many speakers offer a general prayer 'Help us to understand these things', or encourage listeners to attend a course, or to buy a book or to talk to a friend. All perfectly fair things to mention. Still, I confess to being a bit concerned that many are unwilling to actually pray and lead people to commit their lives to the Lord.

It is difficult to exposit a passage so that one can pray such a prayer, but it seems to me to be of the essence of evangelistic expository preaching. It impresses upon people the reality, urgency, need and nature of crying out to be saved. I wonder why people are not aiming for such prayers so often now?

Here is the sermon if you want to have a listen:

http://www.srcf.ucam.org/ciccutapes/mp3/M08ZZ3.mp3

Seven Deadly Sins (3) Avarice

2008-11-26T10:29:00.004Z

Avarice is the inordinate desire for earthly things- especially wealth and money. 1 Tim 3:3 says that an elder must be free from the love of money. 1 Timothy 6 is an extended treatment of the dangers of wanting to be wealthy, and so forsaking the riches of contentment and good deeds. 2 Tim 3 reminds us that in the last days many who have an appearance of godliness will in reality be lovers of money. Avaricious in other words.

Augustine made clear in his sermon on Lazarus and the rich man that the reason the rich man went to hell was not that he was rich - 'After all was not Lazarus greeted in heaven by a rich man - Abraham?!' Against the Pelagian work Tractatus de Divitiis, which failed to distinguish between the rich and avaricious. Augustine responded by saying that even the poor could be filled with avarice, the danger of being rich lay more in the ability to feed the desire ostentatiously. On the other hand, as Clement had argued, Augustine realised that the rich also were the ones in a position to give alms to help the poor. The deadly sin was not riches themselves, but avarice.

Augustine held up Job as an example of a man able to deal with adversity and riches:

"He who said 'The Lord gave and the Lord took away - blessed be the name of the Lord' was rich indeed. He is empty of gold, but filled with God; empty of all transitory riches, filled with the will of God."

The desire for money is insidious because money is an infinitely fluid idol. It changes form to fit whatever our desires are - pleasure, technology, sex, security, power, prestige - no idol has the chameleon like powers that money has. As such money has incredible abilities to become whatever our heart wishes to love. Money both promises to be our god and to make us god - for it not only promises to become whatever we desire, it also gives us the power to do whatever we want.

The difference between money and the true God is not that God has less ability to satisfy desires- rather it is that God both fulfils and transforms our desires. The God who promises true riches renovates our sense of pleasure, and enables us to forsake avarice by doing the words of Jesus recorded in Acts 20 - 'Remember that it is more blessed to give than to receive.'

Seven Deadly Sins (2) Anger

2008-11-25T13:57:00.005Z

Ira, translated as Wrath or Anger is an unusual sin, as in some manner it is experienced by God. God's anger is different to sinful human anger - Isaiah tells us that wrath is the 'strange work of God.' (Isa.28:21)

In Luke 12:49 Jesus enthuses about the future day of his wrath. In Mark 3:5 Jesus was angry at the Scribes, and every gospel records the anger Jesus brought to the Temple money changers. Christians are often accused of defending an Old Testament God of Wrath - all the wars and bloodshed he commanded in anger.

All of this puts Christians in a tricky position - we appear to have our work cut out for us if we want to affirm the sinfulness of anger. One way this has been demonstrated is that when Oxford University Press published a recent series of books on the seven deadly sins, they asked a Buddhist to contribute the volume on anger. The reason was explicitly given that Christians were too compromised on the issue and unable to speak out on it. Sadly, when you read the book by Austin Cline you discover that his Buddhist philosophy has no moral resources to deal with anger. All he can encourage is a redirection of angry feelings to more positive ends:

“Our goal surely is to conquer anger, but not destroy the fire it has misappropriated. We will wield that fire with wisdom and turn it to creative end”

Despite appearances to the contrary, only the Christian scriptures offer substantive resources for dealing with anger. Simply telling people to will to change and redirect energies, is woefully insufficient. Anger by its nature is the experience of overwhelming passion, it cannot simply be redirected by effort. The heart that is easily set alight by irritation or crossing, needs to be calmed and melted by God's Spirit. There is need for more than mere environmental control; interior renovation is required.

The reason mere willpower is not enough to overcome anger, is of course that we enjoy being angry! (I speak from experience!) Despite the damage it does us and others, it is an enjoyable liberating experience of freedom and righteousness. Righteousness because, in exaggerating the appropriate feelings of injustice to anger, a wrathful person is sensitive of nothing other than the pleasure of being in the right. Our human experience of anger is sinful to the extent that it is a putting of ourselves in the centre of our experiential universe. It is a self-justification and as such an extraordinary powerful form of works religion.

The simple difference between human sinful anger, and God's holy anger, is that he is truly and rightly at the centre of the universe. When we give into anger, we are worshipping ourselves and taking his place. We are failing to 'leave room' (Rom. 12:19) for God, who in time will exercise wrath in the right and good way only the true God can do. This was, of course, the original sin -Eve set herself in the centre of the universe adjudicating right and wrong. She took the place of God and ushered in a fallen world. It is deeply ironic, that today we can repeat the same error - and do so in response to things that are in themselves wrong and offensive to God. The tragedy of the Fall is that good and evil are both used to bad ends.

The ultimate resource for dealing with anger is to invite God to displace me from the central position in my desires and life. I am no longer to expect others to keep in step with me - rather I am to keep in step with the Spirit.

And finally... Here is a postscript CS Lewis added to a personal letter on the topic of anger, in 1960:

PS - It's also useful to think, 'Either x is (or is not) so bad as, in my present anger, I think. If not, how unjust I must be. If so, how terribly x needs my prayers.'

Seven Deadly Sins (1) Envy

2008-11-24T10:18:00.012Z

Last night I felt like reflecting a bit on sin - so I thought I would look up the seven deadly sins. After a few minutes flicking through Proverbs my wife asked me what I was doing. She informed me that the seven deadly sins are not in the Bible.... After checking on Wikipedia (!) I was forced to admit that she was correct. So much for my Bible knowledge.

Still, I thought it may be instructive to spend some time reflecting on the seven deadly sins. The list originated with Pope Gregory the Great (d. 604). He described them in his Moralia in Job.

The sins he listed were:

1. Invidia Envy
2. Ira Anger
3. Avaritia Avarice
4. Tristia Sadness
5. Gula Gluttony
6. Luxuria Lust
7. Superbia Pride

Tristia eventually came to be replaced by 'sloth'. However it is interesting to note that each of the original sins (no pun intended) was an excessive desire. Thought to be deadly by Aquinas because they damage the spirit, each of these sins are given a lot of coverage in the Bible. Notwithstanding the lack of any list!

Since the original list was written in Latin, I have taken the time to do some wordsearches of the Latin Vulgate Bible. When I search for all word forms of 'invidia' I discover that envy is mentioned 35 times if you include the Apocrypha.

In Genesis we read of envy in several situations - The Philistines envied Isaac's flocks (Gen.26:14), Rachel envied her sister (30:1) and Joseph's brothers envied him (37:5). The last reference is in the ESV translated 'hated' rather than 'envied.' The Latin root word shades towards ideas of hatred, enmity and enemy, but even when it is used so should preserve something of the flavour of personal envy.

Prov. 14:30, 23:6, 28:22 and Job 5:2 all warn against envy, in the Vulgate. In modern English translations it is rare for all to opt for that explanation of the Hebrew poetry. The ESV does so in only the first of the three proverbs verses, using footnotes to highlight the ambiguity in the second two.

Eccl.4:4 tells us that envy motivates all the work of men, while Eccl. 9:6 states that death will bring an end to envy. While the English translations of Psalm 73 speak of envy, the Vulgate does not use the word, preferring the imagery of growing hot.

Mt 27:18 and Mk. 15:10 tell us that Pilate knew it was envy which motivated the scribes' betrayal of Jesus. Rom 1 and Gal 5 include envy in their lists of sins.

Ironically, orthodox preaching can be motivated by envy (Phil. 1:15) while false teaching can produce envy (1 Tim.6:4). Envy is the natural state all Christians once lived in (Titus 3:3). James 4:5 says, in the Vulgate, that the Spirit envies us, in the sense that he is rightly jealous of our devotion. 1 Peter 2:1 urges Christians to set aside all envy.

Reflecting on all that - Envy is a dangerous sin because it can and does motivate so much in life. It is a sin which inserts itself into our hearts via that which we see, hear and aspire to. As it grows in strength, it can be harnessed to motivate work and achievement. It is the backbone of the capitalist free market, and can just as much inspire Gospel preachers to proclaim Christ. Envy is part of the air breathed on this fallen planet - we all once lived in it. That being the case, I suspect that unless we as Christians have spent some time seriously submitting our hearts to the searching light of the Spirit and Scripture, we may well still be fueling up on some envy to get us through the day.

Augustine suggests that envy is 'sorrow at another person's happiness.' As such it is a negative motivation that can lead only to an inner pathology. The envious person energises themselves, by eating themselves up. On the other hand, being motivated by grace is a refreshingly expansive and wholesome experience. One becomes free to rejoice in others' successes and content to serve in the place God has put you. Cultivating contentedness and thankfulness comes from times of exposure to the riches of Christ, who spent himself on behalf of those who had nothing worth envying.

Science and Proof

2008-11-22T20:03:00.002Z

It is possible to spend time reflecting on theological issues which are of little use to ministry - as Thielicke said in vol.1 of systematic theology, endless focus on methodology can be a form of passive resistance to the Holy Spirit!

One of the issues which I have worked on over the past few years, which has had huge payoffs for ministry, has been the issue of proof.

We can suffer a strange schizophrenia - one moment we think that the 'proof' of the Gospel is irrefutable and clear - the next the proof is so difficult to accept that one needs endless conversations, courses, books and explanations to convince. The proof appears to be both compelling and weak, and it alters depending on whether the speaker is at the point where they are saying the Bible is reliable, or trying to get you to sign up for a follow on course.

On the whole, the effect of this is to generally lower the conviction of proof. We shy away from saying that we can prove Christianity, because then we cannot explain failure to accept it. From what I can see this has led to fewer and fewer evangelistic speakers expecting conversions at their talks, and therefore not inviting people to commit their lives to God in prayer at the end.

I think that we can assert a higher level of proof in our evangelistic preaching. With this we can explicitly highlight the noetic effects of sin - making clear to people that the Gospel is demonastrably provable, but that due to the impact of sin they will not like or want to believe the evidence.

My encouragement to people giving evangelistic talks is fourfold:

1. Take time to explore the nature of proof, that there are differences between historical, scientific, philosophical and mathematical proof. Historical is very important for all of the Bible, it is very different from mathematical. Scientific is not as overwhelming as the media suggests.

2. Increase your claims about the provability of Christianity. It is true, it is demonstrably so.

3. Explicitly state that unless the Spirit works in listeners they will find themselves irrationally running away from that which has been proven to them.

4. Before you give your talk, and while you give it - pray that the Spirit would work through the Word to to enable listeners to act rationally and believe the proof.

Next week I am speaking to a secular Cambridge University group, the title being 'How God proves himself to scientists.' I hope to be able to take my own advice...

Restless after election?

2008-11-17T13:36:00.001Z

Augustine said that 'our hearts are restless till they take their rest in Thee'. Even a new president is not enough to satisfy:

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

The full thing?

2008-11-14T16:23:00.002Z

I have always liked this hymn by the Scottish preacher, Robert Murray McCheyne. The second verse was usually omitted by Victorian hymn collections due to its focus on hell. I was excited to discover about three extra verses though in addition to that one! Here is, perhaps, the full thing - nine verses! Give it a sing at your church.

When this passing world is done,
When has sunk yon glaring sun,
When we stand with Christ in glory,
Looking o'er life's finished story,
Then, Lord, shall I fully know -
Not till then - how much I owe.

When I hear the wicked call
On the rocks and hills to fall,
When I see them start and shrink
On the fiery deluge brink, -
Then, Lord, shall I fully know -
Not till then - how much I owe.

When I stand before the throne,
Dressed in beauty not my own,
When I see thee as thou art,
Love thee with unsinning heart,
Then, Lord, shall I fully know -
Not till then - how much I owe.

When the praise of heav'n I hear,
Loud as thunder to the ear,
Loud as many water's noise,
Sweet as harp's melodious voice,
Then, Lord, shall I fully know -
Not till then - how much I owe.

Even on earth, as through a glass
Darkly, let Thy glory pass,
Make forgiveness feel so sweet,
Make Thy Spirit's help so meet,
Even on earth, Lord, make me know
Something of how much I owe.

Chosen not for good in me,
Wakened up from wrath to flee,
Hidden in the Saviour's side,
By the Spirit sanctified,
Teach me, Lord, on earth to show,
By my love, how much I owe.

Oft I walk beneath the cloud,
Dark, as midnight's gloomy shroud;
But, when fear is at the height,
Jesus comes, and all is light;
Blessed Jesus! bid me show
Doubting saints how much I owe.

When in flowery paths I tread,
Oft by sin I'm captive led;
Oft I fall - but still arise -
The Spirit comes - the tempter flies;
Blessed Spirit! bid me show
Weary sinners all I owe.

Oft the nights of sorrow reign -
Weeping, sickness, sighing, pain;
But a night Thine anger burns -
Morning comes and joy returns;
God of comforts! bid me show
To Thy poor, how much I owe.

Forceful Preaching

2008-11-14T10:39:00.003Z

I am at a point in my thesis where I am exploring the sorts of pagan ideas Augustine held pre-conversion, about the power and nature of public speaking.

One of the several important influences is Plato. Reading his writing is immensely stimulating. As Plato portrays Socrates, he wanders through Athens seeking to persuade people to examine their underlying beliefs. He challenges them to explain how and why they live as they do, valuing what they care about. One of the striking things is that Socrates often fails to persuade listeners to change.

Most scholars explain this by saying that failure to persuade lies within the listeners. They are intellectually and emotionally unwilling to enter into the dialogue with Socrates, which would be necessary to help them examine their lives and be changed. This would seem to be true for a good number of dialogues, such as, Gorgias.

The problem is captured well in the opening section of The Republic, where Socrates is forcefully waylaid and told to wait for somebody who wants to talk to him. Socrates asks if he would be able to persuade his captor to let him go. The reply is:

'Could you persuade us, if we won't listen?' 327c.

Socrates makes clear that he realises in such a situation, force will win out over philosophical persuasion. You cannot persuade a person to change who does not want to listen. The desire to grow, listen and enter into dialogue must be present within. In Plato, this problem is never really resolved.

In our preaching, we face people who will not listen. The temptation is to try and make people change using forms of force - the only other resource in Plato's worldview. We can pressurise people, embaress them, ignore them, pay them, flatter them, cajole them - all are forms of force which try and persuade the person who does not want to listen.

Thankfully Augustine realised there is a God who persuades those who do not want to listen. He does it by his Spirit- seductively, scripturally and often slowly. When we forget the power of God we may seek to persuade in our own power - but truly forceful preaching does not depend on human power for its forcefulness.

Forgetful Theology

2008-11-13T14:33:00.003Z

I have been enjoying reading Thielicke's three volumes of systematic theology, 'The Evangelical Faith.' His use of Luther's key theological insights, engagement with Cartesian models of theology and appreciation of the Spirit's place in epistemology, are all refreshing.

This morning I came across a good quote for the inside of a doctoral thesis:

'We must guard against the error that the history of theology is one of continuous growth in truth. In almost equal measure it is a history of forgetting the truth. Theology is undertaken by sinners and thus needs forgiveness as sinners themselves do. Even at best our work is in vain. Thought, including theological thought, is part of this work. Like all our work, it can go forward only as a justified work.' Vol 1. p.124

Schaeffer Review

2008-11-10T10:50:00.002Z

You may enjoy this review of a new biography of Schaeffer, which I contributed to a fun American website.

You can also download a chapter of the book:

http://www.theosource.com/2008/11/book-review-francis-schaeffer-by-colin.html

Black votes and race

2008-11-05T09:01:00.003Z

The BBC says in the same news article that 'race was for the majority of Americans not an issue in voting' yet also that 'voting into the White House a black man is a historic occasion.'

Watching the postmodern pluralist media grapple to simultaneously affirm a man due to his skin colour, while denying the existence of colour - one wonders if it is a bit early to declare the journey towards racial equality complete.

I would suggest that Obama's election is simply an indicator of attempting to make the journey by setting off in the wrong direction. For it is clear that masses of black voters turned out to elect Obama, specifically because he is coloured. This is not at all a sign that race has been overcome. That will happen when the black voters feel free enough from race to elect a non-black president!

Sadly, such a situation is not possible within the hermeneutical framework which presently governs secular postmodern politics. Such a triumph would require a change in the heart by God's Spirit, which brings those who experience it into Trinitarian acceptance of both unity and diversity. A person who knows the Trinitarian God can accept the other without having to facilely pretend that they are not different in significant ways. Real acceptance, real diversity, real change. There is a God who offers it - and he is not in the White House.

Feeling heroic?

2008-11-03T11:47:00.003Z

I am reading Charles Taylor's 'Sources of the Self' - a history of the development of the idea of the self. He makes use of Augustine in his work, and I am taking some time to interact with his understanding of Augustine.

There is much of value in 'Sources of the Self'. In light of a new James Bond movie, here is a comment from Taylor on the way our concepts of heroism set the stage for secular confusion and disenchantment:

“We struggle to hold on to a vision of the incomparably higher, while being true to the demands of ordinary life. We sympathize with both the hero and anti-hero; we dream of a world in which one could be in the same act both. This is the confusion in which naturalism takes root.” p.24

Road to Hell

2008-11-02T16:16:00.002Z

Last week I gave a lunch talk to the Cambridge Christian Union - as part of their witness to students. The title I was asked to speak to was 'How can a loving God send people to Hell?'

I tried to formulate an answer that completely sidesteps the usual debates about the duration and nature and justice of hell. What I came up with may be a helpful approach, since the more unfair or horrible a person views hell to be - the more they find their objection answered.

Talk is 20min long, followed by ten min of questions. I found that giving this talk and engaging with the people made me feel ill till late that night, hopefully it won't have the same effect on you...

http://www.srcf.ucam.org/ciccutapes/mp3/M08EA4.mp3

Right click to download, or left click to play.

Fit churches?

2008-10-31T09:36:00.002Z

Andy Burnham, Labour MP, is a man with ideas. He is keen to help ailing British institutions. His ideas take no notice of the purpose for which institutions exist - that would get in the way of his original ideas!

So, for example, Mr Burnham recently came up with a good idea for making libraries work better - install cafes and stop people from being quiet in them. Well, that may be pleasant in a book shop, where one looks at books and maybe buys one or two. But the unique purpose of a library is to read books which are too valuable to be borrowed. As somebody who reads a lot (I can't speak for Mr Burnham!) I can tell you that reading is very difficult when somebody is shouting in your ear for more froth on their cappuccino.

The latest idea from Mr Burnham, is that dying churches should become health gyms. In such a guise they can more effectively serve multi-faith communities. Well, it may be that a gym would do more good to people than what some churches offer - See 1 Timothy 4:8... however before we venture down that path, I have an alternative suggestion.

If you know of a vacant or almost empty church building near you, petition your bishop to get permission to have a try out. (Actually a very sport oriented idea!) have a trial of letting a man look after the building who can preach the Bible clearly and persuasively. Let him do all he can to encourage local people to listen to the good news Jesus Christ has for the world. Let him help them, one by one, family by family, to experience the transformation Jesus brings to a life. And only after that has been tried, offer out gym membership...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/burnham-lets-turn-churches-into-gyms-980245.html

Don't go to Egypt!

2008-10-31T09:09:00.002Z

This is one of the sermons I preached on Sunday - it is an exploration of what it means to not only be saved by faith, but to live by faith. I attempt to deal with this by means of an exposition of Isaiah's stern warning - 'Do not go to Egypt'.

Enjoy!

http://www.cambridgepres.org.uk/cd/2008-10-26-pm-hi.mp3

Martyred - for what?

2008-10-21T22:04:00.005+01:00

The murder of British Christian worker, Gayle Williams, in Afghanistan has put the issue of martyrdom and Christian service into the British media. It is sad watching the BBC news attempt to report the murder in a way that downplays the fact that the person was a Christian - very difficult when the publicly given reason for her death, by her executers is that she was preaching Christ.

As the evaluations by British media dilettantes are given so politely, the moral repugnance of their views can be missed for what it is. Ponder these words from The Times:

'There is an important principle here that the violence must not be allowed to obscure. The accusation that religious groups are exploiting parlous economic conditions to add numbers to their flock is a common one. There is little doubt that it has happened frequently, notably in India. The so-called “rice Christians” sought conversion, it is said, less for the hope of salvation in the next world than in the hope of survival in this.'

So while murdering a woman trying to help people is wrong - the important principle that must not be obscured by the murder - is the danger of.... Christians evangelising?

One wonders why freedom of speech should be curtailed and reduced to silent practical aid, if there happens to be people who would kill you for sharing religious beliefs they do not like? As The Times journalist goes on to call for Christians to offer aid that is practical, but does not involve also sharing their faith - one wonders, will such reporters consider acting as bravely as Gayle Williams? What would motivate a person to live as she did?

Augustine pondered the issue of what would motivate people to be willing to give up their lives. He noted in one sermon that people will indeed sacrifice their lives for many causes - wealth, romance, war and bravado. However, preaching on the anniversary of some Christian martyrs, he said:

'Real courage is that which serves God, not pride.' S.285.1.

He continued to formulate what became the classic orthodox Christian evaluation of martyrdom- It is the cause or motivation, not the suffering which makes one a martyr.

'We must remember all the time that it is not the punishment that makes a martyr, but the cause. What God delights in is our righteousness, not our sufferings.' S.2885.2.

It is a sad fact of life that some will lose their lives caring for people, for motivations that in the end will be revealed to be selfish or wicked.
If Gayle Williams gave her life, motivated by her relationship with Jesus Christ - then to question that or despise it, as some do, is a terrible thing. For in the end, it will be the despised motivation that makes her death so precious to Jesus.

It is a very foolish person who murders a Christian (Rev.6:9-16).

The person who scorns the motivations of a murdered Christian may not be much wiser...

Blog Interview Today

2008-10-03T11:49:00.003+01:00

I'm giving a live radio interview this afternoon, on the subject of Christians and blogging. If you feel like listening it, you can catch it at 2.45 on

http://newstalk.ie/newstalk/index.html

Should clergy wear collars?

2008-10-03T10:55:00.002+01:00

I'm undecided - and uncomfortable about wearing clergy garb! However I have to wear some for a function coming up, and as I ponder my discomfort, I wonder - should evangelical clergy dress in secular smart casuals, or suit and clergy collar?

I came across this article about it and appreciated the author's humility in his manner.

http://www.kencollins.com/pray-26.htm

All comments welcome...

Self - Restraint

2008-10-03T10:20:00.005+01:00

Towards the end of his life Augustine published a short treatise called continentia - self control or restraint. It was mainly aimed at dealing with sexual lust, but he made clear that the principles he outlined were the Christian way to deal with all kinds of sin. By this stage in his ministry, Augustine has carefully engaged with Manichees, and concluded that created matter is good, not evil. He has refuted the Pelagians, and concluded that all virtue is the fruit of grace. He has dismissed the Stoics, and concluded that effort and willpower lead to sin rather than godliness. In other words, in this treatise we get the mature Augustine who could explain to others how grace impacts Christians. Here are a few quotes:

'It is not enough to keep the exterior mouth of the body under control, to ensure that nothing harmful escapes from it in its speech. There is also the internal mouth of the heart... There are many things that we do not say outwardly with our lips, but which we shout out in our heart; but not a word comes from the mouth about anything if the heart is silent about it.' 1.2

'If a man wishes to murder, but does not have opportunity - is the heart unstained? If someone wishes to steal but lacks opportunity - is he not a thief in his heart? If a woman is chaste and will not commit adultery with a man, but he wants to - is he not an adulterer in his heart? If a prostitute is not found in the street, has the man who went looking for one not already embraced impurity? If somebody says in his heart 'There is no God' but is silent publicly, is he not guilty of utter wickedness?' 2.4

'There are those who are entirely unaware of God's law, and do not even count evil desires an enemy, but in abject blindness are slaves to them, and even think they become happy by giving in to them rather than controlling them. On the other hand, there are those who know them through the law... but are still overcome by their assault... This is because they live under the law, whereby good is commanded but not also granted, and they do not live under grace, which bestows through the Holy Spirit what is commanded by the law.' 3.7

'It is grace that brings it about that sin has no dominion over you. So do not trust in yourself, lest it have even greater dominion over you because of that.' 5.12

'True continence that comes from above does not aim to suppress some evils in order to have other evils, but to cure all evils with good.' 13.28

'There are some who prictice continence because of their incontinence.' 12.26

Against those who suggested a Christian restrain sin by rationally understanding the right course of action and willing oneself to do it: 'They argue one should live according to that part of the human being that is distinctively human, that is, according to the mind, whereby the human is superior to the animals. Such an argument has some force perhaps in the philosophers' schools, but to understand Christ's apostle we ought to study the manner of speaking customary in Christian books.' 4.11

When a Christian fails - 'By a healing providence he has been abandoned by his guide for a moment, lest through fatal pride he himself abandon his guide.' 14.32

Death by Love

2008-10-02T10:56:00.002+01:00

Let's face it, most evangelistic books are pretty tame and assume the reader has no serious social or personal problem. I have not read it yet, but this looks like a book that is a bit more earthed in the realities of this actual life. Gritty stuff.

And also - I am trying to not be envious of the fact that the title 'Death by Love' is simply brilliant!

Blog & Bible

2008-10-01T12:36:00.004+01:00

Last week I joined Mark Meynall, Phil Whittal and Krish Kandiah at the Evangelical Alliance, for a conference on Blogging.

I was giving a presentation on the significance of Internet 2.0 for our communication of the Bible. The day was really encouraging; I think there is a lot of value in small fairly informal gatherings like this that can deal with varying aspects of Christian living. There may well be a place for big Christian events that mimic the secular world's idea of success - but I think we are on safer ground with the more relational, focused gatherings...

The podcast (With the other talks) is available to listen to or download at:

http://www.eauk.org/slipstream/resources/blogosphere.cfm

Interiority Defined

2008-09-30T15:35:00.002+01:00

An important part of my thesis is coming up with a working definition of 'Interiority'. That is, Augustine clearly was very concerned with what goes on inside a person, but how can this be defined in such a way as to flow with the shape of his theology and so help understand his preaching better? After a long time and several thousand words, I have come up with a definition. Here goes:

Interiority: That inner world of desirous longings which ought to be so acted upon by God that God is enjoyed.

The astute among you will notice that this definition carefully enshrines grace, and assumes that apart from grace our interiority is fallen.

I will be arguing through the thesis that it is to our interiority, so understood that preaching must be directed. With grace taking such a central place, we are confronted with the great mystery of preaching - how can human speech be the means, and the preacher so important - when in the end, it is God who acts upon the interior?

Dark Side of Cross

2008-09-29T12:48:00.007+01:00

If you missed the second Still Deeper conference in London this week- you missed out.
However you can listen to the talks online. Five presentations were given, all on different aspects of the difficult doctrine of God's wrath and judgement. Why not take some time to ponder the 'dark side of the cross.'

Links can be found at http://www.stilldeeper.com/

Marx and Markets

2008-09-25T08:24:00.004+01:00

Rowan Williams writes of his lookalike this week; he has an article in The Spectator, on how Marx was partly right in pointing out the excesses of capitalism. He does a good job of warning that we ought not to think of 'The Market' as an actual force which does things. Rather it is a system that has been created by us.

I guess what that translates to in blunt Biblical language is that the real problem is that we have greedy hearts. Neither capitalism nor socialism changes the nature of our hearts - it takes the Holy Spirit to do that.

The article can be found at:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/2172131/face-it-marx-was-partly-right-about-capitalism.thtml

Courses: Church is so Easy!

2008-09-24T09:16:00.005+01:00

About ten years ago a friend of mine, William Scholes, wrote an article in which he critiqued the Alpha Course. It was published in Churchman and became one of the most popular articles from that journal. I believe it is still available online. He engaged provactively and helpfully in the theological evaluation of Alpha.

Ten years on and I think British evangelicals need to consider a more fundamental issue than an evaluation of any particular course. I think we need to theologically critique our use of courses in general.

Today, the practical reality is that a church is distinguished most, not by its creed, leader, denomination, heritage or preaching, but rather by the courses which are endorsed by its program.

So a church which runs an Alpha Course feels it is very different from a church which identifies with its main rival - Christianity Explored. A church which uses Mars Hill's DVDs by Rob Bell is shaped in a different way from those who sign up to Bill Hybell's Contagious Christian DVDs.

But here's the point - maybe we are missing the wood for the trees. Maybe what is shaping our churches more than anything else is not what each one of these resources say in and of themselves; maybe the most influential reality is that we sign up to courses in general.

We have developed a course culture in British churches - a few brief observations on this.

1. There is the pure hard-core course addiction. That is where evangelism is reduced to inviting people to courses, small groups are pre-packaged materials, identity is measured by the particular brand bought. This addiction is wide-spread. It is unlikely to be broken without remedial repentance.

2. There is also the soft-core addiction to course culture. This results from the above. It means that the church know they should not rely on courses so much, but they have been so deeply affected by course addiction that they cannot but think in course type patterns. So everything gets reduced to the level of a course. People such as Tim Keller or Tim Chester - to name a few - write books which make profound meaningful theological comments about the nature of church and ministry. But to people with soft-core course addiction, what they say cannot be heard, and must be reduced to something resembling a course. So a book is promoted, a name mentioned, and the impression given that the message has been heeded. In actual fact, the points made by people such as those are so substantive, that they cannot merely be added to current evangelical culture - they call for a more radical rethink of our agendas. I make no comment on the extent to which I agree with those leaders - I merely say that if their work is seen as something akin to a course then what they are saying has not really been heard.

3. Often when evangelicals turn to a course it is the result of desperation or laziness. The success of the original venture is desired, and the pre-packaged short cut is desirable.

4. Courses raise questions of finance - they are expensive to run (If you do it with integrity and actually buy all the materials!)

5. The secular culture which led to our reliance upon courses has begun to turn away from them as a means of engaging with ideas and life issues. As evangelicals embrace them all the more, we are sadly stepping away from where people are - giving the impression to outsiders that we are a rather curious hangover from the early 1990s.

6. When we rely on courses as planks in our ministries, we fail to take advantage of the local church. The local church has a unique strength - it is local! You know your people and situation better than anybody else. You are the person best qualified to bring God's Word to that local place. Maybe a minister in a city 300 miles away happens to have put together the perfect course tailor made for your exact situation- but how likely is it?

7. There is a great loss to us if we pass on God's Word in a manner mediated through courses - we do not get the value of actually working at the Bible ourselves. The person who pops a CE DVD into the player cannot possibly have the same enthusiasm for the issue in hand as a person who has wrestled through chapter 1 of Ephesians and discovered some treasure to share.

8. One of the saddest things about our reliance upon courses is that in Britain, we should know better. Our distinctive heritage is expository. Two generations ago evangelicalism was given a huge boost through the ministries of John Stott, Dick Lucas and ML Jones. What they bequeathed us was a commitment to studying the Bible, reading it on its own terms, displaying confidence in it, sharing our excitement for what we discover afresh.... When we turn to courses, we are neglecting that heritage and putting our confidence in market shaped products. Experience has taught us that these products lead to a certain kind of growth, give a certain kind of identity and nurture a certain kind of Christian.

The big question is this - if God's work is done with human techniques, can we be sure the growth is from God?

Lewis on Liturgy

2008-09-10T13:44:00.003+01:00

By the time I get ordained I will have spent eight years in Anglican educational establishments. That exposes one to a good deal of discussion about liturgy. Towards the end of the third volume of CS Lewis' letters I came across a letter he published in the Church Times, in 1946:

'I would ask the clergy to believe that we are more interested in orthodoxy and less interested in liturgiology than they imagine... What we laymen fear is that the deepest doctrinal issues should be tacitly and implicitly settled by what seem to be, or are avowed to be, merely changes in the liturgy.
A man who is wondering whether the fare set before him is food or poison is not reassured by by being told that this course is now restored to its traditional place in the menu.'

Stop thief!!!

2008-09-08T21:08:00.003+01:00

One of the most common questions I get after people read my article 'The Curse of Law' (See sidebar on right), is 'How do you preach the Old Testament Law?

Well - yesterday I had to do that as I was preaching on the commandment 'Thou shall not steal'.

A number of things are attempted in the sermon. Firstly, I help us to identify with Israel in their inability to keep the law. Secondly, I show how easy it is to remake Christian living into something which is essentially partaking in the same dynamic as that which we have seen fail in Israel and Thirdly, I try and show how the New Testament offers something so much deeper than the Law.

On the final point, that which the NT offers, we could look at many things - the grace, the cleansing, forgiveness etc. That I choose to focus on one - the new heart worked in us by the Spirit - is not to deny those others. However it may be a suggestion that I fear we do not appreciate the import of the Spirit's work in us. Enjoy - you can download the sermon here:

http://www.christchurchmedia.org.uk/catalog/event.shtml?;i=416;bs=da;bi=

Inner Emotions

2008-09-04T10:00:00.003+01:00

Here are links to some talks I gave recently at Nottingham Uni CU houseparty. They are on Rom 7 (Experiencing Failure), Gal 5 Growing Fruit) and Phil 3 Living for the Future).
The idea was to preach on three passages which all contain the apostle's reflections on an aspect of the inner emotional nature of Christian living. There is a Q and A session at the end. Enjoy!

http://www.nucu.org/dl/talks/hhp08/Romans_7_Peter_Sanlon.mp3

http://www.nucu.org/dl/talks/hhp08/Galatians_5_Peter_Sanlon.mp3

http://www.nucu.org/dl/talks/hhp08/Philippians_3_Peter_Sanlon.mp3

http://www.nucu.org/dl/talks/hhp08/HHP_Q_A_Session_Peter_Sanlon.mp3

The Profit of Reading

2008-09-03T23:17:00.003+01:00

I have often reflected on the benefits of reading books - the cultivation of imagination, seeing things from a fresh perspective, disciplining thoughts and of course simple pleasure. There are books published about the profits of reading - I seem to recall Prof. Bloom wrote a few stirring treatises on the issue after his seminal 'Closing of the American Mind.'

Encouraging a work colleague to reacquaint himself with the enjoyment of reading in general once was the start of talking about reading the Bible.

The release from Sony of a new electronic book reader has reignited some of the old debates about the profit of reading versus more modern technology.

One author I have got much profit from over the years is my fellow Ulsterman who taught at the universities I have studied in - old CS Lewis. This morning I managed to turn the love into actual financial profit. Spying a copy of his Guide to Sixteenth Century Literature in an Oxfam Charity shop I purchased it, then cycled a mile or two into the centre of town and sold it on to a more fancy antiquarian bookdealer. The fifteen pound profit bought a few volumes of Lewis' letters and a cup of coffee for me and a friend.

The profit of reading - work it out by the hour and it is not great economics, but there is more to life than money.